Tobacco Documents Online

Academic Freedoms / Ethics in Science

Abstract

This three-page Philip Morris (PM) report describes the problems both PM and the tobacco industry face when scientists and academics refuse to take tobacco funding for their research. PM notes the "loss of credibility of the Company, the tobacco industry or individual scientists because they have received research funding by a tobacco company."

When scientists and academics refuse to take tobacco money, PM loses credibility, and the business impacts of this are vast, according to the report. If left checked, it can keep PM and other tobacco companies from publishing their own research, impede corporate hiring and increase the difficulty of keeping current employees. It can hinder the ability of tobacco companies to participate in mainstream scientific conferences and make it difficult for tobacco scientists to interact with the scientific community. It hinders tobacco companies' ability to recruit third-party consultants and expert witnesses for courtroom trials and legislative testimony. It can also reduce the acceptance of corporate statements made to regulatory agencies.

This paper shows that PM makes it a business objective to promote "academic freedom," or the ability of academics and scientists to take tobacco money.

Fields

Quotes

Academic Freedoms/Ethics in Science

Issue Definition:

Loss of credibility of the Company, the tobacco industry or individual scientists because they have received research funding by a tobacco company.

Assertions of conflict of interest have been raised towards physicians, scientists, academics and others who have received funds from the tobacco industry or who are employed by the industry. These assertions of conflict of interest, or even the threat of such an assertion, have negatively affected the ability of the tobacco industry or its contractors to publish or present the results of research.

Business impacts:

The issue may adversely affect our ability to perform, publish and to support research on important scientific and/or public health issues and consequently:

--Undermine the credibility of company testimony, position statements and regulatory responses to market our products in some venues and the ability to smoke in some venues.

--Negatively affect the Company with regard to the scientific community in many ways: impedes hiring; may increase the difficulty of keeping current employees; hinders participation in scientific meetings and interactions in a constructive manner with those in the scientific community; impedes the ability to obtain consultants and expert wittneses. It may also affect future activities, e.g., the acceptance of research results and corporate statements made to regulatory agencies.

--Diminish our ability to credibly articulate our views on scientific data and interpretations in the appropriate venues.

Business Objective:

--Encourage ethics in science to promote academic freedom, so that research is judged on the basis of the science performed, not by who has performed he work, not by where the work was performed, nor who has funded it, specifically:

--Ensuring objective evaluation of scientific research, irrespective of funding mechanism. --Maintaining and enhancing our ability to provide both internal and independently conducted scientific and technical information to the Corporation.

Company

Philip Morris

Region

United States/Global

Litigation

Feda/Produced

Operation/Project

Academic Freedoms Project/Campaign

Type

REPT, REPORT, OTHER

Subject

Tobacco funding of academic research