Scientists boycott American Diabetes Association over June conference ousters

Overview

Updated Sep 11

American 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

Scientists removed from ADA meeting

Removed June 5 for distributing editorial reprints at the annual meeting in New Orleans.

200+

Members signed open letter

Demanded resignations, an independent investigation, a full apology, and editorial independence.

Days from ouster to boycott

June 5 through September 11.

Demands in open letter

Resignations, independent investigation, full apology, restored editorial independence.

Voices

Curated perspectives — historical figures and your fellow readers.

People Involved

Steven E. Kahn

Editor-in-chief, Diabetes Care; professor of medicine, University of Washington

One of five scientists removed from the ADA meeting; among those demanding leadership changes

Charles D. Henderson

Chief executive, American Diabetes Association

Target of open letter demanding his resignation; apologized in June 10 video

Rita Kalyani

Chief scientific and medical officer, American Diabetes Association

Target of open letter demanding her resignation

Aaron S. Kelly

Professor of pediatrics and medicine, University of Minnesota; codirector, Center for Pediatric Obesity Medicine

One of five scientists removed from the ADA meeting

Organizations Involved

American Diabetes Association

Professional medical association

Facing member boycott over handling of June ousters

The nonprofit medical society that owns and publishes Diabetes Care and hosts the annual Scientific Sessions.

Diabetes Care

Peer-reviewed medical journal

Subject of editorial independence dispute; boycott halting article reviews

The ADA's flagship peer-reviewed journal, at the center of a dispute over who controls its editorial decisions.

Timeline

April 2026 September 2026

6 events Latest: September 11th, 2026 · 2 months ago

Tap a bar to jump to that date

September 2026
Members launch boycott halting grant and article reviews
Latest Member Action

ADA members begin refusing to review grants and new article submissions for Diabetes Care, directly disrupting the journal's operations.
September 11th, 2026
July 2026
More than 200 members sign open letter demanding resignations
Member Action

Open letter to the ADA board demands resignations of Henderson and Kalyani, an independent investigation, a full apology, and restored editorial independence.
July 28th, 2026
ADA blocks journal publication of editors' account
Governance

STAT reports ADA leadership blocked publication of the editors' account of the June events in Diabetes Care, citing an ongoing review.
July 16th, 2026
June 2026
ADA CEO apologizes, announces independent review
Statement

Charles Henderson issues a video apology to the removed scientists and the broader diabetes community, committing to an independent review.
June 10th, 2026
Police remove five scientists from ADA meeting
Incident

Security and New Orleans police escort Kahn, Gannon, Kelly, Ryder, and Schatz from the annual Scientific Sessions for handing out editorial reprints.
June 5th, 2026
April 2026
Diabetes Care editorial warns NIH cuts threaten research
Publication

Editor-in-chief Steven Kahn and deputy editors publish an editorial criticizing NIH budget cuts and reduced opportunities for young investigators.
April 29th, 2026

Scenarios

ADA leaders resign under boycott pressure

Possible Resolves by Q1 2027

Discussed by: Fierce Biotech and STAT reporting on escalating member pressure

The boycott disrupts the journal's peer-review pipeline, making operations difficult. The board, facing continued member defections and the threat of permanent damage to Diabetes Care, moves to accept the resignations of Henderson and Kalyani. The independent review report, promised but undated, could provide the trigger.

Board restructures journal governance, editors regain control

Possible Resolves by Q2 2027

Discussed by: CASRAI's analysis of COPE editorial independence guidelines

Rather than forcing leadership changes, the ADA board implements formal governance reforms separating editorial decisions from society leadership. Diabetes Care's editors regain authority to publish their account of the June events without review. The boycott lifts once the structural changes are announced, allowing the journal to resume normal operations.

Standoff persists, Diabetes Care publication delays mount

Likely Resolves by Jan 31, 2027

Discussed by: Healio coverage of member discussions about meeting attendance

ADA leadership continues to refuse the open letter's demands while the boycott persists. Diabetes Care accumulates a backlog of unreviewed submissions, leading to publication delays and a decline in the journal's competitive position. Attendance at the next Scientific Sessions drops as some members follow through on threats to skip the meeting, reducing revenue from the pharmaceutical industry exhibit hall.

Historical Context

3 moments from history that rhyme with this story — and how they unfolded.

February-June 2021

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.

Then

Bauchner resigned as JAMA editor in June 2021, and the episode damaged the journal's credibility.

Now

The case became a reference point for how medical journals handle politically charged content and editor accountability.

Why this matters now

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.

2015-2016

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.

Then

The resolution failed by a narrow margin in 2016 but left deep divisions within the association.

Now

Academic boycotts remain a contested tool within scholarly societies, and the debate reshaped how such organizations approach political resolutions.

Why this matters now

Demonstrates how a political dispute inside a scholarly society can fracture the membership and prompt boycott proposals, much like the ADA's current fight.

February 2004

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.

Then

The report put political interference in science on the national agenda and drew wide media coverage.

Now

It established a pattern of scientific communities organizing collective responses when they perceive political meddling in research.

Why this matters now

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.