The Tobacco Industry Has No Business Funding Continuing Medical Education

Robert K. Jackler,Pamela M. Ling

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2024.9241

IF: 11.816

2024-07-08

JAMA

Abstract:This Viewpoint explores tobacco industry–funded continuing medical education and concerns regarding the precedents this funding sets in relation to commercial bias and influence and conflicts of interest.

medicine, general & internal

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Industry-Funded Continuing Medical Education: The Potential for Bias.

J. Schofferman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/pme.12828_1

2015-07-01

Abstract:Continuing medical education (CME) is expected to be intellectually rigorous, evidence-based, and free from bias. CME financially supported by industry, however, has the potential to unconsciously bias educators and the leadership of professional medical associations—biases that might unduly influence an attendee's choice of drugs and devices, and thereby ultimately affect patient care ⇓. At present, there are no studies that have examined whether the industry funding of CME affects patient outcomes positively or negatively ⇓. Industry marketing strategies rely heavily on physician education to boost drug sales ⇓. Physicians attending CME conferences supported by industry are more likely to use a sponsoring company's product ⇓. CME conferences provide excellent venues for direct and indirect marketing. Most of the direct marketing occurs in exhibit halls. Physicians might feel that they are resistant to such obvious promotion, but exhibit hall marketing is very useful and profitable for the …

Medicine,Business
Financial Conflicts of Interest and Stance on Tobacco Harm Reduction: A Systematic Review

Yogi H Hendlin,Manali Vora,Jesse Elias,Pamela M Ling

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2019.305106

Abstract:Background. Tobacco companies have actively promoted the substitution of cigarettes with purportedly safer tobacco products (e.g., smokeless tobacco, e-cigarettes) as tobacco harm reduction (THR). Given the tobacco, e-cigarette, and pharmaceutical industries' substantial financial interests, we quantified industry influence on support for THR. Objectives. To analyze a comprehensive set of articles published in peer-reviewed journals assessing funding sources and support for or opposition to substitution of tobacco or nicotine products as harm reduction. Search Methods. We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and PsycINFO with a comprehensive search string including all articles, comments, and editorials published between January 1, 1992, and July 26, 2016. Selection Criteria. We included English-language publications published in peer-reviewed journals addressing THR in humans and excluded studies on modified cigarettes, on South Asian smokeless tobacco variants, on pregnant women, on animals, not mentioning a tobacco or nicotine product, on US Food and Drug Administration-approved nicotine replacement therapies, and on nicotine vaccines. Data Collection and Analysis. We double-coded all articles for article type; primary product type (e.g., snus, e-cigarettes); themes for and against THR; stance on THR; THR concepts; funding or affiliation with tobacco, e-cigarette, pharmaceutical industry, or multiple industries; and each author's country. We fit exact logistic regression models with stance on THR as the outcome (pro- vs anti-THR) and source of funding or industry affiliation as the predictor taking into account sparse data. Additional models included article type as the outcome (nonempirical or empirical) and industry funding or affiliation as predictor, and stratified analyses for empirical and nonempirical studies with stance on THR as outcome and funding source as predictor. Main Results. Searches retrieved 826 articles, including nonempirical articles (21%), letters or commentaries (34%), editorials (5%), cross-sectional studies (15%), systematic reviews and meta-analyses (3%), and randomized controlled trials (2%). Overall, 23.9% disclosed support by industry; 49% of articles endorsed THR, 42% opposed it, and 9% took neutral or mixed positions. Support from the e-cigarette industry (odds ratio [OR] = 20.9; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 5.3, 180.7), tobacco industry (OR = 59.4; 95% CI = 10.1, +infinity), or pharmaceutical industry (OR = 2.18; 95% CI = 1.3, 3.7) was significantly associated with supportive stance on THR in analyses accounting for sparse data. Authors' Conclusions. Non-industry-funded articles were evenly divided in stance, while industry-funded articles favored THR. Because of their quantity, letters and comments may influence perceptions of THR when empirical studies lack consensus. Public Health Implications. Public health practitioners and researchers need to account for industry funding when interpreting the evidence in THR debates.
Conflicts of interest: moving towards zero tolerance

Chris van Tulleken,Nigel Rollins,Rebecca Coombes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.q2574

