I don’t see where it’s “science as a whole” but rather names specific (narrow) set of journals to cancel subscriptions because they are funded by big pharma or are too expensive. Seems more reasonable than your comment purports
I recall reading about journal’s positive bias to only publish positive results of pharmaceutical drugs, but would not publish negative results in later years (when another researcher disproves it). This is bad science and bad for patients. This in addition to the downright fraud.
I’m not a fan of this secretary’s approaches, but I’ve been hoping for 10 years someone would take a stand against predatory journal practices