cmaj controversy

not a controversy, really. in december, the publisher, graham morris, pulled an article set for publication because he claimed the piece did not meet methodological standards. the article was the result of 12 women "mystery shopping" pharmacies in each province, to check up on how well the april 2005 national re-scheduling of Plan B was being opreationalized. no longer a prescription drug, emergency contraception was supposed to be easily accesible, simply ask a pharmacist for it and you shall receive. the "mystery shopping" women, investigating the situation like an reporter might (although certainly not undertaking the methodological gold standard of a randomized control trial, 'tis true), found in many cases to get the pills they were forced to first give a slew of personal information (where do you live? when did you have sex? etc...as if you would answer such questions to get condoms out of a washroom dispenser!). For the record, Plan B involves two pills, taken 12 hours apart, as soon as possible after a contraceptive slip-up. It rarely causes uncomfortable side effects and is not an abortificient, but prevents conception. now, the findings made by these ladies are VERY important. its one thing to be on a CMAJ-sponsored mission to get the freaking pills, and quite another to be a girl scared out of her panties that she has to face a white-coat and explain her sex sins under the glaring lights of shopper's the morning after. when morris said the article couldn't be published as it stood, he was protecting the pharmacists. the paternalistic question-asking has since come under ethical fire, and is banned in many provinces. then last month the CMA fired john hoey, editor in chief, innovative and fantastic cmaj leader, and critic of the december censorship. i was teary-eyed at hoey's good governance in december, and now i am devastated at his departure and the end of integrity at canada's best medical journal. The editorial board, including many of my academic mentors, has asked that hoey and anne marie todkill (the senior deputy editor, also admirable, also fired) be re-instated. why they would want to go back to this kind of treatment is worthy of some investigation, however, to join the petition to get hoey & todkill back and for editorial autonomy, go to:
http://www.chaps.ucalgary.ca/cmaj.htm