Here I am, a professor in a totally woke university and over-the-top hyper-woke department, sending off this article to Alor.org, and loving it! Now, one of the leading bits of bs of academia is peer review, which always reminded me of dogs sniffing each other, if I may be somewhat rude, and unacademic for a moment. Peer review received its grand refutation during the Covid plandemic, when first, almost all mainstream medical academics got behind the bat soup hypothesis, because China would come under scrutiny otherwise. In private they doubted this, but still pushed the line to protect “China’s science,” as one medical academic put it. And, it is today, only a handful of brave renegade doctors who are dealing with the greatest medical crime in history, at the price of personal de-registration. In short, peer review presupposes that the “peers” are not corrupt, and will objectively assess data, but given that most researchers hold to the line that “he who pays the piper, calls the tune,” don’t expect any mainstream searching critiques of Big Pharma. Peer review fails for the very good reason that the peers are as corrupt as the original researcher. It is one of the reasons that there is a “replication crisis.”