Peer review for scientific / medical journals is seriously compromised by commercial interests.
As yet, we are no clearer to finding out the answer to the below question I posed (though there are a number of obvious candidates).
Who funds / controls this shadowy umbrella organisation of medical regulators?
By reading the below article, I have been directed to go down a new line of enquiry with respect to the power structures which initiated and / or maintained the staged pandemic.
We may not be in a position to unravel the power structures pulling the strings of medical regulators, but what about scientific publishing?
As Carl Heneghan and Tom Jefferson noted in the below piece the pharmaceutical industry is providing significant funding to scientific / medical journal peer reviewers - who are meant to be independent.
As they stated:
Between 2020 and 2022, 1155/1962 peer reviewers (59%) received at least one industry payment. More than half (54%) accepted general payments, while 32% received research payments.
Between 2020 and 2022, reviewers received over $1.2 billion in industry payments, including $1 billion to individuals or their institutions. Over the three years, the median general payment was $7,614.
That’s a lot of money, which buys a lot of influence.
Update:
This article (linked by the below comment) - by Richard Smith, former editor of the BMJ - is well worth a read.
Looks like somebody knew this way back in 2006.
“So peer review is a flawed process, full of easily identified defects with little evidence that it works. Nevertheless, it is likely to remain central to science and journals because there is no obvious alternative, and scientists and editors have a continuing belief in peer review. How odd that science should be rooted in belief.”
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1420798/
One only has to watch the stock of a pharmaceutical company when it mentions positive or negative clinical results for a new drug, to understand why peer review standards will fall prey to those with vested interests.
Combine that with the lax approach to drug advertising on MSM (who has become severely compromised by their sponsors), or the laws surrounding sponsor's vaccine liability. Peer review is simply in the food chain to be manipulated by the vested interests.