It is unlikely that the authors faced any pressure to conform to the mainstream position of being exceedingly avoidant about the possibility of serious harm resulting from the mRNA (Pfizer and Moderna) and adenovirus vector (AstraZeneca and J&J) gene therapy injections falsely marketed and mandated as COVID-19 "vaccines", because this ar…
It is unlikely that the authors faced any pressure to conform to the mainstream position of being exceedingly avoidant about the possibility of serious harm resulting from the mRNA (Pfizer and Moderna) and adenovirus vector (AstraZeneca and J&J) gene therapy injections falsely marketed and mandated as COVID-19 "vaccines", because this article was not published in a proper peer-reviewed journal.
If the "Journal of Emergency Medicine: Open Access" was a legitimate, properly peer-reviewed, mainstream journal it would be listed in PubMed, but it is not: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/journals/. This lists seven journals which have the phrase "Journal of Emergency Medicine" in their titles, but not this one.
The publisher, Opast, is mentioned six times in this recent, mainstream, peer-reviewed journal, report on predatory journals: https://ese.arphahub.com/article/113535/ .
Both Opast and Longdom are listed on Beall's original list of predatory journals: https://beallslist.net and reports like these:
This research is probably perfectly good and, if so, is extremely pertinent to protecting human health. However, by publishing it in a journal not indexed in PubMed, many people who need to take notice of it will fail to do so and the research itself can easily be dismissed as invalid, since predatory journals do not provide proper peer-review.
Furthermore, by publishing good research on the safety of the so-called vaccines for COVID-19 in a predatory journal, this whole field of research is brought into disrepute. It may be impossible to have it published, at least without many months of wrangling and possible final rejection or retraction, in a legitimate journal. A better option would be to publish it in a mainstream pre-print site, which, while not peer-reviewed, brings it to the attention of legitimate researchers and does not involve paying money to parasitic companies like Longdom.
It is unlikely that the authors faced any pressure to conform to the mainstream position of being exceedingly avoidant about the possibility of serious harm resulting from the mRNA (Pfizer and Moderna) and adenovirus vector (AstraZeneca and J&J) gene therapy injections falsely marketed and mandated as COVID-19 "vaccines", because this article was not published in a proper peer-reviewed journal.
The same is true of another article, which also likely contains important research, written by Nicholas Hulscher, John Leake and Dr McCullough, on the origins of some bird flu strains: https://petermcculloughmd.substack.com/p/breaking-peer-reviewed-study-finds. See my comment: https://petermcculloughmd.substack.com/p/breaking-peer-reviewed-study-finds/comment/76276072 on how the predatory journal chosen is associated with the well-known predatory publisher Longdom.
A quick search for "Journal of Emergency Medicine: Open Access" finds it is part of the Longdom operation: https://www.longdom.org/emergency-medicine/peer-review-process.html.
If the "Journal of Emergency Medicine: Open Access" was a legitimate, properly peer-reviewed, mainstream journal it would be listed in PubMed, but it is not: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/journals/. This lists seven journals which have the phrase "Journal of Emergency Medicine" in their titles, but not this one.
The publisher, Opast, is mentioned six times in this recent, mainstream, peer-reviewed journal, report on predatory journals: https://ese.arphahub.com/article/113535/ .
Both Opast and Longdom are listed on Beall's original list of predatory journals: https://beallslist.net and reports like these:
https://www.editage.com/insights/my-research-has-been-published-in-a-predatory-journal
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Longdom_Publication_Issue-Is_that_a_Predatory_Publication
https://www.bmj.com/content/384/bmj.q452 (Paywalled, but the PDF is at: http://press.psprings.co.uk/bmj/march/predatoryjournals.pdf
make it clear that Longdom is a predatory publisher. It is a brand of long-established predatory publisher OMICS: https://insights.uksg.org/articles/10.1629/uksg.631 .
This research is probably perfectly good and, if so, is extremely pertinent to protecting human health. However, by publishing it in a journal not indexed in PubMed, many people who need to take notice of it will fail to do so and the research itself can easily be dismissed as invalid, since predatory journals do not provide proper peer-review.
Furthermore, by publishing good research on the safety of the so-called vaccines for COVID-19 in a predatory journal, this whole field of research is brought into disrepute. It may be impossible to have it published, at least without many months of wrangling and possible final rejection or retraction, in a legitimate journal. A better option would be to publish it in a mainstream pre-print site, which, while not peer-reviewed, brings it to the attention of legitimate researchers and does not involve paying money to parasitic companies like Longdom.