striker42
Well-known member
Interesting post here... looking forward to reading through the details
[Tw]1380917292431728646[/tw]
Not the most reliable source. The journal's own description of itself:
"Medical Hypotheses was therefore launched, and still exists today, to give novel, radical new ideas and speculations in medicine open-minded consideration, opening the field to radical hypotheses which would be rejected by most conventional journals. "
There's a role for journals like this. Speculation and new ideas are necessary to growing our understanding but they are not the same as a position that has been tested and has objective support.
That list of negative effects doesn't have much in the way of support. It's fine to speculate about negative effects, but people need to be careful about treating speculation as fact.