Literature DB >> 11684591

Turning science into junk: the tobacco industry and passive smoking.

J M Samet1, T A Burke.   

Abstract

In this issue, Glantz and Ong offer a powerful analysis of the tobacco industry's attempt to discredit the scientific evidence on passive smoking, particularly the industry's use of the label "junk science." Environmental epidemiologic studies in other arenas have also been targets for the "junk science" label. Lessons for researchers involved in high-stakes issues in the public policy arena include a need for awareness of competing interests, for transparency concerning funding, and for adherence to rigorous quality assurance and peer review practices. The goal of "sound science" seems an admirable one; it should not, however, be used to dismiss available but uncertain evidence in order to delay action.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11684591      PMCID: PMC1446866          DOI: 10.2105/ajph.91.11.1742

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Public Health        ISSN: 0090-0036            Impact factor:   9.308


  2 in total

1.  A solution to concerns over public access to scientific data.

Authors:  L R Cohen; R W Hahn
Journal:  Science       Date:  1999-07-23       Impact factor: 47.728

Review 2.  Constructing "sound science" and "good epidemiology": tobacco, lawyers, and public relations firms.

Authors:  E K Ong; S A Glantz
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 9.308

  2 in total
  8 in total

1.  "Sound science" and tobacco exposure.

Authors:  Sharon P Brown
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 9.308

2.  The Temporal Structure of Scientific Consensus Formation.

Authors:  Uri Shwed; Peter S Bearman
Journal:  Am Sociol Rev       Date:  2010-12-01

Review 3.  Challenging the epidemiologic evidence on passive smoking: tactics of tobacco industry expert witnesses.

Authors:  John A Francis; Amy K Shea; Jonathan M Samet
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 7.552

Review 4.  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

5.  Tobacco industry efforts to undermine policy-relevant research.

Authors:  Anne Landman; Stanton A Glantz
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2008-11-13       Impact factor: 9.308

6.  Implementation failures in the use of two New Zealand laws to control the tobacco industry: 1989-2005.

Authors:  George Thomson; Nick Wilson
Journal:  Aust New Zealand Health Policy       Date:  2005-12-14

7.  Analysis of Alcohol Industry Submissions against Marketing Regulation.

Authors:  Florentine Petronella Martino; Peter Graeme Miller; Kerri Coomber; Linda Hancock; Kypros Kypri
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-01-24       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 8.  Beyond nutrition and physical activity: food industry shaping of the very principles of scientific integrity.

Authors:  Mélissa Mialon; Matthew Ho; Angela Carriedo; Gary Ruskin; Eric Crosbie
Journal:  Global Health       Date:  2021-04-20       Impact factor: 4.185

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.