I concur with the sentiment expressed in a previous statement regarding the detrimental effects of the "publish or perish" culture in academia. It's evident that the emphasis on sheer publication quantity often overshadows the importance of quality research and its real-world impact. We often find ourselves lauding "leading scientists" with an overwhelming number of publications, disregarding the implausibility of such prolific output without resorting to shortcuts or sacrificing rigor. It's worth noting that many Nobel Prize laureates have had their groundbreaking research published in journals with relatively low impact factors. This underscores the flawed obsession with high-impact publications, particularly those in prestigious journals like those under the CNS (Cell, Nature, Science) umbrella. Furthermore, there's a concerning pattern where senior legends, despite their invaluable experience and insights, may be resistant to embracing novel discoveries that challenge their established viewpoints. This resistance can stifle scientific progress and innovation, hindering the advancement of knowledge in various fields. In essence, we must reevaluate the metrics by which we measure academic success and prioritize the quality and significance of research findings over sheer quantity. Additionally, fostering an environment that encourages openness to new ideas and dissenting perspectives is crucial for advancing scientific inquiry and achieving meaningful breakthroughs.