Communicating science

The world is changing, but big journals have not realized it

The avalanche of bad science that accompanied the COVID pandemic has brought long-standing problems with biomedical journals to the fore. The issues are many and are summarised by Peter Gøtzsche in an honest account, which he calls an Odyssey. We would call it a tragedy.

We will not repeat Peter’s words as his vivid description is probably a testament to what was once a great journal. Those who have followed the antiviral series will wonder why we seem to be writing an obituary for the BMJ. In reality, the obituary has been written by the very people who run it. 

From 2009, the BMJ helped us uncover and publicize the gross exaggerations, bias, and manipulation surrounding neuraminidase inhibitors. It actively campaigned to get Roche to release the data.  It even built a web page to allow us to shed light on the deep biases of organizations like WHO, US CDC, EMA, and ECDC. Soon after the campaign's conclusion, though, things started to change, and it became increasingly difficult and fin…