Junk Science And PR.

[Guest guest]

There are many internal links in this document that will not survive the servers

at . Click on the link below to access the links. The links are

highlighted with an asterisk here like this *.

 

http://www.ourstolenfuture.org/Industry/2001-11ongandglantz.htm

 

Ong, EK, and SA Glantz. 2001. Constructing “Sound Science” and “Good

Epidemiology”: Tobacco, Lawyers, and Public Relations Firms. American Journal of

Public Health 91:1749-1757.

 

 

" Public health professionals need to be aware that the " sound science " movement

is not an indigenous effort from within the profession to improve the quality of

scientific discourse, but reflects sophisticated public relations campaigns

controlled by industry executives and lawyers whose aim is to manipulate the

standards of scientific proof to serve the corporate interests of their clients.

"

 

Ong and Glantz reach this forceful conclusion after an analysis of * internal

documents made public as a result of litigation against the tobacco industry.

Their analysis reveals that the effort was not restricted to tobacco, but also

targeted other environmental contaminants. Indeed, the Chemical Manufacturers

Association co-funded, along with the Philip Morris Company, one of the most

vocal advocates for " sound science, " The Advancement for Sound Science Coalition

(TASSC). The Chemical Manufacterers Association has since been renamed the

American Chemistry Council. This organization (which has had a series of name

changes since its inception) has a long history of questionable practices in

debates about public health, as revealed by Bill Moyers' devastating analysis *

" Trade Secrets. "

 

The documents reviewed by Ong and Glantz unambiguously reveal that TASCC was

established by Philip Morris explicitly for the purpose of undermining EPA

efforts to regulate second-hand tobacco smoke. A European version of TASSC was

also spawned, called the " European Science & Environment Forum " to head off

development of regulations in Europe.

 

Philip Morris hired two PR firms, Burson-Marsteller and APCO, to design and

implement the strategy. Part of the strategy developed by the PR team was to

enlist other industries concerned about environmental regulations. In this way,

the tobacco origins of the ploy could remain hidden. The more that other

industries and issues participated in the effort, the more effective would the

smoke-screen be.

 

Another part of the strategy involved paying scientists and lawyers to advance

the concept of " good epidemiological practices " (GEP). While in principle this

sounds good, the express purpose was to ensure that standards were set that were

too high to allow regulations to be developed for second-hand smoke. From Ong

and Glantz:

" From 1994 to 2000, seemingly independent seminars on GEP have been conducted

by several organizations in the United States, United Kingdom, European Union,

and China. In fact, Philip Morris is connected to all these events. Federal

Focus, Inc, a nonprofit foundation based in Washington, DC, that engages in

research and education pertaining to federal government policy issues, conducted

seminars on epidemiology and risk assessment that appear to have been part of

PM's GEP program. "

The Philip Morris effort also spawned the " junk science " home page.*

http://www.junkscience.com writer/editor/publisher Steven Milloy worked for

TASSC, ultimately as its executive director before the sham operation was

allowed to fade out of existence:

" ...by 1995, a TASSC Web site was being planned with PM to distribute

scientific papers and polls to support PM's position. 44 TASSC and its Web site

are now defunct, but its executive director Steve Milloy, an adjunct scholar at

the Cato Institute (a libertarian think tank in Washington, DC, that has

received funds from the tobacco industry), now produces a " junk science " Web

site. Milloy's Web site continues TASSC's original work in criticizing and

" debunking " the science behind public health and environmental issues, including

secondhand smoke. " (emphasis added)

Milloy's association with tobacco continues, as * acknowledged on his website.

 

The documents reviewed by Ong and Glantz indicate that PM and its PR firms were

very pleased by TASSC's activities:

" APCO is very excited about the development and progress of TASSC. The national

coalition currently has over 300 members, with representation from business and

industry, the scientific and academic communities, and public officials. We are

looking forward to the successful launching of TASSC this fall. We believe the

groundwork we conduct to complete the launch will enable TASSC to expand and

assist Philip Morris in its efforts with issues in targeted states in 1994. "

(emphasis added) * [link to PDF of document]

www.OurStolenFuture will update this page with names of scientists who became

involved in the TASSC effort as we continue to review the documents on line and

other files.