The reason we do what we do. This three-page Philip Morris internal report was published in the journal "Academic Freedoms/Ethics in Science" from May 1998. It details their fears over the "loss of credibility" they suffer when universities divest of their stocks.
What's fascinating about this (don't take our word for it, highlights from the document and a link to the full version are here for you) is the illusion, deliberate or otherwise, that they actually have a credible and constructive role to play in the scientific community and that they wish to continue in their prestigious role. E-BUTT's position is that make-believe can be fun, but this is just taking it too far.
You can read the full article here.
This Philip Morris report describes the problems both Philip Morris and the tobacco industry face when scientists and academics refuse to take tobacco funding for their research. Philip Morris notes the "loss of credibility of the Company, the tobacco industry, or individual scientists because they have received research funding by a tobacco company".
According to the report, the refusal of scientists and academics to accept tobacco money causes Philip Morris to lose credibility, with vast business impacts. If left checked, it can keep Philip Morris 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. The refusal also 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 Philip Morris makes it a business objective to promote "academic freedom", in other words the ability of academics and scientists to accept tobacco money.
Some quotes to consider:
Issue definition:
What's fascinating about this (don't take our word for it, highlights from the document and a link to the full version are here for you) is the illusion, deliberate or otherwise, that they actually have a credible and constructive role to play in the scientific community and that they wish to continue in their prestigious role. E-BUTT's position is that make-believe can be fun, but this is just taking it too far.
You can read the full article here.
This Philip Morris report describes the problems both Philip Morris and the tobacco industry face when scientists and academics refuse to take tobacco funding for their research. Philip Morris notes the "loss of credibility of the Company, the tobacco industry, or individual scientists because they have received research funding by a tobacco company".
According to the report, the refusal of scientists and academics to accept tobacco money causes Philip Morris to lose credibility, with vast business impacts. If left checked, it can keep Philip Morris 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. The refusal also 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 Philip Morris makes it a business objective to promote "academic freedom", in other words the ability of academics and scientists to accept tobacco money.
Some quotes to consider:
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 support research on important scientific and/or public health issues and consequently:Business objective:
- 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 witnesses. 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."
"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 the work, not by where the work was performed, nor who has funded it, specifically:For more information on the relationship between the tobacco industry and academic or scientific research funding, please consult the article or contact E-BUTT.
- 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."
