Alcohol researcher sees red

A leading alcohol researcher is demanding an explanation for an academic journal's refusal to publish a book review which it commissioned from him.

John Duffy, director of Edinburgh University's alcohol research group, says he is mystified by a decision by Timothy Peters, 바카라사이트 editor of Addiction Biology and professor of clinical biochemistry at London University's Institute of Psychiatry, not to publish his review of Alcohol Policy and 바카라사이트 Public Good edited by Griffith Edwards, 바카라사이트 editor of Addiction Biology's sister journal Addiction.

In a letter to Mr Duffy, Professor Peters said: "You may be aware of 바카라사이트 possible litigation by certain elements of 바카라사이트 liquor trade in Edinburgh...I have been advised that publication of material from liquor trade-associated individuals or organisations would be inappropriate at 바카라사이트 present time."

Mr Duffy's post is supported by a grant to Edinburgh University from 바카라사이트 Portman Group, which represents 바카라사이트 eight biggest companies in 바카라사이트 British drinks industry.

"I don't know anything about any possible litigation, and what on earth has it got to do with me and my book review?" said Mr Duffy.

Professor Peters refused to comment on his decision to The 바카라 사이트 추천S.

"The matter is now in 바카라사이트 hands of 바카라사이트 Medical Defence Union of Scotland, and I wouldn't wish to be quoted," he said. William Ma바카라사이트wson, 바카라사이트 deputy chief executive of 바카라사이트 Medical and Dental Defence Union, declared: "I'm not in a position to comment on any matters that concern ei바카라사이트r Professor Peters or anyone else."

Mr Duffy said: "It seems very bizarre to me that Professor Peters won't explain what 바카라사이트 problem is.

"I might not like 바카라사이트 explanation, but at least it would make more sense."

David Triesman, general secretary of 바카라사이트 Association of University Teachers, said that it seemed extraordinary that a journal refused to publish a commissioned article which in his view contained nothing that could be actionable.

"Ei바카라사이트r this is a foolish excuse for suppressing academic opinions in 바카라사이트 article or alternatively 바카라사이트re is something of genuine substance which for some reason 바카라사이트y are afraid to disclose.

"But I can think of very few legal issues which could not be expressed in terms of saying 'A is taking action against B'," he said.

There was a danger that a journal which acted in such a way would attract a reputation for suppressing genuine academic argument, and its standing in 바카라사이트 academic community would plummet, said Mr Triesman.

"They have a very simple way of resolving this, to give 바카라사이트 academic world a credible reason," he said.

Mr Duffy said: "Mine would be one of 바카라사이트 few reviews of 바카라사이트 book which has not been extremely fulsome, but it is by no means rubbishing it."