Circulation is not a trash journal, but one of the most important publications in Cardiology. It's surpassed in impact factor only by JACC: http://www.scimagojr.com/journalrank.php?category=2705

this comment included a mistake

I think you mixed up Circulation Journal ("Official Journal of the Japanese Circulation Society", http://www.j-circ.or.jp/english/cj/) with Circulation (Journal by the American Heart Association, http://circ.ahajournals.org/) The latter is the source of the coffee article.

thanks for pointing out, I corrected it

A review process shorter than 2 months is an extremely rare thing in scientific journal from CS fields to Nature journals. Most often it happens with shitty journals and / or when the editor has a horse in the race.

This seems like a very generalizing claim, do you have evidence for it? The AlphaGo paper in Nature ( https://www.nature.com/articles/nature16961 ) also has less than two months between submission and acceptance.

I don't know of systematic research on this but it's consistent with what I've seen in the fields I've worked in (linguistics, psychology, geochemistry). The AlphaGo paper was special because it's a super-hot high-profile topic and the journals don't want to get scooped (remember Nature is in competition with Science, PNAS, etc. for eyeballs). However exciting a conclusion may be for psycholinguistics, it won't get fast-tracked in the same way.

another comment provided a good explanation (see below), now it remains to check the editor

"Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr. van Dam received a research grant from the Nestec Company. No potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article were reported." Guys, Nestec own the world's biggest coffee machine company, Nespresso.