2024-11-27

BMJ

Abstract:In the 1950s, smoking was proven beyond doubt to cause cancer and yet efforts to curb this pandemic were stalled over the next half century by a network of individuals and institutions with competing interests. The industry paid doctors, academics, charities, and policy makers to dilute and distort the science and public health messaging.1 By the 1980s, the largest tobacco companies bought the largest food companies2 and used the same methods to create a food environment where poor diet has overtaken tobacco as the leading cause of early death globally.3Food and tobacco are just two of the industries that use their economic power to evade effective regulation; food, alcohol, pharmaceuticals, gambling, and fossil fuels, among others, have the same commercial incentives and obligations as the tobacco industry and directly impact human and planetary health.The World Health Organization (WHO) has defined these commercial determinants of health as "...private sector activities that...

medicine, general & internal
Tobacco Industry Efforts Undermining Evidence Linking Secondhand Smoke With Cardiovascular Disease

Elisa K. Tong,Stanton A. Glantz

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.107.715888

IF: 37.8

2007-10-16

Circulation

Abstract:Background— The scientific consensus that secondhand smoke (SHS) increases cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk by 30% is based on epidemiological and biological evidence. The tobacco industry has contested this evidence that SHS causes CVD, but how and why they have done it has not been described. Methods and Results— About 50 million pages of tobacco industry documents were searched using general keywords and names of industry consultants and scientists. Tobacco industry–funded epidemiological analyses of large data sets were used to argue against an epidemiological association between SHS and CVD and smoke-free regulations, but these analyses all suffered from exposure misclassification problems that biased the results toward the null. More recent industry-funded publications report an increased risk of CVD associated with SHS but claim a low magnitude of risk. When early tobacco industry–funded work demonstrated that SHS increased atherosclerosis, the industry criticized the findings and withdrew funding. RJ Reynolds focused on attacking the biological plausibility of the association between SHS and CVD by conducting indirect platelet aggregation studies, exposure chamber experiments, and literature reviews. Although these studies also suffered from exposure misclassification problems, several produced results that were consistent with a direct effect of SHS on blood and vascular function. Instead, RJ Reynolds attributed these results to an unproven epinephrine-related stress response from odor or large smoke exposure, which supported their regulatory and “reduced-harm” product development efforts. Philip Morris’ recent “reduced-harm” efforts seem supportive of a similar corporate agenda. Conclusions— The tobacco industry attempted to undermine the evidence that SHS causes CVD to fight smoke-free regulations while developing approaches to support new products that claim to reduce harm. The industry interest in preserving corporate viability has affected the design and interpretation of their cardiovascular studies, indicating the need for great caution in current debates about future tobacco industry regulation and development of reduced-harm tobacco products.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems,peripheral vascular disease
Tobacco industry lawyers as "disease vectors"

Sara D Guardino,Richard A Daynard

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/tc.2006.018390

Abstract:Objective: Despite their obligation to do so, tobacco companies often failed to conduct product safety research or, when research was conducted, failed to disseminate the results to the medical community and to the public. The tobacco company lawyers' role in these actions was investigated with a focus on their involvement in company scientific research, claims of attorney-client privilege and work-product cover, document concealment, and litigation tactics. Methods: Searches of previously secret internal tobacco industry documents located at Tobacco Documents Online. Additional searches included court transcripts, legal cases and articles obtained through Westlaw, PubMed, and the internet. Results: Tobacco company lawyers have been involved in activities having little or nothing to do with the practice of law, including gauging and attempting to influence company scientists' beliefs, vetting in-house scientific research, and instructing in-house scientists not to publish potentially damaging results. Additionally, company lawyers have taken steps to manufacture attorney-client privilege and work-product cover to assist their clients in protecting sensitive documents from disclosure, have been involved in the concealment of such documents, and have employed litigation tactics that have largely prevented successful lawsuits against their client companies. Conclusions: Tobacco related diseases have proliferated partly because of tobacco company lawyers. Their tactics have impeded the flow of information about the dangers of smoking to the public and the medical community. Additionally, their extravagantly aggressive litigation tactics have pushed many plaintiffs into dropping their cases before trial, thus reducing the opportunities for changes to be made to company policy in favour of public health. Stricter professional oversight is needed to ensure that this trend does not continue.
Hidden flaws in e-cigarette industry-funded studies

