Read it. And read more from the blog. Certainly some truth to this, but the blog is a great example why peer review actually matters.
The article itself is a bit of a straw man: one example of a bad peer review dismisses the whole process.
Other articles are similar. For example one talks about how "green parties want 100% safety", which simply isn’t true.
Some are click bait like "if there is no Corona vaccine, how about we ask anti-vaxxers how to deal with this?" And gives some generic advice that every doctor also says while neglecting that the core argument of anti-vaxxers often goes like "vaccine is bad for you and you actually should contract a virus because it makes you stronger in a natural way".
Stopped reading after having found too many of these fake arguments in several posts.
The article itself is a bit of a straw man: one example of a bad peer review dismisses the whole process.
Other articles are similar. For example one talks about how "green parties want 100% safety", which simply isn’t true.
Some are click bait like "if there is no Corona vaccine, how about we ask anti-vaxxers how to deal with this?" And gives some generic advice that every doctor also says while neglecting that the core argument of anti-vaxxers often goes like "vaccine is bad for you and you actually should contract a virus because it makes you stronger in a natural way".
Stopped reading after having found too many of these fake arguments in several posts.