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 251: Jennifer Pybus on the Debate Over Canadian Digital Sovereignty
byMichael Geist

November 24, 2025
Michael Geist
November 17, 2025
Michael Geist
November 10, 2025
Michael Geist
November 3, 2025
Michael Geist
October 27, 2025
Michael Geist
Search Results placeholder
Recent Posts
Why Freedom of Expression Must Not Become a Right to Harass or Intimidate
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 251: Jennifer Pybus on the Debate Over Canadian Digital Sovereignty
Reversing the Reversal?: Government Puts Privacy Invasive Lawful Access Back on the Agenda
Canadian Government Introduces New Stablecoin Act as Part of Budget Implementation Legislation
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 250: Wikimedia’s Jan Gerlach on the Risks and Challenges with Digital Policy Reform

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.