Eric K Soule,Matthew E Rossheim,Melvin D Livingston,Cassidy R LoParco,Kayla K Tillett,Thomas Eissenberg,Steve Sussman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/tc-2024-058609

2024-06-11

Abstract:Electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) use has increased since e-cigarettes were introduced to the market nearly 20 years ago. Researchers continue to conduct studies to understand the health risks and benefits of e-cigarettes to inform health education and promotion efforts as well as public policy. Studies funded by the tobacco industry examining the potential risks and benefits of e-cigarettes have also been conducted and are sometimes published in the scientific literature. Frequently, tobacco and e-cigarette industry-funded researchers report findings that contradict research funded by other sources. While many industry-funded studies may appear methodologically sound at first glance, in some cases, industry-funded studies include methodological flaws that result in misleading conclusions. The tobacco industry's use of biased research to influence tobacco-related policy decisions in the past is well-documented. This commentary provides specific examples of recent e-cigarette research funded by the tobacco/e-cigarette industry in which methodological flaws result in misleading conclusions that support industry goals. Given the long history of biased research conducted by the tobacco industry, there is a need to assess whether research funded by the e-cigarette industry similarly contains methodological flaws. We emphasise the need for tobacco and e-cigarette-funded research to be scrutinised by non-industry-funded subject matter experts and call for journals to not consider manuscripts that have received support from the tobacco or e-cigarette industry.
How the tobacco industry built its relationship with Hollywood

C Mekemson,S A Glantz

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/tc.11.suppl_1.i81

Abstract:Objective: To describe the development of the relationship between the tobacco industry and the entertainment industry. Methods: Review of previously secret tobacco industry documents available on the internet. Results: Both the entertainment and tobacco industries recognised the high value of promotion of tobacco through entertainment media. The 1980s saw undertakings by four tobacco companies, Philip Morris, RJ Reynolds (RJR), American Tobacco Company, and Brown and Williamson to place their products in movies. RJR and Philip Morris also worked to place products on television at the beginning of the decade. Each company hired aggressive product placement firms to represent its interests in Hollywood. These firms placed products and tobacco signage in positive situations that would encourage viewers to use tobacco and kept brands from being used in negative situations. At least one of the companies, RJR, undertook an extensive campaign to hook Hollywood on tobacco by providing free cigarettes to actors on a monthly basis. Efforts were also made to place favourable articles relating to product use by actors in national print media and to encourage professional photographers to take pictures of actors smoking specific brands. The cigar industry started developing connections with the entertainment industry beginning in the 1980s and paid product placements were made in both movies and on television. This effort did not always require money payments from the tobacco industry to the entertainment industry, suggesting that simply looking for cash payoffs may miss other important ties between the tobacco and entertainment industries. Conclusions: The tobacco industry understood the value of placing and encouraging tobacco use in films, and how to do it. While the industry claims to have ended this practice, smoking in motion pictures increased throughout the 1990s and remains a public health problem.
Exposing and addressing tobacco industry conduct in low-income and middle-income countries

Anna B Gilmore,Gary Fooks,Jeffrey Drope,Stella Aguinaga Bialous,Rachel Rose Jackson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60312-9

2015-03-14

Abstract:The tobacco industry's future depends on increasing tobacco use in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), which face a growing burden of tobacco-related disease, yet have potential to prevent full-scale escalation of this epidemic. To drive up sales the industry markets its products heavily, deliberately targeting non-smokers and keeps prices low until smoking and local economies are sufficiently established to drive prices and profits up. The industry systematically flaunts existing tobacco control legislation and works aggressively to prevent future policies using its resource advantage to present highly misleading economic arguments, rebrand political activities as corporate social responsibility, and establish and use third parties to make its arguments more palatable. Increasingly it is using domestic litigation and international arbitration to bully LMICs from implementing effective policies and hijacking the problem of tobacco smuggling for policy gain, attempting to put itself in control of an illegal trade in which there is overwhelming historical evidence of its complicity. Progress will not be realised until tobacco industry interference is actively addressed as outlined in Article 5.3 of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Exemplar LMICs show this action can be achieved and indicate that exposing tobacco industry misconduct is an essential first step.
Hollywood on tobacco: how the entertainment industry understands tobacco portrayal

