I’ve been to 30 or so national or international conferences in biology, and have never had an abstract rejected. I don’t think I’m doing anything special, so I assume pretty much everyone gets in. More presenters = more money. I’ve also been on the selection committee side and it is definitely not more selective than peer review. We’re only reviewing an abstract, usually under 100 words. Prob varies by field though. Maybe medical conferences are selective?

Presentations don’t get peer review, at least not in biology (my field). I agree that peer review is totally broken though.

This shouldn’t be taken seriously. It’s a very quick and dirty analysis presented at a conference without peer review. Start worrying when/if the scientific paper comes out, which might be years or never.

Is this the movie where a guys arm bone busts through his skin? That’s the only part I remember from childhood…