For instance, upon opening a local or regional newspaper, one does not usually find non-sensational stories represented on the front page. Instead, issues regarding horrific crimes, corruption, abuse of power, and other issues are usually front and center for the individual to read and digest. By means of contrast in comparison, the way in which scholarly research is performed is a much more slow and methodical process. Essentially, an individual is required to utilize the scientific method and carefully/painstakingly review their findings prior to making these public in the form of a scholarly journal article publication. At which point, ongoing peer review has been performed and a more thorough level of analysis by other individuals within the scientific community can take place. As can relatively be seen, the differential with respect to the way in which scientific community operate in the way in which the knee operates is bound and measurable.
Yet, regardless of these differentials, it can and should be noted that the vaccine debate which took place with respect to Wakefield’s article did not represent a level of due diligence. either on the part of the peer review process or with regard to the way in which the media snapped at the story and widely reported it. For instance, the media perform something of a knee-jerk reaction and reporting the study’s findings as if they were indisputable fact. Unfortunately, this not only occurred with respect to the United States press, it occurred throughout much of Europe as well. Whereas it is somewhat not surprising that the level of due diligence which was performed by the media fell short of what is needed, it does, as a surprise to the reader/analyst that the peer review process evident within the scholarly publication of the journal article that established this faux debate