Peer Review Declaration

The Problem

I recognize, that blogs are a non-ideal way of handling discussions of medical realities. Medical knowledge doubles every twelve to fifteen months, what was true yesterday may be subject to challenge today and be considered false tomorrow.
x
Take for example the well known “Lipid Hypothesis.” It (correctly, as evidenced by many studies and meta reviews) postulates, that high LDL content in blood leads to damages in cell walls and increase the risk of cardiovascular disease manyfold.

What has changed is our understanding of dietary fats and their contribution to LDL levels. We now know, again as evidenced by many studies and metas, that dietary fats are but a minor factor in the greater picture which includes gut microbiota, overall personal health, sufficient levels and balance of PUFA (polyunsaturated fatty acids), and more.

Yet, blogs from the early 2000s still echo those 1856 Virchow/Anichkov theories. And even modern texts reference those older ones, inform dietary decisions, and are the foundations for whole books on the topic.

My Consequences

That is, why I have instituted a three-step approach on this blog:

• All new writing on medical topics will be peer reviewed by at least one, ideally more, colleagues with subject matter expertise.
• All “stale” writing (older than six months) will be delisted from indices. It will still be available online from other links and cross links between content, but no longer shown on the index pages.^[1]
• All “stale” writing will get a warning before the main content, stating the age of the content and linking to this page.

This will, hopefully, do my part against content rot while not turning any counter measure into link rot.

Also see: WikiGarden