Everything should be left to the reader. Most peculiarly, many of those who may agree publicly with the views expressed in Horrobin's article will be quick to dismiss papers of opposing views that they review alone and anonymously in their office. These are the basic characteristics of man, I fear--a mixture of jealousy and conceit: "If the idea were any good, I would have had it earlier." Refereeing new ideas impartially is simply not possible. Conversely, there are readers who have open minds--because they are not specialists in a particular field--and who would read with interest. Even if everything written will not end up chiseled in stone, wrong ideas have a habit of sparking correct ones in somebody s mind.
Censorship of ideas is the most destructive byproduct of the legitimate review activity in the experimental sciences; the journal created by Horrobin is certainly a step in the right direction.
...
