Case vignette: inside information.

A research team at International Genetic Products (IGP) has been working quietly on a new product with significant market potential. Initial laboratory trials yielded significantly favorable results. A careful replication has now confirmed these findings, and both studies were described in a manuscript that has been accepted for publication in the prestigious journal Genome Today. The article will appear in print next month, and the staff at IGP are certain that it will attract considerable favorable attention to their company. The publication requirements of Genome Today included a pledge from all authors not to leak information on the study prior to the publication date press releases normally issued by the journal. Meanwhile, Dr. Phil T. Lucre, who was used as a reviewer of the manuscript by the editor of Genome Today, has learned that the article is to be published by routine editorial feedback. Based on this "inside information," Dr. Lucre plans to make a substantial investment in IGP stock before the embargo on information in the forthcoming article is lifted. He reasons that, although he may indeed have access to special information, he should not be limited in his investment options simply because he happened to be assigned to review this manuscript. What ethical issues are raised by Dr. Lucre's plans? Can/should journal editors take any steps to preclude problems of this sort from arising?