Environmental Health Perspectives, regarded as the leading journal in environmental health, has announced that it will temporarily stop accepting new research for publication due to federal budget cuts that have cast doubt on its future.
For over five decades, the journal has been funded by the National Institutes of Health to evaluate research on how environmental toxins—from persistent chemicals to air pollution—affect health and to publish these findings at no cost.
The decision to stop accepting research papers was influenced by a “lack of confidence” in the renewal of contracts for essential expenses like copy-editing and editorial software, according to Joel Kaufman, the journal’s editor-in-chief.
He refrained from discussing the journal’s potential future.
“If the journal were to cease, it would be a significant loss,” stated Jonathan Levy, chair of environmental health at Boston University. “It diminishes access to valuable information that helps inform sound decisions.”
The editor of the New England Journal of Medicine described a recent letter as “vaguely threatening.” On Tuesday, the journal Obstetrics and Gynecology, published by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, reported receiving a similar letter.
Scientific journals have been under scrutiny from high-ranking health officials during the Trump administration.
In a book released last year, Dr. Martin A. Makary, the new commissioner of the FDA, criticized journal editorial boards for “gate-keeping” and supporting only a specific narrative.
In an interview on the “Dr. Hyman Show” podcast last year, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., now the secretary of health and human services, expressed intentions to take legal action against medical journals under federal anti-corruption statutes.
“I will find a way to sue unless you provide a plan right now on how you intend to start publishing actual science,” he expressed.
Nevertheless, the halting of E.H.P. perplexed researchers, who noted that the budget cuts seemed at odds with the Trump administration’s stated goals.
For example, Mr. Kennedy frequently highlighted the importance of investigating the environment’s impact on chronic diseases. The new administration has also shown interest in improving transparency and public access to scientific journals, a domain where E.H.P. has taken the lead.
E.H.P. was among the first “open-access” journals, making its content freely available to all readers. Unlike many other open-access journals that charge authors significant fees, E.H.P.’s federal funding allowed researchers from smaller institutions to publish without financial concerns.
“The irony here is multilayered,” Dr. Levy remarked.
E.H.P. is not the only journal facing challenges due to budget cuts at the Department of Health and Human Services.
A draft budget for the department, obtained by The New York Times, suggests cutting two journals published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Emerging Infectious Diseases and Preventing Chronic Disease. Both journals are published at no cost to authors or readers and are highly regarded in their respective fields.
Andrew Nixon, a spokesperson for H.H.S., stated that “no final decision has been made” regarding the upcoming budget.
Emerging Infectious Diseases, which is published monthly, delivers timely reports on global infectious disease threats.
It has played a vital role in enhancing preparedness and response to outbreaks, according to Jason Kindrachuk, a virologist at the University of Manitoba who has shared research on the Marburg and mpox viruses in the journal.
The recent news is “very disheartening,” he noted.
