During his Senate confirmation hearings, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. produced a study claiming that vaccines caused autism. The paper was published in a journal called Science, Public Health Policy and the Law. In fact, this was not a medical or scientific journal. It was a blog. The “study” was reviewed by Peter McCullough, a well-known anti-vaccine activist, and supported by the National Vaccine Information Center, an anti-vaccine group. It is likely that these kinds of “journals,” which are outlets to support a particular point of view — in this case that vaccines cause autism — will be even more prevalent in the future.
In January 2025, Christine Lane and colleagues published a paper that in part addressed this growing trend (Lane C, et al. Predatory Journals—What Can We Do to Protect Their Prey? New N Engl J Med. 2025 Jan 16;392(3):283-285). The authors estimated that about 15,000 such journals existed in 2021. They noted that these journals often use “names and branding features that mimic well-established journals,” and “facilitate the dissemination of unvetted, weak, or even fraudulent health information.”
As we enter a time when people often say, “you have your science and I have mine,” we need to be aware that not all scientific studies are of equal quality or have been subjected to rigorous peer review.
Contributed by: Paul A. Offit, MD
During his Senate confirmation hearings, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. produced a study claiming that vaccines caused autism. The paper was published in a journal called Science, Public Health Policy and the Law. In fact, this was not a medical or scientific journal. It was a blog. The “study” was reviewed by Peter McCullough, a well-known anti-vaccine activist, and supported by the National Vaccine Information Center, an anti-vaccine group. It is likely that these kinds of “journals,” which are outlets to support a particular point of view — in this case that vaccines cause autism — will be even more prevalent in the future.
In January 2025, Christine Lane and colleagues published a paper that in part addressed this growing trend (Lane C, et al. Predatory Journals—What Can We Do to Protect Their Prey? New N Engl J Med. 2025 Jan 16;392(3):283-285). The authors estimated that about 15,000 such journals existed in 2021. They noted that these journals often use “names and branding features that mimic well-established journals,” and “facilitate the dissemination of unvetted, weak, or even fraudulent health information.”
As we enter a time when people often say, “you have your science and I have mine,” we need to be aware that not all scientific studies are of equal quality or have been subjected to rigorous peer review.
Contributed by: Paul A. Offit, MD