Literature DB >> 11544389

Philip Morris' new scientific initiative: an analysis.

N Hirschhorn1, S A Bialous, S Shatenstein.   

Abstract

In the fall of 2000, Philip Morris re-initiated an external research grants programme ("Philip Morris External Research Program", or PMERP), the first since the dissolution of the Council for Tobacco Research (CTR) and the Center for Indoor Air Research (CIAR). The ostensible purpose of the programme is to help develop cigarette designs "that might reduce the health risk of smoking". Internal company documents also indicate that Philip Morris urgently seeks to restore its scientific "credibility", as part of a "new openness" in relation to the external community. The structure of the review panel--a cohort of external peer reviewers, a science advisory board, and an internal, anonymous review and approvals committee--is nearly identical to that of the CIAR. The majority of the named reviewers have had previous affiliation with the tobacco industry either as reviewers or grantees, but only a minority have done research directly on tobacco or smoking. The programmatic substance of the PMERP could be interpreted as soliciting exculpatory evidence with respect to smoking and exposure to smoke. We remain sceptical about the scientific integrity of PMERP.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11544389      PMCID: PMC1747596          DOI: 10.1136/tc.10.3.247

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Tob Control        ISSN: 0964-4563            Impact factor:   7.552


  12 in total

1.  Shameful science: four decades of the German tobacco industry's hidden research on smoking and health.

Authors:  N Hirschhorn
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 7.552

2.  The ethics of the cash register: taking tobacco research dollars.

Authors:  S Chapman; S Shatenstein
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 7.552

3.  Sponsored symposia on environmental tobacco smoke.

Authors:  L A Bero; A Galbraith; D Rennie
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1994-02-23       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Why review articles on the health effects of passive smoking reach different conclusions.

Authors:  D E Barnes; L A Bero
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1998-05-20       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Industry-funded research and conflict of interest: an analysis of research sponsored by the tobacco industry through the Center for Indoor Air Research.

Authors:  D E Barnes; L A Bero
Journal:  J Health Polit Policy Law       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 2.265

6.  Tobacco industry efforts subverting International Agency for Research on Cancer's second-hand smoke study.

Authors:  E K Ong; S A Glantz
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2000-04-08       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  What scientists funded by the tobacco industry believe about the hazards of cigarette smoking.

Authors:  K M Cummings; R Sciandra; A Gingrass; R Davis
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1991-07       Impact factor: 9.308

8.  Publication bias and public health policy on environmental tobacco smoke.

Authors:  L A Bero; S A Glantz; D Rennie
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1994-07-13       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Air nicotine and saliva cotinine as indicators of workplace passive smoking exposure and risk.

Authors:  J L Repace; J Jinot; S Bayard; K Emmons; S K Hammond
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  1998-02       Impact factor: 4.000

10.  An enforceable indoor air quality standard for environmental tobacco smoke in the workplace.

Authors:  J L Repace; A H Lowrey
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  1993-08       Impact factor: 4.000

View more
  13 in total

1.  Junking science to promote tobacco.

Authors:  D Yach; S A Bialous
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 9.308

Review 2.  Tobacco industry manipulation of research.

Authors:  Lisa A Bero
Journal:  Public Health Rep       Date:  2005 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.792

3.  The Philip Morris External Research Program: results from the first round of projects.

Authors:  N Hirschhorn; S Aguinaga Bialous; S Shatenstein
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 7.552

Review 4.  Public health, academic medicine, and the alcohol industry's corporate social responsibility activities.

Authors:  Thomas F Babor; Katherine Robaina
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2012-12-13       Impact factor: 9.308

Review 5.  The limits of competing interest disclosures.

Authors:  L A Bero; S Glantz; M-K Hong
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 7.552

6.  Tobacco industry manipulation of the hospitality industry to maintain smoking in public places.

Authors:  J V Dearlove; S A Bialous; S A Glantz
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 7.552

Review 7.  Old ways, new means: tobacco industry funding of academic and private sector scientists since the Master Settlement Agreement.

Authors:  Suzaynn F Schick; Stanton A Glantz
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 7.552

8.  Criteria for evaluating tobacco control research funding programs and their application to models that include financial support from the tobacco industry.

Authors:  J E Cohen; M Zeller; T Eissenberg; M Parascandola; R O'Keefe; L Planinac; S Leischow
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2009-02-24       Impact factor: 7.552

Review 9.  Tobacco industry efforts to present ventilation as an alternative to smoke-free environments in North America.

Authors:  J Drope; S A Bialous; S A Glantz
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 7.552

10.  Tobacco company efforts to influence the Food and Drug Administration-commissioned Institute of Medicine report clearing the smoke: an analysis of documents released through litigation.

Authors:  Crystal E Tan; Thomas Kyriss; Stanton A Glantz
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2013-05-28       Impact factor: 11.069

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.