Here’s a crazy, but none-too-surprising, story from the UK’s Times Higher Education illustrating the way that establishment academics and scientists rally to discredit and run out of town any “rogue” scientists or scholars who dare question the orthodox view of things. THE’s own language is a bit suspect concerning Peter Duesberg, but nevertheless, the point is well made:
It has published papers on everything from ejaculation as a treatment for nasal congestion to why modern scientists are so dull, but the future of Medical Hypotheses is hanging in the balance after a host of complaints from high-profile researchers.
The irreverent publication is the only Elsevier journal not to subject its submissions to peer review. Instead, its editor decides what to publish on the basis of how interesting or radical a paper is, and how well expressed the arguments are.
But its future is in doubt after editor-in-chief Bruce Charlton, professor of theoretical medicine at the University of Buckingham, published a paper from a well-known HIV/Aids denier.