Literature DB >> 25730664

Ethics, morality, and conflicting interests: how questionable professional integrity in some scientists supports global corporate influence in public health.

Xaver Baur, Lygia Therese Budnik, Kathleen Ruff, David S Egilman, Richard A Lemen, Colin L Soskolne.   

Abstract

Clinical and public health research, education, and medical practice are vulnerable to influence by corporate interests driven by the for-profit motive. Developments over the last 10 years have shown that transparency and self-reporting of corporate ties do not always mitigate bias. In this article, we provide examples of how sound scientific reasoning and evidence-gathering are undermined through compromised scientific enquiry resulting in misleading science, decision-making, and policy intervention. Various medical disciplines provide reference literature essential for informing public, environmental, and occupational health policy. Published literature impacts clinical and laboratory methods, the validity of respective clinical guidelines, and the development and implementation of public health regulations. Said literature is also used in expert testimony related to resolving tort actions on work-related illnesses and environmental risks. We call for increased sensitivity, full transparency, and the implementation of effective ethical and professional praxis rules at all relevant regulatory levels to rout out inappropriate corporate influence in science. This is needed because influencing the integrity of scientists who engage in such activities cannot be depended upon.

Keywords:  Conflict of interest,; Corporate ties,; Environmental health; Ethics in medical science,; Moral dimension of bioscience,

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25730664      PMCID: PMC4457128          DOI: 10.1179/2049396714Y.0000000103

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Occup Environ Health        ISSN: 1077-3525


  22 in total

1.  The International Commission on Occupational Health (ICOH) and its influence on international organizations.

Authors:  Nicholas A Ashford; Barry Castleman; Arthur L Frank; Fernanda Giannasi; Lynn R Goldman; Morris Greenberg; James Huff; Kant Tushar Joshi; Joseph LaDou; Richard A Lemen; Cesare Maltoni; Rory O'Neil; Elihu Richter; Ellen K Silbergeld; Daniel T Teitelbaum; Annie Thebaud-Mony; Lorenzo Tomatis; Andrew Watterson
Journal:  Int J Occup Environ Health       Date:  2002 Apr-Jun

Review 2.  Spin your science into gold: direct to consumer marketing within social media platforms.

Authors:  David Egilman; Nicholas M Druar
Journal:  Work       Date:  2012

3.  How conflicted authors undermine the World Health Organization (WHO) campaign to stop all use of asbestos: spotlight on studies showing that chrysotile is carcinogenic and facilitates other non-cancer asbestos-related diseases.

Authors:  Xaver Baur; Colin L Soskolne; Richard A Lemen; Joachim Schneider; Hans-Joachim Woitowitz; Lygia Therese Budnik
Journal:  Int J Occup Environ Health       Date:  2015-03-02

4.  Policy: The art of science advice to government.

Authors:  Peter Gluckman
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2014-03-13       Impact factor: 49.962

5.  Epidemiology. Top choice for French post drops out in industry flap.

Authors:  Tania Rabesandratana
Journal:  Science       Date:  2014-02-07       Impact factor: 47.728

6.  War on Carcinogens: industry disputes human relevance of chemicals causing cancer in laboratory animals based on unproven hypotheses, using kidney tumors as an example.

Authors:  Ronald L Melnick; Jerrold M Ward; James Huff
Journal:  Int J Occup Environ Health       Date:  2013 Oct-Dec

7.  A comparison of DSM-IV and DSM-5 panel members' financial associations with industry: a pernicious problem persists.

Authors:  Lisa Cosgrove; Sheldon Krimsky
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2012-03-13       Impact factor: 11.069

8.  Too few, too weak: conflict of interest policies at Canadian medical schools.

Authors:  Adrienne Shnier; Joel Lexchin; Barbara Mintzes; Annemarie Jutel; Kelly Holloway
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-07-04       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Science and policy on endocrine disrupters must not be mixed: a reply to a "common sense" intervention by toxicology journal editors.

Authors:  Åke Bergman; Anna-Maria Andersson; Georg Becher; Martin van den Berg; Bruce Blumberg; Poul Bjerregaard; Carl-Gustaf Bornehag; Riana Bornman; Ingvar Brandt; Jayne V Brian; Stephanie C Casey; Paul A Fowler; Heloise Frouin; Linda C Giudice; Taisen Iguchi; Ulla Hass; Susan Jobling; Anders Juul; Karen A Kidd; Andreas Kortenkamp; Monica Lind; Olwenn V Martin; Derek Muir; Roseline Ochieng; Nicolas Olea; Leif Norrgren; Erik Ropstad; Peter S Ross; Christina Rudén; Martin Scheringer; Niels Erik Skakkebaek; Olle Söder; Carlos Sonnenschein; Ana Soto; Shanna Swan; Jorma Toppari; Charles R Tyler; Laura N Vandenberg; Anne Marie Vinggaard; Karin Wiberg; R Thomas Zoeller
Journal:  Environ Health       Date:  2013-08-27       Impact factor: 5.984

10.  Transparency and translation of science in a modern world.

Authors:  Philippe Grandjean; David Ozonoff
Journal:  Environ Health       Date:  2013-08-27       Impact factor: 5.984

View more
  4 in total

1.  The export of hazardous industries in 2015.

Authors:  Barry Castleman
Journal:  Environ Health       Date:  2016-01-19       Impact factor: 5.984

2.  How can the integrity of occupational and environmental health research be maintained in the presence of conflicting interests?

Authors:  Xaver Baur; Colin L Soskolne; Lisa A Bero
Journal:  Environ Health       Date:  2019-11-04       Impact factor: 5.984

3.  Reply to Brzozek et al. Comment on "Choi et al. Cellular Phone Use and Risk of Tumors: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 8079".

Authors:  Joel M Moskowitz; Seung-Kwon Myung; Yoon-Jung Choi; Yun-Chul Hong
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-05-24       Impact factor: 3.390

4.  Ongoing downplaying of the carcinogenicity of chrysotile asbestos by vested interests.

Authors:  Xaver Baur; Arthur L Frank
Journal:  J Occup Med Toxicol       Date:  2021-02-23       Impact factor: 2.646

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.