Stem cell research may not be as dispassionate and objective as the public thinks, if a complaint by a group of stem cell researchers is taken seriously. In an open letter to journal editors, 14 leaders in the field have taken the unusual step of alleging that good papers are being sabotaged, and mediocre papers are being over-publicised.

Some researchers are abusing the peer-review process by blocking or delaying rival research, they say. "Papers that are scientifically flawed or comprise only modest technical increments often attract undue profile. At the same time publication of truly original findings may be delayed or rejected". The letter is the culmination of rising concerns about the rejection of good research, and the publication of poor research, for personal or political reasons.

Sometimes, they say, reviewers demand further experimentation, which allows another researcher to scoop rivals with a similar paper. "It's hard to believe except you know it's happened to you that papers have been held up for months and months by reviewers asking for experiments that are not fair or relevant," said Professor Austin Smith, of Cambridge University.

One solution is to to publish anonymised comments from referees along with research papers, so that the validity and fairness of the research can be judged by all. Robin Lovell-Badge of the National Institute for Medical Research in London said,  "Because all comments would be published, it would hopefully make biased or careless refereeing less common, and it would embarrass journals if people could spot biased or stupid comments." ~ New Scientist Feb 2; BBC News Feb 2