Abstract
Background: Major reviews of the health effects of passive smoking have been subjected to tobacco industry campaigns to refute the scientific evidence. Following the 1992 US Environmental Protection Agency review, the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) initiated a review of the health effects of passive smoking. At the time of this review, evidence that environmental tobacco smoke causes disease was being increasingly accepted in courts of law and voluntary adoption of smoking restrictions was rapidly growing.
Objective: To demonstrate how the tobacco industry attempted to delay and discredit the publication of a report on passive smoking that the tobacco industry anticipated to contain recommendations that would be unfavourable to their business.
Methods: A search of tobacco industry documents on the Master Settlement Agreement websites was conducted using the terms and acronyms representative of the NHMRC review.
Results: The tobacco industry sought to impede the progress of the NHMRC Working Party by launching an intensive campaign to delay and discredit the report. The main strategies used were attempts to criticise the science, extensive use of Freedom of Information provisions to monitor all activity of the group, legal challenges, ad hominem attacks on the credibility of the Working Party members, rallying support from industry allies, and influencing public opinion through the media.
Conclusions: The Australian tobacco industry deliberately impeded the NHMRC Working Party's progress and successfully prevented the publication of the report's recommendations. The tobacco industry's motivation and capacity to disrupt the advancement of scientific knowledge and policy in tobacco control should be recognised and anticipated.
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (227.4 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Barnes D. E., Bero L. A. Industry-funded research and conflict of interest: an analysis of research sponsored by the tobacco industry through the Center for Indoor Air Research. J Health Polit Policy Law. 1996 Fall;21(3):515–542. doi: 10.1215/03616878-21-3-515. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Barnes D. E., Hanauer P., Slade J., Bero L. A., Glantz S. A. Environmental tobacco smoke. The Brown and Williamson documents. JAMA. 1995 Jul 19;274(3):248–253. doi: 10.1001/jama.274.3.248. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Chapman S., Borland R., Hill D., Owen N., Woodward S. Why the tobacco industry fears the passive smoking issue. Int J Health Serv. 1990;20(3):417–427. doi: 10.2190/YYKC-PGTC-VUMM-3A5P. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Chapman S., Penman A. "Can't stop the boy": Philip Morris' use of Healthy Buildings International to prevent workplace smoking bans in Australia. Tob Control. 2003 Dec;12 (Suppl 3):iii107–iii112. doi: 10.1136/tc.12.suppl_3.iii107. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Dearlove J. V., Bialous S. A., Glantz S. A. Tobacco industry manipulation of the hospitality industry to maintain smoking in public places. Tob Control. 2002 Jun;11(2):94–104. doi: 10.1136/tc.11.2.94. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Drope J., Chapman S. Tobacco industry efforts at discrediting scientific knowledge of environmental tobacco smoke: a review of internal industry documents. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2001 Aug;55(8):588–594. doi: 10.1136/jech.55.8.588. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hirayama T. Non-smoking wives of heavy smokers have a higher risk of lung cancer: a study from Japan. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1981 Jan 17;282(6259):183–185. doi: 10.1136/bmj.282.6259.183. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Jamrozik K., Chapman S., Woodward A. How the NHMRC got its fingers burnt. Med J Aust. 1997 Oct 6;167(7):372–374. doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.1997.tb125103.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Muggli M. E., Forster J. L., Hurt R. D., Repace J. L. The smoke you don't see: uncovering tobacco industry scientific strategies aimed against environmental tobacco smoke policies. Am J Public Health. 2001 Sep;91(9):1419–1423. doi: 10.2105/ajph.91.9.1419. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Nemery B., Piette D. The hot air on passive smoking. Experts who evaluated studies seem not to have had relevant experience. BMJ. 1998 Aug 1;317(7154):348–348. doi: 10.1136/bmj.317.7154.348. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Ong E. K., Glantz S. A. Tobacco industry efforts subverting International Agency for Research on Cancer's second-hand smoke study. Lancet. 2000 Apr 8;355(9211):1253–1259. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)02098-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Yach D., Bialous S. A. Junking science to promote tobacco. Am J Public Health. 2001 Nov;91(11):1745–1748. doi: 10.2105/ajph.91.11.1745. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]