Scientists boycott American Diabetes Association over June conference ousters
Rule ChangesMembers halt grant and article reviews for Diabetes Care, escalating a governance fight over editorial independence
Today: Members launch boycott halting grant and article reviewsNew here? Follow stories to track developments over time. Create a free account to get updates when stories you care about change.
Overview
Updated 1 hour agoAmerican Diabetes Association (ADA) members are refusing to review grants and new article submissions for the group's flagship journal, Diabetes Care. The boycott is the latest escalation in a fight that began June 5, when security and New Orleans police removed five scientists from the ADA's annual meeting for distributing reprints of an editorial critical of federal cuts to diabetes research.
The editorial, written by Diabetes Care's editor-in-chief and three deputies, warned that National Institutes of Health (NIH) budget cuts threatened the diabetes research pipeline. In the months since, more than 200 ADA members signed an open letter demanding the resignations of chief executive Charles Henderson and chief scientific and medical officer Rita Kalyani, an independent investigation, a full apology, and restored editorial independence for the journal. The ADA has apologized and ordered a review but granted none of the demands.
Why it matters
If the boycott holds, the ADA's peer-review pipeline stalls and its leadership faces likely ouster over editorial independence.
Questions about this story
Free account needed to ask — your question is kept and asked for you right after sign-up. Answers are public.
No questions yet — be the first to ask.
Key Indicators
Voices
Curated perspectives — historical figures and your fellow readers.
Play
Exploring all sides of a story is often best achieved with Play.
Higher or Lower
A number from this story, against one from elsewhere in the news — guess which is bigger, then keep the chain going. 5 rounds, 3 strikes; a miss costs a strike and resets your streak.
Keyboard: ↓/L lower · ↑/H higher
0 points — sign up to put that on the leaderboard.
Timeline
Order five events from this story, oldest at top. Each in the right slot scores 1 — neighbours within one slot count too. Your previous result — green ✓ for exact slots, yellow ~ for off by one. Cards now in true chronological order.
Sign up to save your score and track a streak across stories.
Connections
Sixteen names from the news. Find the four hidden groups of four. Four mistakes max.
Sign up to keep a daily streak — a new puzzle lands every day.
Exit debate?
Your progress in this debate will be lost.
- 1 Two AI personas square off on this story.
- 2 You predict who'll win each round — correct picks earn XP.
- 3 One crossfire question is yours to fire. Pick it carefully.
Couldn't generate a topic
Select Your Champions
Choose one persona for each side of the debate
DEBATE TOPIC
Choose personas with different perspectives for a more dynamic debate.
Select debater for this side:
No debate personas available right now.
Select debater for this side:
No debate personas available right now.
Who's Got This Round?
Make your prediction before the referee scores
The referee scores both sides on
Round Results
Set the Crossfire
Pick the question both personas must answer in the final round
Debate Oracle! You called every round!
Sharp Instincts! You know your debaters!
The Coin Flip Strategist! Perfectly balanced!
The Contrarian! Bold predictions!
Inverse Genius! Try betting the opposite next time!
XP Breakdown
Prediction History
People Involved
Organizations Involved
The nonprofit medical society that owns and publishes Diabetes Care and hosts the annual Scientific Sessions.
The ADA's flagship peer-reviewed journal, at the center of a dispute over who controls its editorial decisions.
Timeline
April 2026 September 2026
-
Members launch boycott halting grant and article reviews
Today Member ActionADA members begin refusing to review grants and new article submissions for Diabetes Care, directly disrupting the journal's operations.
-
More than 200 members sign open letter demanding resignations
Member ActionOpen letter to the ADA board demands resignations of Henderson and Kalyani, an independent investigation, a full apology, and restored editorial independence.
-
ADA blocks journal publication of editors' account
GovernanceSTAT reports ADA leadership blocked publication of the editors' account of the June events in Diabetes Care, citing an ongoing review.
-
ADA CEO apologizes, announces independent review
StatementCharles Henderson issues a video apology to the removed scientists and the broader diabetes community, committing to an independent review.
-
Police remove five scientists from ADA meeting
IncidentSecurity and New Orleans police escort Kahn, Gannon, Kelly, Ryder, and Schatz from the annual Scientific Sessions for handing out editorial reprints.
-
Diabetes Care editorial warns NIH cuts threaten research
PublicationEditor-in-chief Steven Kahn and deputy editors publish an editorial criticizing NIH budget cuts and reduced opportunities for young investigators.
Historical Context
3 moments from history that rhyme with this story — and how they unfolded.
Union of Concerned Scientists reports political interference (2004)
The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) released a report documenting cases of political interference in federal science under the Bush administration. Thousands of scientists, including dozens of Nobel laureates, signed statements of protest.
The report put political interference in science on the national agenda and drew wide media coverage.
It established a pattern of scientific communities organizing collective responses when they perceive political meddling in research.
The ADA members' boycott follows the same logic: a scientific community using collective action to push back against perceived political or organizational interference in research.
American Anthropological Association boycott debate (2015-2016)
Members proposed a resolution for the association to boycott Israeli academic institutions in line with the BDS movement. The proposal split the membership and leadership in heated debates about academic freedom, political neutrality, and the proper role of a scholarly society.
The resolution failed by a narrow margin in 2016 but left deep divisions within the association.
Academic boycotts remain a contested tool within scholarly societies, and the debate reshaped how such organizations approach political resolutions.
Demonstrates how a political dispute inside a scholarly society can fracture the membership and prompt boycott proposals, much like the ADA's current fight.
JAMA editor Howard Bauchner's forced resignation (2021)
JAMA published a podcast episode with remarks about structural racism that sparked a firestorm. Editor-in-chief Howard Bauchner first dismissed the criticism, then apologized after an internal investigation found he had not been forthcoming about how the episode came together.
Bauchner resigned as JAMA editor in June 2021, and the episode damaged the journal's credibility.
The case became a reference point for how medical journals handle politically charged content and editor accountability.
Shows how a medical journal editor can be forced out by a political controversy, and how the public expects editors to answer for their decisions.
