How often are research/litrature reviews peer reviewed? All the references are there, you can check them youself with little effort. There are no results that need to be replicated. To verify no bias exists in the presentation of the existing research, you'd basically have to reproduce the entire output of this paper (i.e. go and find and report on every single study out there related to fasting to ensure the results have been fairly presented). That's not so much a review as a replication of the research and I cannot see how a journal would have the resources to do that. What benefits would peer review give in this case?