Medical Journals as Gatekeepers: A Broken System

Research challenging the safety of Covid-19 vaccines is being silenced by medical journals, stifling critical debate.

Jan 23, 2025

∙ Paid

Cross-posted by MD REPORTS

"Publishing in medical journals has always been a process affected by distortions and biases, however the censorship implemented in these pandemic years against studies that do not conform to the dominant narrative is unprecedented."

- Marco Cosentino

Medical journals are increasingly acting as gatekeepers, promoting established narratives while sidelining research that challenges the status quo.

Studies questioning the safety of Covid-19 vaccines, for example, are often dismissed outright, denied the opportunity to undergo peer review.

In some instances, even studies that pass rigorous peer review are later retracted due to external pressures.

One such example involves a study on adverse events following the Covaxin vaccine, which was retracted after the journal faced pressure from the vaccine manufacturer. The authors were subsequently sued for defamation.

Similarly, a narrative review examining lessons learned from the global roll-out of the Covid-19 vaccine campaign was retracted post-peer review, with no clear explanation provided.

Now, a pre-print published in October 2023 by Speicher et al., serves as the latest example of the significant obstacles researchers face in this field.

Subscribe to MD REPORTS to continue reading

Visit the author’s Substack to subscribe and read more.