Peer reviewed journals

I think it's become a tactic for Alt Med radio hoststo quote Journals the way a radio minister quotes Scripture. Perhaps both sources are equally misquotedor miss applied.Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine is an NLMlisted, peer-reviewed journal and is nowhere near someof the worst "scientific peer-reviewed journals"available on PubMED. It "is a forum for sharinginformation concerning the practical use ofalternative therapies in preventing and treatingdisease, healing illness, and promoting health."In my experience, the journal is a source oflegitimate information -taken in context. Most of theclinical studies published will advocate some type ofAlternative modality or declare statistical healthimprovements by them. However, as powerful as theconclusions in some of the abstracts seem, it isusually very apparent why the study is not in otherrecognized scientific publications. Many are pilotstudies on small, narrowed populations. Others havenarrow or limited outcomes measures that will lend topositive outcomes, or cannot be extrapolated to theclinical care arena. Based on information in just the abstracts versus theentire text of a study, it's very easy to see howproponents can use the reference to trump up stuff as"scientifically proven." Let the list know whatstudies are referenced, I'm sure you'll get somespecifics in reply.You can Journal-bash over the different studies andthe evidence or lack of it, but this usually ends upin claims of conspiracy to suppress the "truth,"claims that something is to too revolutionary andgroundbreaking to yet be widely accepted, or claimsthat a differing analysis of the science is equallylegitimate.My analogous reply is "If this is so great, why can'tI buy it at Wal-Mart?" Or, if this alt therapy is sogood, I'm sure it will be offered/advocated bymainstream medicine in no time.Dalehttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?CMD=search&DB=pubmed