Editorial Independence and Ethics of Research Publication

Less than three days after submission of a manuscript to a medical journal, the author received a letter saying that his paper had been rejected. Unlike many rejection letters this one did not contain any explanation regarding the content of the manuscript or the peer reviewers’ opinions. Instead, the letter explained that there are regulations prohibiting the journal from publishing material originating from certain countries (personal communication). As these countries are “embargoed”, sanctions against them included any technical and scientific assistance, among them peer reviewing their papers. Several questions remain unanswered here: what is the reason for this decision? Are the public interests and ethical considerations taken into account? What is the role of the editor in this ruling and who is to be held responsible for the content of the journal in question? How should the results be communicated in the presence of such strong political influences? Isn’t it true that result communication is what keeps science alive?