Detachment and objectivity are the hallmarks of the model scientist. Alas! how difficult they are to achieve -- as a spat involving one of the world’s leading medical journals, the Journal of the American Medical Association, shows. A few days ago it took the unusual step of publishing a very long editorial explaining the ins and outs of a painful quarrel with a conflict-of-interest whistleblower.

As reported with barely-suppressed glee by the Wall Street Journal, the story runs like this. Dr Leo Alexander, a professor of neuroanatomy at Lincoln Memorial University in Harrogate, Tennessee, discovered on Google that the author of an article in JAMA about an anti-depressant had not observed JAMA’s guidelines for declaring conflict of interest.

He wrote to JAMA in October and they began to investigate – a long and tedious process. Frustrated by the delay, he published a letter in a rival journal, the BMJ, with stinging words about conflict of interest: "The medical community strives to make decisions based on evidence, but as this case illustrates we have unfortunately arrived at a point where taking the conclusions of clinical trials at face value is apparently a sign of naivete."

The editors of JAMA were not happy. They felt that publication in the BMJ constituted a serious breach of confidentiality, that it made an impartial investigation difficult and that it harmed JAMA’s reputation. The executive deputy editor, Dr Phil Fontanarosa, rang Dr Leo. According to Dr Leo, Dr Fontanarosa was irritated: "He said, ‘Who do you think you are?’ He then said, ‘You are banned from JAMA for life. You will be sorry. Your school will be sorry. Your students will be sorry." ("Inaccurate", according to Dr Fontanarosa.)

In an interview with The Wall Street Journal, JAMA editor-in-chief Catherine also called Dr Leo "a nothing and a nobody" (erroneously reported, according to JAMA). The dean of Dr Leo’s medical school told the WSJ that Dr DeAngelis threatened in a telephone conversation that she would "ruin the reputation of our medical school" if he did not force Dr Leo to retract the BMJ letter and stop talking to the media. (Dr DeAngelis denies threatening the dean.)

As a result of this dust-up, JAMA has changed its policy on complaints about conflict of interest. From now on, whistleblowers will be told to remain silent about the allegation while the journal investigates the charge. The new policy has been criticised by a former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine and the editor of the BMJ as excessive. ~ Wall Street Journal, Mar 24; Wall Street Journal, Mar 13; statement from Leo Alexander