Now the article I read (by Judith Sloan in the Week End Australian 20-21 Oct 18) opened my eyes and gave me cause for some concern, if not despair. We like to think the boffins know what they are doing. Here are some catch-phrases from the article:
" ...the fundamental problem is that the results of many peer-reviewed papers and reports have not been confirmed when the experiments have been repeated or the data reanalysed".
"Eminent medical scientist John Loannidis belled the cat as early as 2005 in a much cited technical paper, Why Most Published Research Findings are False" .
"...many referees...in the peer review process do a lousy job by simply reading papers and approving them if they agree with their findings. Peer review generally doesn't involve re-running experiments...".