Social and political activism in scientific medical journals: Belief-based evidence or evidence-based beliefs?

Scientific medical journals are increasingly becoming focal points in social and political discussions. The rise of mass and social media, access to technology, global health emergencies, rapidly changing policy climates, societal divisions, and economic upheavals have expanded the reach of journal publications beyond just scientific circles and into the wider public conversation. This editorial delves into the intricate role of activism within journals dedicated to medicine, surgery, and public health. We characterize activism as the act of taking explicit moral, social, or political stances that go beyond merely reporting evidence neutrally, and we investigate its possible advantages and disadvantages for scientific integrity, clinical practice, and public trust. Also, given the varying political and social landscapes globally, we discuss the implications of activism in scientific medical journals for clinicians, researchers, authors, the general public, and journal editors. In conclusion, we assert that while activism may not necessarily be incompatible with scientific publishing, it should be approached with a significant purpose, grounded in facts, and after careful consideration of its nature/ scope to prevent undermining the fundamental mission of scientific journals (i.e., to advance reliable, objective, and clinically relevant knowledge or publish science that improves public health).