Not really For one thing being on the cutting edge means youre on the wrong side of the knife  For the second thats actually how Wikipedia works We always follow often at a good distance behind what RS say We never lead the way with new information including scientific discoveries Good science is conservative and so is Barrett and QW When new medical knowledge is established QW articles get updated Some which are outdated may not even exist anymore or they have been revised to include new data Thats the proper way to do things If QW were to trumpet new knowledge too  quickly they would often end up having to backtrack because most new knowledge ends up being a false lead that proves to be a disappointment Thats exactly what quacks do and make money by selling such poorly supported new knowledge Barrett knows better than to do that