John,
You seem a bit cynical today.
The advise given on histonet is experience not meant to be absolute.  I personally
find that often "hands on experience" is more useful than many peer reviewed
publications because there is an interchange so that you can go back and ask the
internet advisee questions, such as "what altitude are you working at".  I have a
lot of experience injecting Calcein and other fluorochromes in different animals for
measuring bone formation and true we began our studies by consulting publications
but we used the information as a base and modified from there to meet our needs.
Sometimes the most experienced knowledgeable people don't get around to publishing
their work, I wouldn't want to miss out on the benefits of their experience just
because it has not been peer reviewed published.  You just have to know that what
they give you is their experience and may not work the same for you, but it sure can
be a good basis to start your studies from.
My opinion.
Patsy

"J. A. Kiernan" wrote:

> Fernando Capela e Silva wrote:
> > I would like someone send me information about the concentration of Calcein
> > (gr to 100 ml) I must use to inject in the animals and the amount (ml) of this
> > solution/injection/animal
>
> Dear Fernando,
> If someone answers your Histonet question with a
> concentration and a dose, with a reference to a
> paper in a peer-reviewed journal, you should NOT
> go ahead and follow the advice.  You must find
> the paper and read it carefully.
>
> You are doing RESEARCH, and the only way for
> you (or your supervisor) to obtain the information
> is from reading the original peer-reviewed papers
> in the field. A Histonet reply is not peer-reviewed
> and it could be Wrong+++.  Lots are.
>
> Even the peer-reviewed literature must be read
> critically and with a suspicious and cynical
> attitude. As one of my students told me more than
> 30 years ago, "The literature is full of lies."
> He was a bit younger and a lot wiser than I, but
> I have known for about 25 years that he was Right+++.
>
> The peer-review system is the only way to police
> scientific publication, but plenty of bad papers
> get published. An item that has not been
> peer-reviewed is worthless and has an
> above-average chance of being either ignorantly
> or maliciously untrue. You cannot do serious
> work (such as diagnosis or research) on the basis
> of internet gossip.
> --
> -------------------------
> John A. Kiernan
> Department of Anatomy and Cell Biology
> The University of Western Ontario
> London,   Canada   N6A 5C1
>    kiernan@uwo.ca
>    http://publish.uwo.ca/~jkiernan/