Health
‘Vaguely Threatening’: Federal Prosecutor Queries Leading Medical Journal
A federal prosecutor in Washington has contacted The New England Journal of Medicine, considered the world’s most prestigious medical journal, with questions that suggested without evidence that it was biased against certain views and influenced by external pressures.
Dr. Eric Rubin, the editor in chief of N.E.J.M., described the letter as “vaguely threatening” in an interview with The New York Times.
At least three other journals have received similar letters from Edward Martin Jr., a Republican activist serving as interim U.S. attorney in Washington. Mr. Martin has been criticized for using his office to target opponents of the administration.
His letters accused the publications of being “partisans in various scientific debates” and asked a series of accusatory questions about bias and the selection of research articles.
Do they accept submissions from scientists with “competing viewpoints”? What do they do if the authors whose work they published “may have misled their readers”? Are they transparent about influence from “supporters, funders, advertisers and others”?
News of the letter to N.E.J.M. was reported earlier by STAT, a health news outlet.
Mr. Martin also asked about the role of the National Institutes of Health, which funds some of the research the journals publish, and the agency’s role “in the development of submitted articles.”
Amanda Shanor, a First Amendment expert at the University of Pennsylvania, said the information published in reputable medical journals like N.E.J.M. is broadly protected by the Constitution.
In most cases, journals have the same robust rights that apply to newspapers — the strongest the Constitution provides, she added.
“There is no basis to say that anything other than the most stringent First Amendment protections apply to medical journals,” she said. “It appears aimed at creating a type of fear and chill that will have effects on people’s expression — that’s a constitutional concern.”
It’s unclear how many journals have received these letters or the criteria that Mr. Martin used to decide which publications to target. The U.S. attorney’s office in Washington did not respond to a request for comment.
“Our job is to evaluate science and evaluate it in an unbiased fashion,” Dr. Rubin said. “That’s what we do and I think we do it well. The questions seem to suggest that there’s some bias in what we do — that’s where the vaguely threatening part comes in.”
Jeremy Berg, the former editor in chief of the journal Science, said he thought the letters were designed to “intimidate journals to bend over backward” to publish papers that align with the administration’s beliefs — on climate change and vaccines, for example — even if the quality of the research is poor.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the nation’s health secretary, singled out N.E.J.M in an interview with the “Dr. Hyman Show” podcast last year as an example of a medical journal that has participated in “lying to the public” and “retracting the real science.”
Andrew Nixon, a spokesman for the Health and Human Services Department, declined to comment on whether Mr. Kennedy had any involvement with the letters.
In the interview, Mr. Kennedy said he would seek to prosecute medical journals under federal anti-corruption laws.
“I’m going to litigate against you under the racketeering laws, under the general tort laws,” he said. “I’m going to find a way to sue you unless you come up with a plan right now to show how you’re going to start publishing real science.”
Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, the new director of N.I.H., has vigorously criticized the leadership of scientific journals. Recently he co-founded a new journal as an alternative to traditional scientific publishing. It has published contrarian views on Covid.
Other prominent journals said they had not received the letter. On Friday, The Lancet, which is based in Britain, published a scathing editorial in solidarity, calling the letters “an obvious ruse to strike fear into journals and impinge on their right to independent editorial oversight.”
“Science and medicine in the U.S.A. are being violently dismembered while the world watches,” the editorial said.
One of Mr. Martin’s letters was sent to the journal Chest, a low-profile publication that publishes highly technical studies on topics like lung cancer and pneumonia. The New York Times reported last week that at least two other publishers had received nearly identically worded letters.
They declined to speak publicly for fear of retribution from the Trump administration.
Dr. Rubin said he, too, was worried about political backlash. Scientific journals rely on public funds in several indirect ways — for example, universities often use federal grants to pay for subscriptions.
“Are we concerned? Of course we are,” he said. “But we want to do the right thing.”
Mr. Martin gave the journals until May 2 to respond to his questions. N.E.J.M. has already responded to Mr. Martin with a statement that pushes back against his characterization of the journal.
“We use rigorous peer review and editorial processes to ensure the objectivity and reliability of the research we publish,” the statement read. “We support the editorial independence of medical journals and their First Amendment rights to free expression.”
This is not the N.E.J.M’s first brush with a Trump administration.
