Source: ChameleonsEye/Shutterstock.com

The , from 24 doctors and scientists, published on 23 July, denounces Israel¡¯s ¡°aggression¡± and accuses the country of mendacity and war crimes.?

But critics have challenged the decision to publish the letter, saying that it was inappropriate for a peer-reviewed medical journal.

The to the letter condemning Israel are mostly Italians, but also include six UK-based academics and doctors.

¡°We challenge the perversity of a propaganda that justifies the creation of an emergency to masquerade [sic] a massacre,¡± the letter reads. ¡°In reality it is a ruthless assault of unlimited duration, extent, and intensity¡­Israel¡¯s behaviour has insulted our humanity, intelligence, and dignity as well as our professional ethics and efforts.¡±

³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ

The letter also suggests that since only 5 per cent of Israeli academics signed an appeal to their government to stop the military action ¡°the rest of the Israeli academics are complicit in the massacre and destruction¡±.

The Lancet also offered online readers the opportunity to add their names to the list of signatories.

³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ

On 30 July, the journal published a of response by two US-based writers saying that it is ¡°totally inappropriate for a peer-reviewed medical journal to publish purely political, inaccurate, and prejudiced pieces¡±.

Meanwhile, have said that they are ¡°baffled by The Lancet¡¯s decision to publish such a slanted, evidence-less, open letter¡±.

However, Richard Horton, editor-in-chief of The Lancet, told ³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ that it was right that ¡°medical journals should report and engage with controversial topics that have a bearing on health¡±.

¡°The open letter directly and explicitly called for the support of the medical community and was a call to action. We facilitated this call with a sign-up option (as we do from time-to-time, most recently a few months ago with our ).¡±

³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ

But he said that the journal did not endorse the letter, and noted that it had also enabled readers to sign up to the Israeli authors¡¯ critical letter.

In an editorial published on 4 August, the journal notes that a debate has been opened ¡°about the appropriateness of a medical journal giving space to opinions about an issue that lies at the intersection between health and politics¡±.

It adds: ¡°We do not support any side whose actions lead to civilian casualties. The role of the doctor is to protect, serve, and speak up for life. That, too, is the role of a medical journal.¡±

The journal announced on 31 July that it had closed the sign-up facility for the open letter and had decided not to publish the names of the 20,000 additional signatories since it was ¡°concerned about several threatening statements to those signatories, which have recently been posted on social media¡±.

³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ

paul.jump@tsleducation.com