No. LOL. The vast proliferation of ACS journals over the last 10-15 years is a head scratcher although they are hardly alone.

I must admit that one of the few papers that I read in ACS Omega was so clearly flawed that it turned me off from the journal. Small sample size though.

In the latter cases, the question arises as to how much additional effort is required to reconcile the data, which is time consuming and often fruitless even though it may be providing potentially useful information. In the latter case. I usually hold back on publication.

I might suggest a review-like article that would be illustrative of the processing difficulties that you describe. Not sure where to submit though. One situation that I have found (in my own labs research) is that data derived from different experimental methods give results that can't be reconciled

Finally have the answer on PSI+ prion strains. Nice work!

This paper should be highlighted solely for its title. It could potentially spawn countless internet memes. The scientific advances contained therein, however insightful and groundbreaking, must take a backseat.