Boycott Against American Diabetes Association Expands, Scientific Journals Impacted
Baca dalam 60 detik
- Lebih dari 400 peneliti dan profesional diabetes menandatangani seruan boikot terhadap American Diabetes Association (ADA) buntut pengusiran lima ilmuwan dari konferensi ilmiah tahunan.
- Kontroversi memuncak setelah ADA merilis temuan awal yang dianggap tidak independen, memicu penangguhan aktivitas editorial jurnal Diabetes Care dan ancaman eksodus komunitas riset.
- Jika tuntutan tidak dipenuhi, para pengkritik berpotensi beralih ke organisasi profesi alternatif, yang dapat menggeser lanskap riset diabetes global dan memengaruhi arah kebijakan kesehatan di banyak negara, termasuk Indonesia.
A number of researchers, clinicians, and professional members in the field of diabetes are organizing a boycott against the American Diabetes Association (ADA) following the expulsion of five scientists from the Scientific Sessions in June 2026. As of Friday, September 11, over 400 people—including former ADA presidents, award recipients, journal editors, and people with diabetes—have signed the call, according to a MedPage Today report.
The main trigger was an incident in New Orleans on June 5, 2026, when Steven Kahn, Maureen Gannon, Aaron Kelly, Justin Ryder, and Desmond Schatz were escorted out of a conference room after distributing copies of an editorial from the journal Diabetes Care. The editorial criticized National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding cuts and what its authors called government interference in medical research.
ADA CEO, Charles Henderson, had issued an apology and promised an independent review. However, the conclusions released on September 1, 2026, only widened the divide. The ADA Audit and Governance Committee stated that the five researchers were removed due to disruptive behavior during the event, not because of the content of the material they distributed. The ADA also asserted that security personnel acted according to procedure, even though they wore New Orleans police uniforms—which the ADA claimed were contractor personnel, not law enforcement officers.
Complicating the situation further, the ADA issued a second statement on September 6, acknowledging that initial findings had not considered the "depth and breadth" of the investigation. A final report is scheduled to be submitted to the ADA board in the coming weeks. However, for critics, the ADA's backtracking only reinforced the perception that the internal process was neither transparent nor trustworthy.
This boycott is not merely symbolic. Its supporters are committed to suspending various activities related to the ADA, ranging from attending leadership and board meetings—including the 2027 Scientific Sessions—attending ADA-hosted events, reviewing grants, submitting manuscripts, managing journals, and contributing to position statements. They demand that the ADA board authorize a formal review of the organization's structure and function, led by independent academics, to ensure proper representation of professional membership.
"We remain committed to the ADA's mission of improving the lives of people with diabetes, but meaningful structural reforms are necessary before we can participate again," read the letter from the boycott's initiators.
The most direct impact is felt by Diabetes Care, the ADA's flagship journal. Steven Kahn, who is also the journal's editor-in-chief, stated on September 10 that the editorial board signed the boycott and would temporarily not carry out editorial duties. He claimed the journal was not accepting new manuscripts. However, the ADA denied this, stating that the publication process was proceeding normally. Kahn had previously revealed that the suspension notice on the manuscript submission page had been removed by the ADA—a detail that adds another layer to the dispute.
For the global research community, especially in Indonesia, this turmoil is not a distant matter. Many researchers and endocrinologists in the country regularly refer to ADA guidelines and publish clinical findings in affiliated journals. If Diabetes Care truly suspends its review process, Indonesian researchers pursuing publications for academic promotions or grant funding could be directly affected. Furthermore, the uncertainty surrounding ADA's policy direction—which has long been a benchmark for diabetes care standards—could potentially influence updates to clinical protocols in hospitals and primary healthcare facilities.
On the other hand, this crisis highlights issues of governance in large-scale non-profit health organizations. When an institution that should be a scientific reference stumbles into internal conflict, public trust in its medical recommendations can erode. In Indonesia, where diabetes prevalence continues to rise and access to health education remains uneven, the credibility of reference sources is at stake. Professional organizations like the Indonesian Society of Endocrinology (PERKENI) may need to strengthen partnerships with alternative research institutions to avoid reliance on a single global authority.
The ADA itself stated it remains focused on its mission. "The American Diabetes Association is the leading voluntary health organization fighting to end diabetes and help people live better lives. As the review continues, we remain focused on serving the millions of people who rely on us," said an ADA spokesperson. However, that statement has not addressed the core demands: independence and accountability.
If the ADA board does not grant the boycott's demands in the coming weeks, it is not unlikely that researchers and clinicians will turn to other professional organizations covering diabetes, endocrinology, obesity, and metabolism. Such a scenario could fragment the scientific community, complicate global consensus, and ultimately slow down therapeutic innovations awaited by millions of people with diabetes. Will the ADA be able to restore trust before a wave of exodus truly occurs?