D L Shields,J Carol,E D Balbach,S McGee

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/tc.8.4.378

Abstract:Objective: To determine how people in the California-based entertainment industry think about the portrayal of tobacco use in movies and on television. Specifically, to explore who decides when to include tobacco in a project; how that decision is made; what issues are considered; what messages are intended; whether and how the issue of second-hand smoke is considered; and what advocacy methods might be useful in influencing future decisions about tobacco portrayal. Design: Qualitative in-depth interviews of entertainment industry personnel,with a semi-structured interview protocol to guide the interview. Subjects: 54 subjects drawn from a convenience sample of writers, actors, directors, producers, studio executives, and others involved in the film industry. Results: Hollywood is heterogeneous with varying perspectives on rates of tobacco use portrayal; intentionality of the decision to use and the necessity to portray tobacco use; and its degree of acceptance of responsibility for influencing societal smoking. Tobacco depiction may originate with the writer, actor, or director and is included most frequently to elucidate character or portray reality. On-camera smoking is influenced by actors' off-camera tobacco use. Conclusions: The research presented can help advocates better understand the norms and values of those working within the entertainment industry and thereby assist them in creating more effective change strategies.
PMI-funded foundation for a smoke-free world: application of criteria to assess funding models that include financial support from the tobacco industry

Joanna E Cohen,Thomas Eissenberg,Mitch Zeller

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/tc-2023-058474

IF: 6.953

2024-02-01

Tobacco Control

Abstract:Recent changes to the leadership and the terms of tobacco industry financing of the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World (FSFW) have called for a revisiting of a paper published in 2009 where we proposed criteria and other considerations to assess possible funding models for research that include financial support from the tobacco industry. This paper reviews and attempts to apply the elements laid out in 2009 to the current state of FSFW. After discussing each criterion and consideration we conclude that, at this point in time, conducting a thorough assessment using our 2009 paper is not possible because critical details related to FSFW governance, decision-making and process have not been announced. Nonetheless, we hope this paper will remind the tobacco control community that the 2009 criteria exist and highlight the information needed and questions that might be asked of FSFW to help form judgements about this new iteration of the foundation. We further hope this will put the FSFW on notice that they need to address each of these criteria and speak publicly about their plans regarding the specific issues raised in the 2009 paper.

public, environmental & occupational health,substance abuse
Perceptions of industry responsibility and tobacco control policy by US tobacco company executives in trial testimony

Michael Chaiton,Roberta Ferrence,Eric LeGresley

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/tc.2004.009647

Abstract:Objective: Trial testimony from the United States provides a unique opportunity to examine strategies of the American tobacco industry. This paper examines congruence between the arguments for tobacco control policy presented by representatives of the American tobacco industry at trial and the stages of responsibility associated with corporate social responsibility principles in other industries. Data sources: Trial testimony collected and coded by the Deposition and Trial Testimony Archive (DATTA). Study selection: All available testimony was gathered from representative senior staff from major tobacco companies: Brown & Williamson, Philip Morris, RJ Reynolds, and Liggett. Data extraction: Transcripts from each witness selected were collected and imported in text format into WinMax, a qualitative data program. The documents were searched for terms relating to tobacco control policies, and relevant terms were extracted. A hand search of the documents was also conducted by reading through the testimony. Inferred responsibility for various tobacco control policies (health information, second-hand smoking, youth smoking) was coded. Data synthesis: The level of responsibility for tobacco control policy varied according to the maturity of the issue. For emerging issues, US tobacco company representatives expressed defensiveness while, for more mature issues, such as youth smoking, they showed increased willingness to deal with the issue. This response to social issues is consistent with corporate social responsibility strategies in other industries. Conclusion: While other industries use corporate social responsibility programmes to address social issues to protect their core business product, the fundamental social issue with tobacco is the product itself. As such, the corporate nature of tobacco companies is a structural obstacle to reducing harm caused by tobacco use.
What if… your research is suddenly affiliated with a tobacco manufacturing company?

