Journal editor given ultimatum over peer review

[n2doc]

07 April 2010

The editor of a journal which publishes controversial medical ideas claims he has been told that he will be fired unless he agrees to make the journal peer-reviewed.

Medical Hypotheses is the last of the non-peer-reviewed journals in the mainstream scientific literature," says Bruce Charlton, the editor facing the ultimatum. "They are going to sack me on 11 May unless I unconditionally accept the changes to the journal."

Elsevier is demanding the changes after it withdrew two controversial papers that Medical Hypotheses published last year, one of them questioning whether HIV in fact causes AIDS. Following an internal review, Elsevier ordered Charlton to introduce peer review and to devote extra attention to potentially controversial articles.

Charlton says that peer review would undermine the spirit of the journal, which is to challenge prevailing dogma. At present, Charlton alone decides what to publish.

Tom Reller, a spokesman for Elsevier, says the company has acted ethically towards Charlton but, "as owner of the journal, we have every right and obligation to make the final decision on the editorial policies of the journal".

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18740-journal-editor-given-ultimatum-over-peer-review.html

[Orrex]

Good.

It's curious that Charlton would "prevailing dogma" while being the lone decider for the magazine.

[enlightenment]

4. Definitely odd.

If there is a sufficiently large community of like-minded researchers - i.e., those who read this journal for the content - then there should be a sufficient number of individuals that even the editor would find 'acceptable' to send articles for peer review.

Sounds like he was just enjoying his one-man show.

[mediaman007]

1. Sounds like the magazine was the National Enquirer of science!

[Orrex]

2. I find the Weekly World News to be a much more serious scientific publication

[stray cat]

3. From what I've seen of the journal maybe he should be fired anyway

[ProgressiveProfessor]

5. Medical Hypotheses is now where near the mainstream of scientific literature

[Odin2005]

6. LOL, this will send the woo-woos into a conspiracist tizzy.

[supernova]

7. Didn't realize

there were any "major journals" that *weren't* peer- reviewed.

Learn something new every day.

And yes, he should be fired. What a dolt.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

8. First time I had heard of this rag...

was when some woo woo on DU was claiming to be a scientist, and used her paper in this journal as proof of expertise.

[Festivito]

9. Elsevier requires peer review. This guy needs his own website, not being on theirs.

Seems like a no-brainer.