Tobacco Control

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
[Advanced]

Tobacco Control 2005;14:217-219; doi:10.1136/tc.2005.012427
Copyright © 2005 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Read responses to this article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this link to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Add article to my folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Chapman, S
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Chapman, S

EDITORIAL

Tobacco industry research

Research from tobacco industry affiliated authors: need for particular vigilance

S Chapman

Correspondence to:
Professor Simon Chapman
School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Building A27, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia; simonchapman@health.usyd.edu.au


Is tobacco industry sponsored science ever likely to be trustworthy?

Keywords: tobacco industry; research

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

This issue of the Tobacco Control contains an account by Professor Eiji Yano1 complementing an earlier report2 about the disturbing circumstances of his association in the early 1990s with tobacco industry lawyers Covington and Burling—specifically, with the company’s then employee Christopher Proctor, now head of science and regulation at British American Tobacco (BAT). Dr Proctor and Mr Peter Lee (whom Yano accuses of publishing his research without his consent and distorting its meaning) were given an opportunity to respond to Yano’s allegations. Lee has done so,3 but Proctor offered no comment.

Proctor forwarded to Yano—the principal investigator on the study—a succession of drafts of a paper that he hoped Yano would then agree to "author". Lee advised me via email that as statistical consultant to the project he made "considerable" contributions to these drafts which did not bear his name. When Yano refused to agree with the . . . [Full text of this article]




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Tobacco ControlHome page
T Eissenberg
The time for tobacco industry sponsored PREP evaluation has arrived
Tob. Control, February 1, 2006; 15(1): 1 - 2.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Tobacco ControlHome page
P N Lee
Response to E Yano and S Chapman
Tob. Control, December 1, 2005; 14(6): 430 - 431.
[Full Text] [PDF]

eLetters:

Read all eLetters

Japan made a great progress in tobacco control.
Yoshitaka Kiriake
Tobacco Control Online, 21 Oct 2005 [Full text]
Courtrooom expert opinions should be published
David Egilman
Tobacco Control Online, 3 Jan 2006 [Full text]
Re: Courtrooom expert opinions should be published
Frederic Grannis
Tobacco Control Online, 27 Jan 2006 [Full text]



HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
Terms and conditions relating to subscriptions purchased online  ¦  Website terms and conditions  ¦  Privacy policy
Copyright © 2005 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.