SUPPORT GROWS DAILY FOR FIRED EDITORS

Fired Cmaj Editor Dr. John Hoey and Deputy Editor Anne Marie Todkill
Spoke at Mcmaster's Degroote Centre Yesterday. Yet Hoey Doesn't
Believe Fight Over Independence Was Reason

An editor fired by the Canadian Medical Association Journal says he
doesn't believe it was due to his public fight with owners over
editorial independence.

"I don't think it was any specific issue that might have led to the
termination," said Dr. John Hoey, one of two editors fired last month.

"There's no reason for them to fire us over that issue."

It's a staggering statement considering the firings -- that have
galvanized the medical community -- are widely believed to be a result
of the editors coming forward about changing at least one story under
pressure from The Canadian Medical Association (CMA), which owns the
journal.

Publisher Graham Morris has said from the beginning the firings were
the result of a desire for new leadership at the journal called the
CMAJ for short.

Few have found this explanation credible and support has been growing
daily for Hoey and deputy editor Anne Marie Todkill. The latest outcry
has come from the two most prestigious medical journals in the world
- -- The New England Journal of Medicine and The Lancet -- expressing
concern.

Researchers including Hamilton's Dr. Gordon Guyatt and Dr. Roman
Jaeschke have threatened to pull upcoming articles from the journal.
About 80 people came to show their support at a lecture by Hoey and
Todkill on editorial autonomy at McMaster University yesterday and
doctors are protesting with a petition that has been signed by 4,000
people so far.

The deans of two prominent medical schools -- the University of
Toronto and the University of Western Ontario -- have spoken out
against the firings.

And in an ultimate show of support, 16 editorial board members at the
CMAJ and eight senior and intermediate editors have resigned.

"It's clear and unequivocal it's about editorial autonomy," said Dr.
P.J. Devereaux, a Hamilton doctor and spokesperson for the board
members who quit. "They (the CMA) only care about making sure that
when they pick the next editor it will be someone who will tow the
party line."

The firings have also been seen as a women's rights issue because the
story in question was about access to the morning-after pill. It
revealed pharmacists were collecting private information about women
and their sex lives before dispensing the pill known as Plan B. The
Canadian Pharmacists Association complained to the CMA about the story.

As a result, interviews with 13 women who bought the pill were taken
out of the story before it was published and the editors wrote an
editorial explaining it was due to pressure from the CMA. Since the
publication of the story, Ontario's privacy commissioner has stopped
the pharmacists from asking the questions and issued new guidelines
prohibiting it. The story has since been nominated for a Michener
Award for meritorious public service.

The story and editorial ran in December and the editors were fired
Feb. 20 after another story was changed, this time to make it more
favourable to federal Health Minister Tony Clement.

"The timing issue makes people think it was the Plan B story," said
Hoey, when contacted before the lecture yesterday. "My own sense is
that it wasn't."

Both Hoey and Todkill say they've never been told why they were fired
and claim they did nothing to deserve to be terminated.

"I don't know what it was and I don't want to speculate," said
Hoey.

However, both mention they broadened the scope of the journal and
hinted the CMA might not have liked it.

"My sense is, it might be over the scope of the journal tackling too
wide a variety of topics and creating too much controversy," said Hoey.

"What's legitimate for a medical journal to cover -- that's where the
issue will be."

He said as the journal become more prominent and rose to fifth best in
the world under his leadership, it also got more attention for
covering controversial issues like marijuana, abortion and emergency
contraception.

The journal "gets, we thought, more interesting but it's also more
bothersome to some who will say why can't they be quieter."

The CMA did not answer interview requests yesterday to explain the
firings.

Acting CMAJ editor Dr. Noni MacDonald said she doesn't know why the
editors were fired and denied rumours the journal's reputation is in
tatters.

"We're getting lots of articles coming in," she said. "We're getting
lots of coming in ... It's high quality stuff."