Was BMJ dead wrong to print critical obituary?

Mere hours after an obituary for Dr. David Horrobin appeared in the British Medical Journal Apr. 19, eBMJ's rapid-response function was humming. In death as in life, Horrobin — the founder of Scotia Pharmaceuticals and the journal Medical Hypotheses — was at the centre of controversy. This time, though, it was the proper role of obituaries in medical journals, and not the relative merits of evening primrose oil, that was at issue.

Figure. Photo by: Alan King

For even though health journalist Caroline Richmond vouched for Horrobin's “charm, intelligence and straightforwardness,” she also wrote that he “may prove to be the greatest snake oil salesman of his age.” The obituary described him as “a passionate promoter of evening primrose oil.”

BMJ readers were shocked. “The obituary … was so disappointing and twisted that it has left me with a disturbing feeling of disgust,” wrote one of the scores of angry readers. By May 26, a printout of the responses totalled 86 pages.

“I do not know if her snide remarks have any foundation,” wrote another. “I do know that it was very ill judged to ask anyone who feels as she did to write an obituary and even more foolish of you to publish it.”

More than a month after publication the furor continued, even though Horrobin — who once taught at the University of Montreal — was acknowledged to be a controversial figure. One Scottish paper said that even though many admired his “unwavering commitment to developing new drugs, others were equally moved in the opposite direction by his combative management style.”

Richard Smith, the BMJ editor, remains unfazed by the outrage. He regrets that some minor inaccuracies slipped into the piece, and wishes he had known before publication that Richmond knew Horrobin. But he welcomes the debate and stands by Richmond's right to assess Horrobin's life in the way she did.

“Medicine has a culture of not speaking ill of the dead,” he says. “What quite a lot of our readers want is what I call glorified death notices, but we want serious journalistic pieces that tell stories and do make a judgement on a character. We want more light and shade.

“It's difficult to go against a culture, to move from a world where everybody was wonderful and never put a foot wrong,” he adds. “But I'm damned if that means I'm not going to give it a go.”

And Richmond remains unapologetic. “The Lancet's obituary, and other obits in the national press, wimpishly parroted the version sent out by Horrobin's former PA [press assistant].”

Asked if she was surprised by the venomous response, Richmond says she realizes now that Horrobin had a cult following, especially among people with chronic fatigue syndrome. “If I'd been as conscious of this as I am now, I would have pre-empted their response as far as I could.” — Naomi Marks, Brighton, UK