Below are the citation and extracts of an editorial in The BMJ, and a comment from me.
Global cost of silencing science
BMJ 2025; 390 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.r1370 (Published 10 July 2025)
Cite this as: BMJ 2025;390:r1370
=
Editors and publishers have a duty to resist
Public trust in scientific integrity is eroded by the politicisation of institutions under Donald Trump’s US presidency. The implications extend far beyond American borders, striking at the core of how scientific knowledge is produced, disseminated, and trusted worldwide.
Recent directives seek to eliminate diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, cut federal funding to critical health research agencies, and restrict references to gender, race, and climate science in official documentation. Scientific staff at federal agencies face mounting pressure to comply with politically motivated communication policies...
The ICMJE underscores that “editors should preserve the integrity of the scientific record by critically evaluating manuscripts free from undue influence and without compromising scholarly values.” Yet, under the current administration, several US federal science agencies require pre-approval for external publications—a direct contravention of these editorial standards. This climate of control stifles open inquiry and discourages evidence based discourse, particularly when scientific conclusions diverge from political narratives...
This trend is not unique to the United States. It is also a concern in democratic nations beyond the US, where similar pressures on scientific discourse and editorial independence have been observed. We are deeply concerned that this dangerous erosion of scientific autonomy recalls some of the darkest episodes in modern history — namely, the rise of fascism during the 1930s and the McCarthy era assaults on academic freedom in the 1950s...
To safeguard the future of medical science, we call for three actions. First, national and international scientific institutions should adopt clear policies to shield research from political interference... Second, medical journals must recommit to editorial independence and advocate for authors who face institutional censorship... Third, scientists, scientific organisations, and editors must resist silence...
=
COMMENT (NPW): I would add a fourth action: Hold policymakers accountable
HIFA has demonstrated with the New York Law School that 'States party to treaties such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights [which include the United States] have a legal obligation under International Human Rights Law to progressively meet the healthcare information needs of all citizens'. This is turn is dependent on the integrity of the global evidence ecosystem. Two of the six pillars of the system (Generating evidence and Publishing evidence) are now being deliberately attacked and weakened. As a result, the system is further disabled in its purpose of ensuring that every person and every health worker has access to the reliable healthcare information they need to protect their own health and the health of others.
https://www.hifa.org/about-hifa/hifa-universal-health-coverage-and-human...
https://www.hifa.org/about-hifa/hifa-vision-mission-strategy
Since our work with the NYLS there has unfortunately been no progress in holding policymakers to account on this issue. On the contrary, 'silencing science' continues to increase. Policymakers do so with impunity and there is no accountability.
HIFA profile: Neil Pakenham-Walsh is coordinator of HIFA (Healthcare Information For All), a global health community that brings all stakeholders together around the shared goal of universal access to reliable healthcare information. HIFA has 20,000 members in 180 countries, interacting in four languages and representing all parts of the global evidence ecosystem. HIFA is administered by Global Healthcare Information Network, a UK-based nonprofit in official relations with the World Health Organization. Email: neil@hifa.org