A Milestone for the Journal of Controversies in Biomedical Research

Abstract

If every positive result published in peer-reviewed, biomedical journals were true, the world would be disease-free. On the contrary, the disease burden and the associated economic burden are on the rise. With unprecedented advances in technology, we have been able to manipulate genes and biological pathways and experimentally demonstrate that diseases can be cured by such approaches. We read these success stories in peer-reviewed journals. However, it is not an understatement that more than 95% of these experimental findings never translate to any useful clinical outcome. One of the reasons for this is that when one gene or biological pathway is manipulated, compensatory mechanisms come into play, causing or sustaining the same disease through alternate pathways or inducing adverse events that are worse than the disease itself. These results usually do not get published. Unless we choose to publish negative, null, and contradictory findings along with positive results, and challenge the existing paradigm, false science will flourish. The Journal of Controversies in Biomedical Research is a dedicated journal for the publication of negative, null, and controversial findings. The current issue of the journal contains a review article questioning the validity of the cholesterol-heart theory, which claims that high cholesterol levels lead to coronary artery obstruction and acute myocardial infarction and that lipid-lowering drugs would offer protection against such pathologies. I hope the journal and the article will stimulate intellectual scientific conversation and encourage researchers to publish their negative, null, and controversial research findings and views.