The editor in chief of the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology (FCT) has resigned with more than a year left of his term, according to an email announcing his move to colleagues.
In the email, first reproduced in Steve Kirsch’s Substack newsletter, the editor, Jose L. Domingo, cited “deep discrepancies” with the journal’s direction under publisher Elsevier as the reason for his early resignation. He shared the email with us when we reached out for comment.
Domingo, a professor of toxicology and environmental Health at the Universitat Rovira i Virgili in Spain, listed three main points of contention: an agreement for the journal to publish documents for the Research Institute for Fragrance Materials, which Domingo believed to be a “drag” on the journal’s impact factor; FCT’s recent designation as the official journal of the Chinese Society of Toxicology; and a February editorial he wrote requesting submissions “on the potential toxic effects of COVID-19 vaccines.”
He wrote:
I have not any proof, just feelings, but I think that the Editorial -and its consequences, among others, with a Review-paper published in FCT that I have not allowed to retract- was the final nail in my coffin.
Doubtless, and based on my almost 7 years as EiC, I should highlight that the commercial interests and economic benefits are the main priority in FCT. No the quality of the papers, and the prestige of the Journal based on the IF.
About that review paper: In August we published a guest post by a group of researchers who had submitted a letter to the editor about a paper in FCT that claimed “billions of lives are potentially at risk” with Covid-19 vaccines. Their letter requested retraction of the article and detailed their reasoning, but Domingo rejected it after reviews and revisions.
In a publisher’s note dated November 11th, Jagna Mirska-Gent, senior publisher of Elsevier’s toxicology journals, and Jason Winkler, the publishing director for life sciences, wrote that they had accepted Domingo’s resignation “with regret,” and “sincerely thank him for all his commitment, hard work and dedication to the Journal.”
The note continued:
The reasons for his resignation, as stated by Dr Domingo, are “my personal frustration by the decrease in the Clarivate IF, and the unpleasant and serious problems generated on my daily mood as a consequence of the e-mails/Internet regarding documents (submitted or published in FCT) on the safety of the COVID-19 vaccines.”
Domingo also shared with us an email he’d sent to FCT’s publishing staff at Elsevier, requesting that his name be removed from the listing of emeritus editors of the journal, because he didn’t want to appear with Wallace Hayes, a former editor who Domingo said “did not act as an honest Editor.”
Hayes may be familiar to Retraction Watch readers as the editor who retracted a controversial paper by Gilles Seralini on the long-term effects of the weedkiller Roundup and genetically modified maize on rats.
Domingo also serves as editor-in-chief of the Elsevier journal Environmental Research, which earlier this year republished a study that had been retracted from JAMA Pediatrics, titled “Carbon dioxide rises beyond acceptable safety levels in children under nose and mouth covering: Results of an experimental measurement study in healthy children.”
When we’d asked Domingo whether the authors of the paper had told the editors of Environmental Research about the paper’s history, he initially said they hadn’t, and that the editors probably wouldn’t have sent the paper out for peer review if they had known it had been retracted from another journal. After checking with an associate editor, however, he told us the authors had indeed explained the paper’s prior publication and retraction in a message with their submission.
Like Retraction Watch? You can make a tax-deductible contribution to support our work, follow us on Twitter, like us on Facebook, add us to your RSS reader, or subscribe to our daily digest. If you find a retraction that’s not in our database, you can let us know here. For comments or feedback, email us at [email protected].
This novaxxer should have been sacked ages ago. Too little, too late.
So everyone with a minority opinion should lose their job? What if one day you’re in the minority?
Sheep. It is ok to question, just so you know
Depends on the question. Some questions are bad for your career. Rule one (and two and three): mainstream is always right, never mind when ait stinks to heaven.
The wording is a bit odd, notably “the final nail in my coffin,” given that it was his decision. It’s possible he is not clear in his own mind as to why he left. That certainly happens.
Perhaps he means rather that he did not think the resignation would be accepted.
“I have not any proof, just feelings….”
Not a great way to defend your position as Editor.
How will we ever know unless we seek information?
What did this life-changing (for this Editor)article he resigned over actually state that was so egregiously wrong ?
This is a bait and switch headline , hooking us in without completing the story.
It was egregiously wrong, speculative without evidence, and may lead to increased deaths. But apart from that….
As a physician who suffered a disabling side effect from the Moderna vaccine (and got COVID 4 months later with post-COVID anyway) I am skeptical about the way these mRNA “vaccines” have been shoved down our throats. I especially think they are an untested danger to children, for whom the unvaccinated COVID death rate is about 1 in 100,000. Thanks to the pandemic and Pfizer, medical practice has been politicized and hyperfocused on profits.
What we know is that the Noble Lie is alive and well defended by the medical profession.
CDC Director Dr. Rochelle P. Walensky gave the party line for all militant vaccination voices, stating on March 29, 2021 on MSNBC, in an interview with Rachel Maddow, “And we have — we can kind of almost see the end. We`re vaccinating so very fast, our data from the CDC today suggests, you know, that vaccinated people do not carry the virus, don`t get sick, and that it`s not just in the clinical trials but it`s also in real world data.” https://www.msnbc.com/transcripts/transcript-rachel-maddow-show-3-29-21-n1262442
Fauci made similar pronouncements. Get jabbed and you won’t get the virus – that was the official word…until it was not. And after multiple jabs, both Walensky and Fauci contracted COVID-19.
No retraction, no apology, and no sign of any government agency going back to honest science, instead of playing government apologist…forgive me if I conclude that Domingo is probably being drummed out for nothing more than medical heresy.
At the time Walensky and Fauci made the original announcements, this was simply true. It was not until completely different variants showed up that the vaccines became much less effective at preventing infection (and thereby also transmission).
They thus had nothing to apologize for.
However they are still effective even if less so. Just like the flu vaccine.
Interviewed Dr Domingo recently for a podcast. He discussed the above retraction/editor to publish / Seneff / Call For Papers issue at length. Maybe of interest to readers here.
https://leafbox.substack.com/p/interview-dr-jose-domingo#details