It would be really interesting to know what peer review would look like if editors were willing to get take sides. Because, you know, the non-scientific aspects of science are all about the objectivity:
According to the Wall Street Journal, JAMA editors threatened to ban the professor from their journal and ruin his medical school’s reputation if he didn’t stop talking to reporters.
Story continues below ↓advertisement | your ad here
The editors deny that. But the flap prompted them to spell out what amounts to a gag order on anyone who alerts the medical journal about suspicions that a researcher has undisclosed industry ties. The journal editors argue that any suspicions should be kept secret until JAMA can complete its own probe.
A good science skeptic can’t keep up with the headlines these days. Journalists and fiction editors clearly aren’t the only gatekeepers being threatened by the Internet.