Multiple sources are pointing to a new report that Merck paid Elsevier, a leading publisher, to produce several volumes of the Australasian Journal of Bone and Joint Medicine, which appeared to be a peer-reviewed journal, but was really little more than marketing material for the pharmaceutical company.
Merck and Elsevier Published Fake Journal
May 4, 2009
Share this post
2 Comments

Law Bytes
Episode 271: Taking Stock of a Wild Week in Canadian Digital Policy With the Online Streaming Reversal, AI Strategy Release, and Lawful Access Review
byMichael Geist

May 25, 2026
Michael Geist
May 11, 2026
Michael Geist
May 4, 2026
Michael Geist
Search Results placeholder
Michael Geist on Substack
Recent Posts
The Exemption Illusion: Why the Government’s Plan to Fast Track Bill C-34’s Kids’ Social Media Ban Means No Standards, No Privacy Review, and No Enforcement
Unpacking Bill C-34: My Appearance on the Globe and Mail’s The Decibel Podcast
Liberal MP: Lawful Access “Has Nothing to Do With the Privacy of People and Their Information”
The Law to Be Named Later: Bill C-34 Punts 50 Key Decisions to Cabinet and a Digital Safety Commission That Does Not Yet Exist
Everything All At Once: Bill C-34 Combines Platform Duties, a Kids’ Social Media Ban, AI Chatbot Regulation, and a Powerful Digital Safety Commission Into a Risky “Trust Us” Bet

And educational institutions subscribe to Elsevier ScienceDirect
1. Publish a fake journal with Elsevier and the like
2. Make educational institurions subscribe to Elsevier and the like
3. Tie university professors with Big Pharma
4. PROFIT!
Regarding [3], visit http://www.ahrp.org/cms/content/view/523/9/
Harvard Medical Students Rebel Against Big Pharma
“The students say they worry that pharmaceutical industry scandals in recent years – including some criminal convictions, billions of dollars in fines, proof of bias in research and publishing and false marketing claims – have cast a bad light on the medical profession. And they criticize Harvard as being less vigilant than other leading medical schools in monitoring potential financial conflicts by faculty members.”
Marketing material, yes, but…
The info that the publication was paid for by Merck could be inferred, if you took the time. In the item pointed to, the ONLY advertisements were from Merck (at least that was the only ones that I noticed).
However, I’d agree that it should have been specifically mentioned. Sort of like the “Medi-Facts” commercials airing these days.