New England Journal of Medicine

Prestigious Medical Journal and Research Credibility Benchmark

Description

The New England Journal of Medicine stands as the gold-standard publication for medical research. Toby cites it twice during tense Roosevelt Room negotiations with Senator Hoebuck and Dr. Gwendolyn Chen, demanding proof that studies on intercessory prayer's impact on cardiac events appeared there. He wields the journal's prestige to dismantle the credibility of double-blind trial claims showing an 11% drop in events, forcing the administration to weigh political votes against scientific rigor.

Event Involvements

Events with structured involvement data

2 events

S4E12 · Guns Not Butter

Counting Votes, Buying Prayers

The New England Journal of Medicine operates as the credibility benchmark Toby invokes, its absence from the prayer-study literature used to undercut the study's authority and frame skepticism.

Active Representation

Referenced rhetorically by Toby as an evidentiary standard the study has not met.

Power Dynamics

Represents cultural and scientific authority that can validate or delegitimize research claims in public debate.

Institutional Impact

Its perceived absence from the study list is used politically to limit the study's acceptability for federal funding.

Organizational Goals

Maintain reputation as the preeminent medical journal Serve as a gatekeeper for high-quality, peer-reviewed research

Influence Mechanisms

Scholarly publication and peer-review prestige Setting standards of scientific legitimacy

S4E12 · Guns Not Butter

Prayer for a Vote — Hoebuck's Price

The New England Journal of Medicine functions as the rhetorical benchmark Toby invokes to test the study's credibility—publication there would signal mainstream scientific acceptance and thus blunt political criticism.

Active Representation

Referenced indirectly as the gold‑standard publication by which the study should be judged.

Power Dynamics

The journal exercises epistemic authority; its absence is used as a lever against accepting the study at face value.

Institutional Impact

Invoking the journal highlights the tension between political expediency and the need for scientific validation before allocating public funds.

Internal Dynamics

Not present in scene; implied standard‑setting role that constrains politicians' ability to cite preliminary work.

Organizational Goals

Serve as the arbiter of rigorous, peer‑reviewed research Maintain publication standards that separate credible science from questionable claims

Influence Mechanisms

Reputational authority in medicine Peer‑review gatekeeping and editorial standards