Primary articles come from the main source. For example, when Darwin was in the Galapagos islands, he drew finches in his notebook and pointed out the differences in their phenotypes. This is a good example of a primary source because it comes from Darwin. An example of a secondary source There’s a book called “Darwin’s Black Box,” written by Michael J. Behe. In that book, it talks about the biochemistry of Darwin’s research. From the article’s point of view, most primary resources have lab data and graphs to provide material for the article. Also, primary source articles have methods and results within the paper, with a conclusion describing whether their hypothesis is correct or incorrect.  Also, primary articles go under the peer review steps. Most of the time they’re published in scientific journals.

On the other hand, a review article is used at a summary over a topic in correcting the thinking of its reader. Review article would rarely show experimental results. It is a secondary source because it is using a primary article to feed its body paragraphs and use them as citations for making their ideas more punctual and less bias.

The peer review process starts with a scientist finding or creating a discovery. This doctor would write a rough draft of his findings and submit them to a journal editor. The journal editor would have to decide whether the article would be good enough for the scientific journal. Then it will be submitted to peers within the same study as the original author. The peers check for the findings to be original, factual, and if the conclusion makes sense. Usually, the author would have to do this editing after the peer review process. After the editing, the article will be sent back to the journal editor for the final decision on whether to be published or not.

I believe the article “Huntington’s Disease: Mechanisms of Pathogenesis and Therapeutic Strategies” was a review article. Huntington’s Disease: Mechanisms of Pathogenesis and Therapeutic Strategies had too many citations. It made it feel like a research paper, and it did not give us a method or direct data for an experiment. Permanent inactivation of Huntington’s disease mutation by personalized allele-specific CRISPR/Cas9 where is the primary resource or primary article. One of the reasons why I think it was a primary resource is that it had headings labeled “introduction,” “method,” and “conclusion.” The article also provided hard state data. Which can only be achieved through an experimental process.