If we say peer reviewed research aren't we still appealing to the authority of the peers? Aren't we presenting the research as more valid because of their approval?
A group of meta researchers have concluded that medical research, even peer reviewed is lacking in trustworthiness.
Lies, Damed Lies, and Medical Science
If research isn't necessarily right when approved by peers and one presents a peer reviewed study as more valid just because it is peer reviewed, then would that be classified as appealing to authority?
If one rejects research because it isn't peer reviewed or done by someone with credentials, does that fall under this fallacy or is there another name for it?
I realize the best scenario would be to see the actual research, but most lay people don't have that access.