Wytse Bastiaan van den Bosch,Noortje Jacobs,Harm Tiddens,Suzanne van de Vathorst

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjresp-2022-001505

2024-02-02

Abstract:The tobacco industry is accountable for an annual global death toll of approximately 8 million people and cigarette smoking is the foremost risk factor for several types of cancer. In addition, the tobacco industry has a long and controversial history of trying to influence scientific research and of engaging in other morally problematic practices. In September 2021, the respiratory community was alarmed by the takeover of Vectura Group (Vectura) by Philip Morris International. As a reaction to this acquisition, strict measures were imposed by the International Respiratory Societies to prohibit the involvement of Vectura in respiratory research and its participation in societies' activities. International Respiratory Societies argued that Vectura had become part of the tobacco industry due to this takeover and is, therefore, subject to the same rules and restrictions. From a healthcare and historical perspective, the reaction and imposed measures are very understandable. However, for researchers that were already affiliated with Vectura through long-standing agreements and for research that was funded by Vectura, the imposed measures have serious consequences. With this article, we provide an example of these consequences. By reflecting on this issue, we would like to start a conversation regarding the current measures and to encourage the respiratory community to begin thinking of a way to avoid these consequences in the future. In addition, we hope that with this conversation the Respiratory Societies can set an example for other medical societies on how to cope with possible morally tainted affiliations (eg, fast food companies, alcohol manufacturing companies) in the future.
State-ownership of tobacco industry: a 'fundamental conflict of interest' or a 'tremendous opportunity' for tobacco control?

Scott L Hogg,Sarah E Hill,Jeff Collin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2014-052114

Abstract:Despite state-owned tobacco companies (SOTCs) accounting for over 40% of global production, the significance of state-ownership for tobacco control strategies has received limited academic and policy attention. The complex interests associated with SOTCs present diverse challenges for tobacco control policy, particularly in implementing Article 5.3 of WHO's Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC). Based on a review of existing literature, this paper examines current challenges and potential opportunities presented by governmental participation in the tobacco industry, identifying three contrasting perspectives from academic and policy sources. The first two perspectives centre on recognising that economic interests inherent in an SOTC are in tension with a government's public health responsibilities. This conflict can be perceived as either fundamental and fixed ('intrinsic conflict') or as amenable to either exacerbation or amelioration via organisational mechanisms ('institutionally-mediated conflict')-as suggested by the contrasting examples of China and Thailand. A third, less prominent perspective (which we refer to as 'interest alignment') suggests that it may be possible to radically alter the objectives and behaviour of SOTCs in order to advance tobacco control. Finally, we draw on this analysis to consider policy options for advancing tobacco control in countries with SOTCs. Guidance on implementation of Article 5.3 demonstrates strategic ambiguity by including elements of all three perspectives described above. We argue that legislative separation of tobacco control from SOTC oversight provides a desirable alternative to industry privatisation, and that radically realigning the goals of SOTCs to reduce tobacco consumption could make an important contribution to endgame strategies.
The future of continuing medical education: the roles of medical professional societies and the health care industry.

Esc Board,F. Ruschitzka

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehy003

IF: 39.3

2019-06-01

European Heart Journal

Abstract:In recent years, wide ranging biomedical innovation has provided powerful new approaches for prevention, diagnosis and management of diseases. In order to translate such innovation into effective practice, physicians must frequently update their knowledge base and skills through continuing medical education and training. Medical Professional Societies, run as not-for-profit organizations led by peers, are uniquely placed to deliver balanced, disease oriented and patient centred education. The medical industry has a major role in the development of new, improved technology, devices and medication. In fact, the best innovations have been achieved through collaboration with scientists, clinical academics and practicing physicians. Industry has for many years been committed to ensure the optimal and safe application of its products by providing unrestricted support of medical education developed and delivered by international and national learned societies. Recently adopted Codes of Practice for the Pharmaceutical and Device industry were intended to enhance public trust in the relationship between biomedical industry and physicians. Unexpectedly, changes resulting from adoption of the Codes have limited the opportunity for unconditional industry support of balanced medical education in favour of a more direct involvement of industry in informing physicians about their products. We describe the need for continuing medical education in Cardiovascular Medicine in Europe, interaction between the medical profession and medical industry, and propose measures to safeguard the provision of high quality, balanced medical education.

