Changing Conclusions on Secondhand Smoke in a Sudden Infant Death Syndrome Review Funded by the Tobacco Industry

Abstract

ABSTRACT. Background. Prenatal and postnatal exposure to tobacco smoke adversely affects maternal and child health. Secondhand smoke (SHS) has been linked causally with sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) in major health reports. In 1992, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) first noted an association between SHS and SIDS, and both prenatal exposure and postnatal SHS exposure were listed as independent risk factors for SIDS in a 1997 California EPA report (republished in 1999 by the National Cancer Institute) and a 2004 US Surgeon General report.The tobacco industry has used scientific consultants to attack the evidence that SHS causes disease, most often lung cancer. Little is known about the industry's strategies to contest the evidence on maternal and child health. In 2001, a review was published on SIDS that acknowledged funding from the Philip Morris (PM) tobacco company. Tobacco industry documents related to this review were examined to identify the company's influence on the content and conclusions of this review.Methods. Tobacco industry documents include 40 million pages of internal memos and reports made available to the public as a result of litigation settlements against the tobacco industry in the United States. Between November 2003 and January 2004, we searched tobacco industry document Internet sites from the University of California Legacy Tobacco Documents Library and the Tobacco Documents Online website. Key terms included "SIDS" and names of key persons. Two authors conducted independent searches with similar key terms, reviewed the documents, and agreed on relevancy through consensus. Thirty documents were identified as relevant. Two drafts (an early version and a final version) of an industry-funded review article on SIDS were identified, and 2 authors independently compared these drafts with the final publication. Formal comments by PM executives made in response to the first draft were also reviewed. We used Science Citation Index in July 2004 to determine citation patterns for the referenced SIDS reviews.Results. PM executives feared that SHS and maternal and child health issues would create a powerful and emotional impetus for smoke-free areas in the home, public areas, and the workplace. In response to the 1992 US EPA report on SHS, the Science and Technology Department of PM's Switzerland subsidiary, Fabriques de Tabac Reunies, searched for "independent" consultants to publish articles addressing SHS. The first industry-funded article was a literature review focusing on smoking and SIDS, conducted by consultant Peter Lee and co-author Allison Thornton, which stated that the association between parental smoking and SIDS could have been attributable to the failure to control fully for confounders. That first review has only been cited once, in the subsequent industry-funded review.In 1997, PM commissioned a consultant, Frank Sullivan, to write a review, with coauthor Susan Barlow, of all possible risk factors for SIDS. The first draft concluded that prenatal and postnatal smokin...

Tobacco industry sociological programs to influence public beliefs about smoking

“…In all public pronouncements about tobacco made by "experts," full disclosure of the contacts with tobacco companies or their surrogates (including law firms, public relations firms, subsidiary companies or smokers' rights groups) should be mandatory. Disclosure statements for research articles involving tobacco or smoking should state not only the funding sources for the work, but should fully disclose the involvement of any tobacco company employees in the preparation of the work (Tong, England, & Glantz, 2005). The industry's ability to maintain an arm's length relationship with social scientists is crucial, not only to its ability to access credible academics, but also to preserve the academics' reputations, since dealing with tobacco companies can diminish an academic's credibility and authoritative legitimacy.…”

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

“…[1][2][3][4] Historically, the industry's reasons for funding publishable external scientific research have included building public credibility, 5-7 developing industry-friendly experts to represent them in litigation and the regulatory process, [8][9][10][11] and creating controversy about the health risks of active and passive smoking. 7 9-14 Until 1998, almost all tobacco industry funding for academic scientists came through the industry's Council for Tobacco Research (CTR) and the Center for Indoor Air Research (CIAR).…”

Epidemiologie und Bedeutung tabakassoziierter Lungenkrankheiten

“…Dick-und Enddarm 15,1 Dick-und Enddarm 9,2 5Fache, bereits 1-9 Zigaretten täglich ver doppeln das Risiko [41]. Weltweit geht man davon aus, dass je des Jahr über 600.000 Menschen an den Folgen von Passivrauchen sterben, davon sind 150.000 Kinder.…”