In 2020, the journal published an editorial condemning the president’s response to the pandemic — the first time the journal had supported or condemned a political candidate in its 208-year history.
Dr. Rubin said he doubted Mr. Martin’s letter was related to the editorial. The journal Chest didn’t write about Trump’s first term yet received a letter, he noted.
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
A new report by the American Heart Association (AHA) included some troubling predictions for the future of women’s health.
The forecast, published in the journal Circulation on Wednesday, projected increases in various comorbidities in American females by 2050.
More than 59% of women were predicted to have high blood pressure, up from less than 49% currently.
The review also projected that more than 25% of women will have diabetes, compared to about 15% today, and more than 61% will have obesity, compared to 44% currently.
As a result of these risk factors, the prevalence of cardiovascular disease and stroke is expected to rise to 14.4% from 10.7%.
The prevalence of cardiovascular disease and stroke in women is expected to rise to 14.4% from 10.7% by 2050. (iStock)
Not all trends were negative, as unhealthy cholesterol prevalence is expected to drop to about 22% from more than 42% today, the report stated.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Dr. Elizabeth Klodas, a cardiologist and founder of Step One Foods in Minnesota, commented on these “jarring findings.”
“The fact that on our current trajectory, cardiometabolic disease is projected to explode in women within one generation should be a huge wake-up call,” she told Fox News Digital.
NEARLY 90% OF AMERICANS AT RISK OF SILENT DISEASE — HERE’S WHAT TO KNOW
“Hypertension, diabetes, obesity — these are all major risk factors for heart disease, and we are already seeing what those risks are driving. Heart disease is the No. 1 killer of women, eclipsing all other causes of death, including breast cancer.”
Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death for women in the U.S. and around the world. (iStock)
Klodas warned that heart disease starts early, progresses “stealthily,” and can present “out of the blue in devastating ways.”
The AHA published another study on Thursday revealing one million hospitalizations, showing that heart attack deaths are climbing among adults below the age of 55.
The more alarming finding, according to Klodas, is that young women were found more likely to die after their first heart attack than men of the same age.
DOCTOR SHARES 3 SIMPLE CHANGES TO STAY HEALTHY AND INDEPENDENT AS YOU AGE
“This is all especially tragic since heart disease is almost entirely preventable,” she said. “The earlier you start, the better.”
Children can show early evidence of plaque deposition in their arteries, which can be reversed through lifestyle changes if “undertaken early enough and aggressively enough,” according to the expert.
Moving more is one part of protecting a healthy heart, according to experts. (iStock)
Klodas suggested that rising heart conditions are associated with traditional risk factors, like smoking, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, diabetes, obesity and a sedentary lifestyle.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE HEALTH STORIES
Doctors are also seeing higher rates of preeclampsia, or high blood pressure during pregnancy, as well as gestational diabetes. Klodas noted that these are sex-specific risk factors that don’t typically contribute to complications until after menopause.
The best way to protect a healthy heart is to “do the basics,” Klodas recommended, including the following lifestyle habits.
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR HEALTH NEWSLETTER
Klodas especially emphasized making improvements to diet, as the food people eat affects “every single risk factor that the AHA’s report highlights.”
“High blood pressure, high blood sugar, high cholesterol, excess weight – these are all conditions that are driven in part or in whole by food,” she said. “We eat multiple times every single day, which means what we eat has profound cumulative effects over time.”
“Even a small improvement in dietary intake, when maintained, can have a massive positive impact on health,” a doctor said. (iStock)
“Even a small improvement in dietary intake, when maintained, can have a massive positive impact on health.”
The doctor also recommends changing out a few snacks per day for healthier choices, which has been proven to “yield medication-level cholesterol reductions” in a month.
TEST YOURSELF WITH OUR LATEST LIFESTYLE QUIZ
“Keep up that small change and, over the course of a year, you could also lose 20 pounds and reduce your sodium intake enough to avoid blood pressure-lowering medications,” Klodas added.
“Women should not view the AHA report as inevitable. We have power over our health destinies. We just need to use it.”
Related Article
Use left and right arrow keys to navigate between menu items.
Use escape to exit the menu.
Sign Up
Create a free account to access exclusive content, play games, solve puzzles, test your pop-culture knowledge and receive special offers.
Already have an account? Login
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Nearsightedness (myopia) is skyrocketing globally, with nearly half of the world’s population expected to be myopic by 2050, according to the World Health Organization.
