Donald Trump’s NIH’s choice has just launched a controversial scientific journal

Karl Bergstrom, a theoretical and evolutionary biologist, believes that the magazine is part of the continued efforts to raise doubts about the established scientific consensus. “If you can create the illusion that there is no prevalence of opinion that says that vaccines and masks are effective ways to control the pandemic, then you can undermine this concept of scientific consensus, you can create uncertainty and you can press a particular program forward “, He says. According to him, the documents are reviewed may provide a cover for politicians who want to make certain decisions and they can also be used in court.

When it was reached on the phone on Thursday, Kulldorff said Bhattacharya and Makary were turned to the editorial board before their nominations by President Trump. “At the moment, they are not active board members,” he said. (The website of the magazine lists Bhattacharya and Makary as “on leave.”) He added that there was no “connection” between the journal and the Trump administration.

Kulldorff told Wired that the magazine would be a place for open discourse and academic freedom. “I think it is important for scientists to be able to publish what they think is an important science and then this should be open to discussion instead of preventing people from publishing,” says Culdorf.

Kulldorff and Andrew Noymer, an epidemiologist at UC Irvine that has been A supporter of the Laboratory Leakage Theory From the origin of Covid, they are cited as the editors of the magazine. Scott Atlas, who was eavesdropped by Trump to serve the White House Coronavirus Special Group in 2020, has also been appointed a member of the editorial. Atlas, a study radiologist has done fake claims These masks do not work to prevent the spread of coronavirus.

In January, Noymer wrote an op-e, supporting nomination of Bhattacharya for NIH administrator. In it, he praised Bhathachary for his open mind to different perspectives. This op -ed has been published in RealClearpolitics.

Angela Rasmussen, an American virologist and researcher at the University of Sascatchevan, says she is worried that the magazine can be used to support and legitimize pseudoscientific and anti-PUBLIC health views. “I don’t think it will give them any merit with real scientists. But the public may not know the difference between the magazine of the Academy of Public Health and the New England Journal of Medicine, “she says.

Taylor Dotson, a professor at New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, which studies the intersection of science and politics, says there is “legal concern” that the magazine can become a repository of evidence that support the arguments preferred by people in the administration. If confirmed, the Bhathachary and the Macari boss can potentially be Robert F. Kennedy -Jr.Trump’s candidate to lead the Ministry of Health and Human Services, which is known for promoting a wide range of lean scientific beliefs, including that there is a connection between vaccines and autism and that AIDS is not caused by the HIV virus.

Dotson warns that there is a risk of the existence of magazines closely brought into line with a certain political view, to deepen the politicization of science. “The worst scenario is that you are starting to make magazines for people who are a type of populist and anti-setting and magazines for people who also read NPR and New York Times.”