Journal of the Academy of Public Health

Last week, @US_FDA Commissioner @DrMakaryFDA announced the formation of an expert panel to review the safety and efficacy of talc in the American food and drug supply, citing a Perspective in the April Issue of JAPH. Watch the announcement video below: realclearpolitics.com/video/2025/05/…

@US_FDA @DrMakaryFDA Read the Perspective on talc's safety and efficacy from Arman Sharma (@sharman2002) and Dr. George F. Tidmarsh (@TidmarshGeorge), both of Stanford University: publichealth.realclearjournals.org/perspectives/2…

Last week, @US_FDA Commissioner @DrMakaryFDA announced the formation of an expert panel to review the safety and efficacy of talc in the American food and drug supply, citing a Perspective in the April Issue of JAPH. Watch the announcement video below: realclearpolitics.com/video/2025/05/…

And view commissioner Makary’s panel announcement below. youtube.com/live/MS-T1KicG…

FDA Commissioner Makary has announced a panel to examine the safety and efficacy of talc as an additive in our food and drugs. Read the original report on talc’s FDA status, published first in JAPH, at the link below.

Read the full Perspective in JAPH on talc’s status at the FDA, “ Reviewing the Safety of our Foods and Drugs: An Urgent Need for a Comprehensive Reevaluation by FDA of Talc in The American Food and Drug Supply.” publichealth.realclearjournals.org/perspectives/2…

To view the announcement of the panel’s formation in full, view the following link, taken from the U.S. FDA. youtube.com/live/MS-T1KicG…

Both men have demonstrated staunch commitments to transparency, scientific integrity and rigorous, evidence-based policy decisions. JAPH shares those commitments, and we look forward to the changes the two will bring to the American public health system at this pivotal moment. Both Bhattacharya and Makary retain their founding seats on the JAPH Editorial Board but remain on leave as they assume their new roles.

JAPH congratulates Editorial Board members Jay Bhattacharya (@DrJBhattacharya ) and Marty Makary (@MartyMakary) on their confirmations to direct @NIH and @US_FDA, respectively. washingtonexaminer.com/news/senate/33…

Watch the 2020 debate between JAPH editors @MartinKulldorff and @AndrewNoymer on the validity of public health responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. This is the model of scientific disagreement that inspires our journal's mission. @reason @GeneSohoForum youtube.com/watch?v=s6q-2e…

Delighted to be on the Editorial Board of the new Journal of the Academy of Public Health @RCJAPH that stands for open scientific debate and transparent review, led by friend and colleague @MartinKulldorff

New paper by @DrJBhattacharya @MartinKulldorff with a thorough analysis of the COVID-19 vaccine trials. Two major problems identified: - a failure in the design, with a mismatch between the clinical trial endpoints (any COVID-19 infection) and the public health interest (severe infection, death). - a failure in the interpretation, with a mismatch between what the trials showed (short-term effect on COVID-19 infection) and what public health officials claimed (long-term effects, effects on transmission). This has led to increased vaccine hesitancy. The paper points to several lessons learned, including that regulators must require industry to conduct trials with clinically and epidemiologically meaningful endpoints, such as protection against severe disease and death. As a historical analogue, the paper mentions the Salk polio vaccine which was tested in a trial with >400,000 participants. Public health was under pressure to deploy the vaccines rapidly, but rightly took the time to conduct a proper evaluation. Had they not done so, there would have been valid concerns about the vaccine. We have recently pointed out that the current system for testing and approving vaccines needs to be updated after the discovery that vaccines can have non-specific effects #NSEvac. Vaccines should be evaluated for their effect on the risk of other infections and on overall health outcomes (Benn et al, Drug Safety 2023). It is increasingly clear that to deserve and maintain public trust, we need better designed and larger clinical trials documenting effects on overall health outcomes. publichealth.realclearjournals.org/history-of-pub…

Peer review is fundamental to science and reviewers should be paid. Our new open access and open peer review Journal of the Academy of Public Health (@RCJAPH) does that. If you agree, check it out and sign up to review! publichealth.realclearjournals.org

Enhancing transparency and open scientific discourse, we are launching the Journal of the Academy of Public Health (@RCJAPH) with open peer review that all can read and where good scientists can publish whatever their studies conclude. Check it out! publichealth.realclearjournals.org

Proud to be an editorial board member on this new journal, the Journal of the Academy of Public Health, created to promote open and transparent discourse on science and public health. @RCJAPH publichealth.realclearjournals.org

"Scientific journals have had enormous positive impact on the development of science, but in some ways, they are now hampering rather than enhancing open scientific discourse." Founding Editor-in-Chief @MartinKulldorff on the future of science publishing. publichealth.realclearjournals.org/perspectives/2…