The Environmental Health Perspective is widely regarded as the premier magazine in the field, announcing its suspension of new research submissions due to uncertainties surrounding federal funding cuts.
For over 50 years, this journal has been supported by the National Institutes of Health to evaluate research on the impacts of environmental toxins, including persistent chemicals and air pollution, publishing findings at no cost.
Joel Kaufman, the journal’s editor-in-chief, opted to halt new submissions because of the “lack of confidence” regarding the funding of critical expenses such as copyediting and updating editing software.
He refrained from providing comments on the publication’s future outlook.
“If the journal were to disappear, it would be a tremendous loss,” stated Jonathan Levy, Chair of the Department of Environmental Health at Boston University. “It diminishes access to crucial information needed for insightful decision-making.”
The NEJM editor referred to the letter as “blushy threats.” Recently, the journal Obstetrics and Gynecology, published by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, reported receiving similar letters.
Scientific journals have been under scrutiny from leading health officials during the Trump administration.
In a book published last year, Dr. Martin A. McCurry, the newly appointed FDA commissioner, indicated that the Editorial Committee of “Gatekeeping” will only disseminate information that aligns with “groupthink narratives.”
In an interview from last year’s “Dr. Hyman Show” podcast, current HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. expressed intentions to take legal action against medical journals under the Federal Anti-Corruption Act.
“If you don’t establish a plan to publish credible science now, I will find a way to sue you,” he warned.
Still, the uncertainty surrounding EHP has left researchers perplexed. They noted that funding cuts seem to conflict with the Trump administration’s declared priorities.
For instance, Kennedy has consistently highlighted the significance of investigating environmental factors in chronic diseases. The new administration has also shown interest in transparency and public access to scientific journals, a principle EHP pioneered.
EHP was among the first “open access” journals, accessible to anyone without a subscription, and unlike many other open access journals that impose substantial fees, EHP’s federal backing allowed researchers at smaller institutions to publish without financial concerns.
“There are several layers of irony in this situation,” Dr. Levy remarked.
EHP isn’t the only journal affected by funding cuts at the Department of Health and Human Services.
A draft budget obtained by The New York Times suggests that two journals published by the CDC—Emerging Infectious Diseases and Chronic Diseases—may face cuts. Both are available at no cost to authors and readers and are among the leading journals in their fields.
HHS spokesman Andrew Nixon stated that there was “no final decision” on the forthcoming budget.
Published monthly, Emerging Infectious Diseases provides state-of-the-art insights on global infectious disease threats.
Jason Kindrachuk, a virologist at the University of Manitoba, who has published studies on Marburg and MPOX in the journal, noted its importance in shaping response strategies during outbreaks.
The news is “very disheartening,” he remarked.
Source: www.nytimes.com
