Prominent Environmental Health Journal Halts New Submissions Due to Budget Constraints

A leading U.S. journal dedicated to environmental health research has ceased the acceptance of new studies, causing concern among the scientific community that relies on its resources. Environmental Health Perspectives (EHP), which is funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), announced the suspension of new submissions following fears surrounding federal budget reductions.

With a legacy spanning over 50 years, EHP publishes vital research examining the impacts of environmental toxins--such as air pollution and persistent chemicals--on human health. Historically, the journal has been accessible at no cost to readers, with federal support allowing authors to publish their findings without incurring fees.

Joel Kaufman, the editor-in-chief of EHP, indicated that the decision to pause new submissions stemmed from uncertainties regarding the renewal of essential contracts that support the journal's operations, including copy-editing and editorial software. He did not provide insights into the journal's future prospects.

Experts in the field have expressed alarm at the potential loss of the journal. Jonathan Levy, a prominent figure in environmental health at Boston University, emphasized the importance of EHP in disseminating valuable information critical for informed decision-making. The current situation reflects broader challenges facing several journals due to the proposed budget for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), which suggests cuts to the funding of journals like EHP, as well as others such as Emerging Infectious Diseases and Preventing Chronic Disease, both published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

These publications are essential for keeping the scientific community informed about health threats, including emerging diseases. Virologist Jason Kindrachuk from the University of Manitoba described the news as deeply concerning, highlighting the broader implications of funding cuts on public health research.

The halt in submissions occurs against the backdrop of escalating tensions between the federal government and the scientific publishing sector. Recently, several journals have received inquiries from federal officials questioning their ethical practices. Researchers argue that reducing support for journals like EHP contradicts governmental initiatives aimed at addressing chronic diseases.

EHP has been a pioneer in open-access publishing, allowing unrestricted access to its articles. This model has been particularly beneficial for researchers affiliated with smaller institutions, enabling them to share their work without the burden of high publication fees.

In light of these developments, the scientific community is calling for renewed support for such critical journals, which have played a pivotal role in environmental health research. The potential discontinuation of EHP would not only diminish access to vital research but also hinder the progress of public health initiatives that depend on comprehensive and reliable information.