Before revision: The report was panned by leading alternative medicine expert Edzard URL pointing out that it was inaccurate, grossly misleading and pointing out that "its conclusions were written before the authors had searched for evidence that might match them".
After revision: The report was criticized by leading alternative medicine expert Edzard URL pointing out that it was inaccurate, grossly misleading and pointing out that "its conclusions were written before the authors had searched for evidence that might match them".