Education,Medicine,Business
Ethical issues of medical schools and their academic departments accepting gifts from pharma

Ayushya Ajmani,M Shane Chapman,Jane M Grant-Kels

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clindermatol.2024.06.002

2024-06-14

Abstract:The ethical implications of medical schools or any of their academic departments accepting large corporate donations, mainly from pharmaceutical companies, have been long debated. Although such contributions are common in other graduate institutions, medical schools must be convinced about potential conflicts of interest and public opinion. We re-explore the benefits these kinds of gifts would afford for improved educational and research resources against the ethical dilemmas this kind of donation would present and concerns about public perception and actual conflict of interest. Using the principles of beneficence, nonmaleficence, autonomy, and distributive justice, we discuss the physicians' obligations and conceivable patient backlash that may ensue. Ultimately, we recognize the necessity for financial resources to support academic missions but contend that health care facilities and medical education must be equipped while ensuring a complete lack of bias in sponsorship.
Financial conflicts of interest among presenters, panellists and moderators at haematology and oncology FDA workshops

Sarah L. Miller,Alyson Haslam,Vinay Prasad

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/eci.14184

2024-02-28

European Journal of Clinical Investigation

Abstract:We examined the characteristics and conflicts of interest of presenters at haematology/oncology workshops held with the US FDA. Among US physician presenters, the mean general yearly payment from the pharmaceutical industry was 2981). We found that 69% of patient advocacy speakers were representing organizations funded by the pharmaceutical industry. Among those for which detailed meeting slides or recordings could be obtained, we found that 50% of presenters included a disclosure slide or verbally indicated their disclosures. Objective To assess the characteristics and financial conflicts of interest of presenters, panellists and moderators at haematology and oncology workshops held jointly with or hosted by the US FDA. Setting We included information on all publicly available haematology or oncology FDA workshop agendas held between 1 January 2018 and 31 December 2022. Exposure General and research payments reported on Open Payments, industry funding to patient advocacy organizations reported on their webpages or 990 tax forms and employment in both pharmaceutical and regulatory settings. Results Among physicians eligible for payments, 78% received at least one payment from the industry between 2017 and 2021. The mean general payment amount was 16,434 per year) and the median was 2981 per year). Sixty‐nine per cent of patient advocacy speakers were representing organizations that received financial support from the pharmaceutical industry. Among those representing regulatory agencies or pharmaceutical companies, 16% had worked in both settings during their careers. Conclusions and Relevance Our findings in this cross‐sectional study show a majority of US‐based physician presenters at haematology and oncology workshops held jointly with members of the US FDA have some financial conflict of interest with the pharmaceutical industry. These findings support the need for clear disclosures and suggest that a more balanced selection of presenters with fewer conflicts may help to limit bias in discussions between multiple stakeholders.

medicine, general & internal, research & experimental
Pro-Con Debate: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Industry-Sponsored Research

Daniel I Sessler,Benjamin A Alman,Miriam M Treggiari,Michael A Mont

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2023.02.018

Abstract:PRO: Nearly all new devices and drugs come from industry that provides two-thirds of the funding for medical research, and a much higher fraction of clinical research. Realistically, without corporate-funded studies, perioperative research would stagnate with little innovation and few new products. Opinions are ubiquitous and normal but do not constitute epidemiologic bias. Competent clinical research includes many protections against selection and measurement bias, and the publication process provides at least moderate protection against misinterpretation of results. Trial registries largely prevent selective data presentation. Sponsored trials are particularly protected against inappropriate corporate influence because they are usually codesigned with the US Food and Drug Administration, and analyses are based on formal predefined statistical plans, as well as being conducted with rigorous external monitoring. Novel products, which are essential for advances in clinical care, largely come from industry, and industry appropriately funds much of the required research. We should celebrate industry's contribution to improvements in clinical care. CON: While industry funding contributes to research and discovery, examples of industry-funded research demonstrate bias. In the setting of financial pressures and potential conflict of interest, bias can influence the type of study design, hypotheses being tested, rigor and transparency in data analysis, interpretation, as well as reporting of the results. Unlike public granting agencies, industry does not necessarily provide funding based on unbiased peer review following an open call for proposals. The focus on success can influence the choice of a comparator, which might not be ideal among the possible alternatives, the language used in the publication, and even the ability to publish. Unpublished negative trials can result in selected information being withheld from the scientific community and the public. Appropriate safeguards are needed to ensure that research addresses the most important and relevant questions, that results are available even when they do not support the use of a product produced by the funding company, that populations studied reflect the relevant patients, that the most rigorous approaches are applied, that studies have the appropriate power to address the question posed, and that conclusions are presented in an unbiased manner.
Mass Media Antismoking Campaigns: A Powerful Tool for Health Promotion

