Ok, fair enough. I think it comes down to someone’s definition of a great article.
If the article is based on wild extrapolations and faulty science I think it falls short of great so quantity of them ceases to impress. That would include all the articles on Aduhelm, which were many and even at the time ridiculous.
But those authors all got paid and were celebrated for their worthy contributions to…??? science? More like schlock. I don’t recall any peer reviewed Aduhelm articles but I would wager there are some who could be persuaded to sign their names to them. $$$. Thankfully not the FDA Advisory Committee, they alone reflected a good light on the fiasco.
And now Lily is trotting down the same path, all smiles, beaming with optimism they will get approval for whatever their mab is. We have that hoopla to look forward to.
Talk about nonsense.
Market Data 
Markets 
