I haven't got any journalistic peers as I'm not a journalist.

"I used to teach science so I know better"

I've never said anything like that in my life and I'll thank you for not ascribing it to me, thanks. It's a rather cheap shot, isn't it?

I'm not knocking any of the magazines I've mentioned. I am saying that they are not the be-all and end-all, and their science content lacks the rigour and the detail of learned journals. Often, it's the hard stuff, the technical stuff, the equations, that have to be omitted. Science is hard graft, and, while one major job of science is to communicate to everyone, it's very important to recognise (and communicate that recognition) that magazines hold less than half of the truth. That's all. They have a role. But the fungus article, with its anecdotal content and its implicit appeal to authority, whilst an entertaining read, falls well short. That's my opinion. If your opinion is different you can say so, if you like, without the accompanying abrasion.