Merck began its legal defence yesterday in an Australian court case over Vioxx marketing tactics that allegedly included publishing marketing material in the guise of peer-reviewed literature.

“The relationship between Vioxx and cardiovascular risk was … and remains contradictory and uncertain,” said Merck’s legal counsel Peter Garling, according to the Australian.

The case has drawn attention from scientists and doctors, some of whom have asked why anyone would agree to serve on the editorial board of a publication that contained only reprints and summaries of studies with positive conclusions about Merck-owned drugs. The publication, called The Australasian Journal of Bone and Joint Medicine, appears in at least one journal indexing service.

An Elsevier spokesperson told The Scientist that the “project in question was produced 6 years ago and ”https://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/intro.cws_home/ethical_guidelines">disclosure protocols have evolved since 2003."