Michael Siegel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-129-2-199807150-00013

IF: 39.2

1998-07-15

Annals of Internal Medicine

Abstract:Cigarette advertising and promotion have been shown to influence smoking in young persons, but the powerful effect of the mass media on behavior can also be used to promote health. Several states have earmarked a portion of their cigarette excise tax revenues to fund mass media antismoking campaigns, which have been effective in reducing cigarette consumption and in helping persons quit smoking. Despite their successes, the campaigns have been hindered by tobacco industry-supported attempts to cut their funding or restrict their scope. The most aggressive campaigns, which attack the tobacco industry and challenge social norms about tobacco use and promotion, are the most controversial but also the most effective. Mass media antismoking campaigns are a promising tool for health promotion, but only if sustained funding can be guaranteed and the development of the advertisements can be protected from intrusion by political forces.

medicine, general & internal
Addressing tobacco industry influence in tobacco-growing countries

Raphael Lencucha,Nuntavarn Vichit-Vadakan,Roengrudee Patanavanich,Rob Ralston

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2471/blt.23.290219

IF: 13.831

2024-01-06

Bulletin of the World Health Organization

Abstract:Protecting policy-making from tobacco industry influence is central to effective tobacco control governance. The inclusion of industry actors as stakeholders in policy processes remains a crucial avenue to corporate influence. This influence is reinforced by the idea that the tobacco industry is a legitimate partner to government in regulatory governance. Addressing the influence of the tobacco industry demands a focus on the government institutions that formalize relationships between industry...

public, environmental & occupational health
Under the influence: system-level effects of alcohol industry-funded health information organizations

Nason Maani,May Ci van Schalkwyk,Mark Petticrew

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/daad167

2023-12-01

Abstract:There is now an established body of evidence that the alcohol industry seeks to obstruct public health policies that could affect the availability, affordability or marketing of alcohol. In parallel, the alcohol industry is active in funding corporate social responsibility initiatives, with a particular focus on 'responsible drinking' campaigns, often facilitated by national-level charities established and/or funded by the alcohol industry and associated organizations. While evidence continues to grow regarding biases in the content produced by such health information organizations, they remain active in partnerships with government health departments on national health promotion campaigns and provide a range of health-related information to the public, community organizations and schools. To understand the implications of such access for policymakers, researchers and the public, there is a need to consider the wider, system-level influences of such organizations and their place in wider alcohol industry strategies. In this article, we describe evolving evidence of the direct and indirect strategic effects of such organizations and demonstrate how they serve key roles in the alcohol industry through their existence, content, partnerships and public profiles. We end by considering the implications for how we conceptualize charities established or funded (entirely or partly) by harmful commodity industries, and to what extent current conflicts of interest guidelines are sufficiently effective.

The Tobacco Industry Has No Business Funding Continuing Medical Education

Industry-Funded Continuing Medical Education: The Potential for Bias.

Financial Conflicts of Interest and Stance on Tobacco Harm Reduction: A Systematic Review

Conflicts of interest: moving towards zero tolerance

Tobacco Industry Efforts Undermining Evidence Linking Secondhand Smoke With Cardiovascular Disease

Tobacco industry lawyers as "disease vectors"

Hidden flaws in e-cigarette industry-funded studies

How the tobacco industry built its relationship with Hollywood

Exposing and addressing tobacco industry conduct in low-income and middle-income countries

Hollywood on tobacco: how the entertainment industry understands tobacco portrayal

PMI-funded foundation for a smoke-free world: application of criteria to assess funding models that include financial support from the tobacco industry

Perceptions of industry responsibility and tobacco control policy by US tobacco company executives in trial testimony

What if… your research is suddenly affiliated with a tobacco manufacturing company?

State-ownership of tobacco industry: a 'fundamental conflict of interest' or a 'tremendous opportunity' for tobacco control?

The future of continuing medical education: the roles of medical professional societies and the health care industry.

Ethical issues of medical schools and their academic departments accepting gifts from pharma

Financial conflicts of interest among presenters, panellists and moderators at haematology and oncology FDA workshops

Pro-Con Debate: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Industry-Sponsored Research

Mass Media Antismoking Campaigns: A Powerful Tool for Health Promotion

Addressing tobacco industry influence in tobacco-growing countries

Under the influence: system-level effects of alcohol industry-funded health information organizations