Medical Journals and Politics

Since talking to Henci Goer way back in 2000 about the concerted effort to misalign natural childbirth for the benefit of "daylight obstetrics" in busy obstetrical practices and hospitals, I have been very wary of the press and even trusted medical journals like the New England Journal of Medicine. In 2002 Henci documented her observations in an article printed in Midwifery Today called The Assault on Normal Birth: The OB Disinformation Campaign.

Today, Red State Moron blogs about a very similar concern reported in the Wall Street Journal, but this time we see the NEJM dipping their toes in the Vioxx scandal. The article explains (emphasis mine),

"Accusations aren't the usual fare of august medical journals, so it's worth trying to understand the publication's self-insertion into the Merck litigation. Its extraordinary decision to publish a critical statement about a Vioxx study it ran years ago is being hailed by trial lawyers as the best evidence yet that Merck played fast and loose with its data. Another way to say this is that the New England Journal is joining the ranks of academic publications risking their reputations as non-partisan arbiters of good science in order to rumble in the political tarpits.

The worry here is that the health community and broader public will soon have one less place to find legitimate "science." These publications have viewed themselves as the gold standard in research, using their peer review processes to build reputations for careful and unbiased science on the leading issues of the day. Any suggestion that these publications have an axe to grind -- whether against corporate America, private markets, or specific drugs -- undermines their standing as neutral arbiters. That in turn makes it that much harder to separate good science from the "junk" version. And that truly warrants an "expression of concern."

As Red State Moron suggests (and I agree), "And this is exactly where I think the medical and science blogs will gain an audience, and perhaps respect. As another way of providing "peer review", and as a means of disseminating the information to the public. Because really, how many of you read the NEJM, The Lancet, or JAMA (to name a few)?" Indeed, how many physicians read their own journals, nevermind the patients they serve?