Source:Rounding The Earth Author: Mathew Crawford

In a letter dated the 23rd of April, 2021, four Guest Editors publicly resigned from the journal Frontiers in Pharmacology. Professor Maria Cristina Albertini, Professor Piero Sestili, Dr. Robert Malone, and Dr. Howard Haimes stepped down in protest over executive decisions not to publish two papers showing positive results of various agents in protecting against or treating COVID-19.

In early March, the ivermectin paper, authored by members of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC), was “taken down” after “editors determined that it contained unsubstantiated claims and violated the journal’s editorial policies”, which sounds a lot like the language used by social media sites censoring science that does not fit the approved narrative these days. Reported at The Scientist:

After being contacted by The Scientist, the journal posted a statement from Frontiers’s chief executive editor, Frederick Fenter, saying that “Frontiers takes no position on the efficacy of ivermectin as a treatment of patients with COVID-19, however, we do take a very firm stance against unbalanced or unsupported scientific conclusions.”

That statement was entirely vague about the reasons for the paper’s rejection.

Apparently, the manager assigned to support the guest editors disappeared when the questions came rolling in about these rejections.


According to the paper’s lead author, Dr. Pierre Kory, communication about any problems by Frontiers was entirely lacking:

Responding to the Frontiers statement’s invitation to the authors to submit a revised version of the paper, Kory says that while he would have been open to removing mentions of his own team’s treatment protocol, he doesn’t want to work with the journal again. “There was no communication with us, no telling us of their concerns, no discussion” during this process, he says. “The idea that I would resubmit to that journal is fairly preposterous, don’t you think?”

The claims made by the resigning guest editors suggest that Frontiers Chief Executive Editor Dr. Frederick Fenter slowed the publication process and tried to steer the ivermectin research into something like “the ghetto of the journal”.


It is noteworthy that Frontiers has had adversarial relationships with editors in the past. Those doing the work of reviewing papers in Frontiershave long complained over having little to no control over actual publication decisions, regardless of their opinions about the research. This and other problems eventually led to a 2015 “Manifesto of Editorial Independence of Editors of Frontiers Medical Journals“. Dr. Fenter fired all 31 signatory editors at the time.

It might be said that unilateral power over publishing decisions in science represents a critical moral hazard. Such a singular point of failure might even lend itself to something like a “crime of the century“.

The Chloroquine Wars Part VIII – Hydroxychloroquine’s Safety Profile and a Cost-Benefit Analysis

The Chloroquine Wars Part IX – How Research Can be Rigged by Statistically Stacking the Deck (A Simpson’s Paradox Tale)

The Chloroquine Wars Part X – A Discussion of the Insanity of the Chloroquine Wars

The Chloroquine Wars Part XI – See No Good, Hear No Good, Speak No Good

The Chloroquine Wars Part XII – Manufactured Fear During Hydroxychloroquine’s Trump Moment

The Chloroquine Wars Part XIII -A Clockwork Orange Man

The Chloroquine Wars Part XIV – How to Rig Research: Surgisphere Part I

The Chloroquine Wars Part XVII – Why the Story About India’s April COVID-19 Spike is All Wrong

The Chloroquine Wars Part XV – How to Rig Research: Surgisphere Part II

The Chloroquine Wars Part XIX – Historical Failures of Public Health Authorities

The Chloroquine Wars Part XX – Why The Early Treatment Data is Better Than Anyone Imagines

The Chloroquine Wars Part XXI

Doctor Didier Raoult Part I: Where We Are Now -The Chloroquine Wars Part XXV

Everything Bret Weinstein, Heather Heying, and Pierre Kory Missed About “The Crime of the Century” The Chloroquine Wars Part XXVI

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on whatsapp
On Trend

Latest Stories

Dr. Harvey Risch: Hydroxychloroquine, Ivermectin, and Other Therapeutics Highly Effective in Early COVID Treatment

I’ve railed against this in the media that we are a part of, and the way that the propaganda reacts to this is, “Ignore it. Ignore all of this.” I’m saying this now because the general public has to be the one that gets angry. The general public should be furious at the way people have been treated in the country by suppression of these drugs, by that kind of website that suppresses the ability of doctors to practice medicine.

Read More »

A Judge Stands up to a Hospital: “Step Aside” and Give a Dying Man Ivermectin

The judge’s finest moment may have been when he dashed the most glaring myth about ivermectin—that it is not safe, despite decades of use that shows otherwise. Noting that all drugs have side effects, Judge Fullerton listed ivermectin’s effects from a government website.
“(N)umber one, generally well tolerated; number two, dizziness; number three, pruritus; number four, nausea/diarrhea. These are the side effects for the dosage that’s being asked to be administered,” he said. “The risks of these side effects are so minimal that Mr. Ng’s current situation outweighs that risk by one-hundredfold.”

Read More »