3 ms·
I might be missing something, so please correct me if I'm wrong, but this looks like a non-peer-reviewed pre-print written by employees/investors of companies t
by jfager 16y ago
I might be missing something, so please correct me if I'm wrong, but this looks like a non-peer-reviewed pre-print written by employees/investors of companies that produce or sell the product being tested. There are also some red flags in the paper itself, such as the discussion about how the original data gathering was "hypothesis generating".
- acqq 16y agoMaybe the red flag is constant reference to the product instead of the claim that some active substance effect is tested, but I admit I don't know how otherwise such articles are written. I have impression you're right. Also see the comment of terrapinbear here, it's a "proprietary extract of the dried root of Astragalus membranaceus." and of tomwalker: "they want about $1000 a month."