Cheap Trick paper rejected by ‘Vaccines’ journal
We submitted the latest version of our ‘cheap trick’ paper to Vaccines – the international, peer-reviewed, open access journal, hoping they would be open minded and brave enough to review and hopefully accept it for publication
We received this response a few days later:
We regret to inform you that we will not be processing your submission further. Submissions sent for peer-review are selected based on discipline, novelty and general significance, in addition to the usual criteria for publication in scholarly journals. Therefore, our decision does not necessarily reflect the quality of your work.
We wish you every success if you choose to pursue publication elsewhere.
Kind regards,
Vaccines Editorial Office
It didn’t even go out to review but was rejected – instantly!
Their rejection email doesn’t make it clear why it was rejected, though they imply it wasn’t relevant to the discipline (despite it being about a supposed vaccine), wasn’t novel or wasn’t of ‘general’ significance.
Or maybe our efforts weren’t scholarly enough? Who knows?
Well at least they were fast and didn’t waste our time over many months like the Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice: dirty-deeds-done-dirt-cheap
So much for peer review!
As an aside it is worth mentioning that when a paper is submitted to Vaccines you can list reviewers who you think are suitable for the subject matter.
We named the new head of the NIH – Jay Bhattacharya – as a potential reviewer given he would obviously be a natural good fit.
Sadly he didn’t even get to see it, never mind review it.
Still, we wont give up and the next step is to take it to another journal and see if they are willing and able to challenge the orthodoxy.
See more here substack.com
Bold emphasis added
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
Saeed Qureshi
| #
This is not news for me.
That is precisely why I started my blog to share my views and articles, as I had extreme difficulties publishing my work in so-called “scientific journals.”
Pharmaceutical and medical journals, as well as experts (peers), are biased and primarily promote work that benefits the profession for securing lucrative funding.
Reply