+- Scivillage.com Casual Discussion Science Forum (https://www.scivillage.com)
+-- Forum: Science (https://www.scivillage.com/forum-61.html)
+--- Forum: Junk Science (https://www.scivillage.com/forum-88.html)
+--- Thread: Article RFK Jr.’s health department calls Nature “junk science,” cancels subscriptions (/thread-18296.html)
RFK Jr.’s health department calls Nature “junk science,” cancels subscriptions - C C - Jul 2, 2025
https://arstechnica.com/health/2025/07/rfk-jr-s-health-department-calls-nature-junk-science-cancels-subscriptions/
EXCERPTS: Scientists at several federal agencies are losing access to scientific literature published by Springer Nature, which produces the prestigious journal Nature among many other high-profile titles.
That's according to a report Monday by Nature's news team, which is also published by Springer Nature, but is editorially independent.
According to the news outlet, spokespeople for NASA and the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) confirmed that agency scientists would no longer have access to Springer Nature journals.
[...] Kennedy's criticism largely stems from his belief that modern medicine and mainstream science are part of a global conspiracy to generate pharmaceutical profits. Kennedy is a germ-theory denier who believes people can maintain their health not by relying on evidence-based medicine, such as vaccines, but by clean living and eating—a loose concept called "terrain theory."
(MORE - missing details)
RE: RFK Jr.’s health department calls Nature “junk science,” cancels subscriptions - Syne - Jul 2, 2025
Not hard to see why.
Leading Science Journal Will Now Reject Inconvenient Scientific Truths
Nature demands that only science compatible with an ideologically fashionable worldview be published.
What is arguably the world’s most influential scientific journal is strangling academic freedom and science itself with the hands of far-left ideology.
“Although academic freedom is fundamental, it is not unbounded,” a recent volume of Nature Human Behavior reads. “For example, research may — inadvertently — stigmatize individuals or human groups.”
‘Nature’ magazine has lost its way
It’s all the more concerning then, that in the last few years, Nature has handed over an increasing amount of editorial space to social justice activism. In February of 2019, Jordan Peterson remarked that a once-great publication was going “farther down the social constructionist rabbit hole”.
RE: RFK Jr.’s health department calls Nature “junk science,” cancels subscriptions - Magical Realist - Jul 2, 2025
Quote:Kennedy's criticism largely stems from his belief that modern medicine and mainstream science are part of a global conspiracy to generate pharmaceutical profits. Kennedy is a germ-theory denier who believes people can maintain their health not by relying on evidence-based medicine, such as vaccines, but by clean living and eating—a loose concept called "terrain theory."
What gets me is the acute wariness they have of any political agenda behind science articles. One could only be this concerned, this offendable, if one also has their own political agenda to push, particularly one so at odds with real science and based on little more than pseudoscientific theories and unevidenced claims.
"Germ theory denialism is the pseudoscientific belief that germs do not cause infectious disease, and that the germ theory of disease is wrong. It usually involves arguing that Louis Pasteur's model of infectious disease was wrong, and that Antoine Béchamp's was right. In fact, its origins are rooted in Béchamp's empirically disproven (in the context of disease) theory of pleomorphism. Another obsolete variation is known as terrain theory and postulates that germs morphologically change in response to environmental factors, subsequently causing disease, rather than germs being the sole cause of it."--- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germ_theory_denialism
RE: RFK Jr.’s health department calls Nature “junk science,” cancels subscriptions - Syne - Jul 2, 2025
Using Kennedy as a red herring doesn't change the fact that such sources have compromised the science, for overt and admitted political reasons.
It's always the defense of the leftists that the "real problem" is people noticing their bias ("Republicans pounce"), as if bias in science is fine, so long as no one criticizes it.
Any political agenda is not science. Period.