Researchers have rallied, sending in letters, to prevent changes to the journal Medical Hypotheses, reports The Scientist. Articles that appear in the journal are not peer-reviewed; instead, they are chosen by editor-in-chief Bruce Charlton. "Medical Hypotheses has become an important vehicle for publishing exciting new ideas and information that is helping to shape the directions of medical research," writes Paul Sherman from Cornell University. "Cancelling the journal, or massively altering its focus and editorial policies, would potentially deprive both the medical and biological communities of their only existing forum for interaction." Elsevier, which owns the journal, is considering switching it to a peer-review model after publishing a paper from an HIV denialist. Elsevier retracted that and another paper. In Times Higher Education, the University of Warwick's Steve Fuller adds: "Medical Hypotheses has never hidden what it set out to do, namely to provide a forum for bold scientific ideas that challenge the status quo."
A Journal for Bold Ideas
Mar 02, 2010