Heavy use of smartphones and other devices is associated with an 80% higher risk of myopia when combined with excessive computer use, but a new study suggests that dim indoor lighting could also be a factor.
For years, scientists have been puzzled by the different ways myopia is triggered. In lab settings, it can be induced by blurring vision or using different lenses. Conversely, it can be slowed by something as simple as spending time outdoors, research suggests.
Nearsightedness occurs when the eyeball grows too long from front to back, according to the American Optometric Association (AOA). This physical elongation causes light to focus in front of the retina rather than directly on it, making distant objects appear blurry.
The study suggests that myopia isn’t caused by the digital devices themselves, but by the low-light environments where they are typically used. (iStock)
Researchers at the State University of New York (SUNY) College of Optometry identified a potential specific trigger for this growth. When someone looks at a phone or a book up close, the pupil naturally constricts.
COMMON VISION ISSUE COULD LEAD TO MISSED CANCER WARNING, STUDY FINDS
“In bright outdoor light, the pupil constricts to protect the eye while still allowing ample light to reach the retina,” Urusha Maharjan, a SUNY Optometry doctoral student who conducted the study, said in a press release.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
“When people focus on close objects indoors, such as phones, tablets or books, the pupil can also constrict — not because of brightness, but to sharpen the image,” she went on. “In dim lighting, this combination may significantly reduce retinal illumination.”
High-intensity natural light prevents myopia because it provides enough retinal stimulation to override the “stop growing” signal, even when pupils are constricted. (iStock)
The hypothesis suggests that when the retina is deprived of light during extended close-up work, it sends a signal for the eye to grow.
In a dim environment, the narrowed pupil allows so little light through that the retinal activity isn’t strong enough to signal the eye to stop growing, the researchers found.
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR HEALTH NEWSLETTER
In contrast, being outdoors provides light levels much brighter than indoors. This ensures that even when the pupil narrows to focus on a nearby object, the retina still receives a strong signal, maintaining healthy eye development.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE HEALTH STORIES
The team noted some limitations of the study, including the small subject group and the inability to directly measure internal lens changes, as the bright backgrounds used to mimic the outdoors made pupils too small for standard equipment.
Researchers believe that increasing indoor brightness during close-up work could be a simple, testable way to slow the global nearsightedness epidemic. (iStock)
“This is not a final answer,” Jose-Manuel Alonso, MD, PhD, SUNY distinguished professor and senior author of the study, said in the release.
TEST YOURSELF WITH OUR LATEST LIFESTYLE QUIZ
“But the study offers a testable hypothesis that reframes how visual habits, lighting and eye focusing interact.”
The study was published in the journal Cell Reports.
Related Article
North Texas middle school closes after a norovirus outbreak
Utah man dies of injuries sustained in avalanche in Big Cottonwood Canyon
Here are five places to ice skate in Vermont this winter
Patchwork 250: Share your community’s unique history for Virginia’s 250th anniversary
Wisconsin DNR opens 2026 elk season applications March 1, with more Central Zone tags
Florida High School Football Rankings: Top 25 teams – Oct. 21
Cleary's 21 help Le Moyne down Central Connecticut State 69-64 in OT
How old is Bo Nix? What to know about Oregon quarterback ahead of 2024 NFL Draft
99th annual Pony Swim held in Virginia
Indiana Members Credit Union announced as new anchor tenant at Bottleworks District
Where Iran’s ballistic missiles can reach — and how close they are to the US
Has India’s influence in Afghanistan grown under the Taliban?
Bill Clinton to testify before House committee investigating Epstein links
Read Judge Schiltz’s Order
Vulnerable House Dem lashes out at Trump’s ‘racist’ SOTU challenge: ‘That was uncomfortable’
-
World2 days agoExclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
-
Massachusetts2 days agoMother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
-
Montana1 week ago2026 MHSA Montana Wrestling State Championship Brackets And Results – FloWrestling
-
Oklahoma1 week agoWildfires rage in Oklahoma as thousands urged to evacuate a small city
-
Louisiana4 days agoWildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
-
Technology6 days agoYouTube TV billing scam emails are hitting inboxes
-
Denver, CO2 days ago10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
-
Technology6 days agoStellantis is in a crisis of its own making