The peer-review process needs a fix

COIs and groupthink are bad things

A new article has been published by Cureus on January 23, 2025 by Raphael Lataster and Peter Parry that warrants reading.

Mainstream medicine, like other academic fields, is shaped by prevailing paradigms and the dominant narratives they create. Over the past half-century, these paradigms have increasingly reflected the growing commercial influence of the pharmaceutical industry. Dominant narratives are closely tied to groupthink, to which medical journals are often subject. In addition, more “prestigious” medical journals tend to have further financial conflicts of interest with the pharmaceutical industry. These dynamics limit scientific progress by suppressing awareness of the iatrogenic aspects of industry products and the benefits of alternative non-patentable and unpatentable medical products and therapeutic interventions. Journals need to adopt a more open policy to manuscripts that encompass contrarian perspectives to dominant narratives while still adhering to time-tested scientific values and methods.

Incidentally, if you haven’t heard, very recently our DNA article was rejected without review by Cureus as well.

Medical Journals as Gatekeepers: A Broken System

Go figure.