Can the free market trump the scientific method?

[Amby 490]

I would think that if it really works and can be replicated then it would have to be accepted.

The thing with replication is that it takes lots and lots of people to test or "review" and they all have to be able to get the same results. Even if they get the same results, they may not agree with the theory after all their data is in. One person (or team) could be asked by a journal to review the experiment and they could come up with the same type of reaction but much different data. Or after reviewing their own data they could come up with a new theory. Or they could just simply reject it because they couldn't replicate it.

I think a big part of it is people agreeing on the analysis of the data.

That's why peer review is so cool!

[JohnSmith2007 353]

The thing with replication is that it takes lots and lots of people to test or "review" and they all have to be able to get the same results. Even if they get the same results, they may not agree with the theory after all their data is in. One person (or team) could be asked by a journal to review the experiment and they could come up with the same type of reaction but much different data. Or after reviewing their own data they could come up with a new theory. Or they could just simply reject it because they couldn't replicate it.

I think a big part of it is people agreeing on the analysis of the data.

That's why peer review is so cool!

In the end, regardless of whether a theory can be agreed upon, if it makes more power than it uses and can be replicated by anyone following the same procedure then it must be accepted. The peer review process is independent of the commercial aspects of the this supposed breakthrough. I could just see it, we would have a power plant humming along creating power out of a reaction that no one could explain. The scientists stand around and say, "It can't work so I don't believe it!". No, they would have to believe their own eyes and accept it until they figure out what is going on despite a lack of a good theory. That is of course, if this is real. Most likely it is another fraud.

[^_^ 5,021]

In the end, regardless of whether a theory can be agreed upon, if it makes more power than it uses and can be replicated by anyone following the same procedure then it must be accepted. The peer review process is independent of the commercial aspects of the this supposed breakthrough. I could just see it, we would have a power plant humming along creating power out of a reaction that no one could explain. The scientists stand around and say, "It can't work so I don't believe it!". No, they would have to believe their own eyes and accept it until they figure out what is going on despite a lack of a good theory. That is of course, if this is real. Most likely it is another fraud.

There are drugs out there that are in market and prescribed to patients but they can't explain exactly why they work. They just know they do.

[The_Dude 1,142]

There are drugs out there that are in market and prescribed to patients but they can't explain exactly why they work. They just know they do.

Now you're starting to sound like a juggalo. Next thing we know, you'll start singing this

[^_^ 5,021]

Now you're starting to sound like a juggalo. Next thing we know, you'll start singing this

Mechanism of Action

Mefloquine is an antimalarial agent which acts as a blood schizonticide. Its exact mechanism of action is not known.