Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Should We Think About Building Another PubMed? -- Medscape
https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/should-we-think-about-building-another-pubmed-2026a10001qoPubmed is one of the leading sources of medical information around the world. It has been maintained by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) and the NIH and is subject to the whims of the current regime. Including this excerpt just to show how deep the influence of politics and personal ambitions can spread.
Given the dramatic and, in some ways, momentous events that marked the beginning of 2026, it may seem out of place to worry about the fate of an online service. But PubMed Central (PMC) is not just another search engine. It is the main gateway to scientific literature for doctors, researchers, and students around the world. It is a free source of information that has been considered neutral precisely because it is published under the aegis of a government, the US government. And despite the ups and downs of its history and regardless of the mistakes and misdeeds of administrations on both sides of the political spectrum, the US government has always been consistent on one point: the priority of defending and supporting scientific research, including as a means of development, wealth, and international soft power.
For a year now, however, this has no longer been the case in the White House. In recent months, we have seen competent and experienced people replaced by television personalities or influencers who are sympathetic to the president. We have witnessed surreal debates within the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) and the inclusion of scientifically unfounded statements on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website, until now an undisputed touchstone for the state of the art in epidemiology and medicine.
PubMed: History, Size, and Centrality
Some are therefore beginning to fear that even a search engine such as PubMed, provided by the National Library of Medicine of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) -- and as such ultimately under the control of the White House -- could be bent to an ideological agenda that has little respect for scientific evidence. And one wonders whether it might be possible to try to free oneself from what is, in fact, almost a monopoly on biomedical knowledge today.
It is not easy. PubMed, active since 1949 and online since 1996, now provides access to nearly 40 million citations of scientific articles and online books published worldwide, in dozens of different languages, providing links to the original content and, where possible, to the full text. For anyone studying or working in medicine, pharmacology, epidemiology, and all branches of biomedical research, it is an everyday tool, essential for research, consultation, training, and continuing education. It is a strictly technical tool, one might say, unrelated to the political leanings of those in power. But the second Trump administration, if there were still any need, has made it clear to everyone how political everything is, and how even science does not escape this definition.
. . .
For a year now, however, this has no longer been the case in the White House. In recent months, we have seen competent and experienced people replaced by television personalities or influencers who are sympathetic to the president. We have witnessed surreal debates within the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) and the inclusion of scientifically unfounded statements on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website, until now an undisputed touchstone for the state of the art in epidemiology and medicine.
PubMed: History, Size, and Centrality
Some are therefore beginning to fear that even a search engine such as PubMed, provided by the National Library of Medicine of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) -- and as such ultimately under the control of the White House -- could be bent to an ideological agenda that has little respect for scientific evidence. And one wonders whether it might be possible to try to free oneself from what is, in fact, almost a monopoly on biomedical knowledge today.
It is not easy. PubMed, active since 1949 and online since 1996, now provides access to nearly 40 million citations of scientific articles and online books published worldwide, in dozens of different languages, providing links to the original content and, where possible, to the full text. For anyone studying or working in medicine, pharmacology, epidemiology, and all branches of biomedical research, it is an everyday tool, essential for research, consultation, training, and continuing education. It is a strictly technical tool, one might say, unrelated to the political leanings of those in power. But the second Trump administration, if there were still any need, has made it clear to everyone how political everything is, and how even science does not escape this definition.
. . .