UC to review the tobacco industry's funding of research

For more than three decades, epidemiologist James Enstrom has labored quietly at UCLA, studying the effect of tobacco smoke on human health. In recent years, his work has challenged the conventional view that second-hand smoke poses a serious health risk. He calls himself a lone wolf, a maverick and a rebel. His critics call him a turncoat. Enstrom once worked closely with the American Cancer Society, but today his sponsor is the tobacco industry. Over the last 15 years, he has received $1.4 million plus undisclosed consulting fees from the industry while producing research that supports industry views. One study used the American Cancer Society's database to contend that second-hand smoke was not a serious health hazard. Now Enstrom has become a symbol of industry influence for activists who support a proposal to bar University of California researchers from receiving tobacco industry money. The regents will take up the issue in May. Mirroring divisions elsewhere in UC, some university regents back a ban, while others oppose it on grounds of academic freedom. The 63-year-old Enstrom maintains that he is simply a scholar in 'pursuit of truth.' 'If I was so corrupt, how could I survive for 33 years at UCLA?' he asks. 'The effort is to smear me and libel me.'
Unfortunately for Enstrom, much of his correspondence with the tobacco industry became public during lawsuits filed by government agencies against the companies. Some of his letters are more revealing than he would have wished.

http://www.topix.net/content/trb/0303267042404886531828542820622735543934

quote:

UC to review the tobacco industry's funding of research

Or, this could be re-titled, "When antis eat their own"..

Bon appetite!

BTW, good post, Jemeyes!

quote:

Glantz called his findings 'crap.'

Glantz. The same guy who touts the Helena study which my $3 calculator found mathematically IMPOSSIBLE 30 minutes after I first read about the study in my local paper.

what I ment buy saying that James Enstrom is in the hot seat... meaning the anti's are trying to discredit his research and refering to him as a turncoat..and if anymore of his reserch is made public the antis will be blown out of the water..

I'm still waiting for when there will be a call for a ban on big pharma funding of academic research. BTW many universities have banned tobacco money for research for at least the past 10-15 years. I'm surprised to see that the UC system is such a late comer.

Engstrom and Kabat found a relative risk due to chronic exposure to SHS at 1.19 pretty much the same as everyone else. They basically admitted that this low number is not significant based on epidmmilogical standards. If you read his rebuttel to his critics he also points out that the Surgeon Generals meta-anaylisis did not include the E&K study and one other that would bring relative risk down to 1.05. About as close to zero as one can get. Engstrom also points out in his rebuttal that the SGs report manipulated numbers in the Cardenas study that raised relative risk in the SGs report. What you are seeing is a typical attack by tobacco control and the anti-smoking movement the people that are really guilty of misconduct.

The real problem is as we rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic the public is becoming accustomed to smoke free air.

If these bans are ever overturned the real consequences will be felt as these infirm are again exposed and their unchallenged immune systems over react to the enviroment which will only get them reinstated.

It looks like we will end up separate but equal in the long run.

http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2007/03/enstrom-cleared-of-scientific.html

Enstrom Cleared of Scientific Misconduct Charges; American Cancer Society Owes Him An Apology

After an internal investigation, the University of California has cleared UCLA professor and epidemiologist Dr. James Enstrom of all charges of scientific misconduct - charges that were leveled by the American Cancer Society.

According to an article in a recent issue of Nature, the American Cancer Society (ACS) had accused Dr. Enstrom of scientific misconduct in his role in a 2003 British Medical Journal study which questioned the link between secondhand smoke and lung cancer among nonsmokers.

That article - which used data from the ACS Cancer Prevention Study and found no significant increase in lung cancer risk associated with exposure to spousal smoking - has received massive publicity, serving as the focal point for a campaign to eliminate tobacco industry funding of research at the University of California.

According to the article, the accusation from the ACS prompted an internal University investigation to determine whether any scientific misconduct occurred:

"The latest round of debate began last autumn when the chief executive of the American Cancer Society, John Seffrin, wrote a letter to the University of California's board of regents arguing that tobacco funding should be banned. In the 12 October letter, Seffrin argued that tobacco-funded front groups "publicized misleading results" while giving "the false implication" that the society had endorsed the study. He cited Enstrom's BMJ article in particular, alleging that Enstrom "ignored" complaints of "fundamental methodological problems". ... Wyatt Hume, provost at the University of California's president's office, wrote to Seffrin saying that the university "takes allegations of scientific misconduct extremely seriously". If there is "specific information in support of an allegation of scientific misconduct against Enstrom", he wrote, he would relay it to officials at the Los Angeles campus so that they "can pursue the matter further". Shortly after, officials at the cancer society sent a seven-page list of what they cited as issues with the BMJ article."

Both authors of the study -- Dr. Enstrom and Dr. Geoffrey Kabat, formerly of SUNY Stony Brook, vehemently denied any scientific misconduct:
"In an interview, Enstrom acknowledged receiving the various letters and corresponding with the University of California's authorities. "I am working on this with regents' approval," he said. "I am being allowed to defend myself by the appropriate people." He "absolutely" denies any misconduct in the study. And Kabat objects to the university's regent policies being based "on allegations motivated by a political agenda and unsupported by any facts"."

The internal investigation failed to find any evidence of scientific misconduct. Dr. Enstrom was officially cleared in a March 22 letter from UC Provost and Executive Vice President for Academic and Health Affairs Wyatt R. Hume, who wrote:

"Chancellor Abrams initiated a thorough review of the materials forwarded by Dr. Thun. He asked two senior campus officials, both of them scientists, to independently review the materials. Both officials independently reached the conclusion that these materials provide no evidence of scientific misconduct."

"The materials Dr. Thun provided reflect the robust debate in the scientific literature about the research methodologies used by Dr. Enstrom in conducting the work that was the basis for the 2003 article published in the British Medical Journal. Disagreements regarding research methodology, and disputes about the soundness of scientific conclusions do not, however, constitute scientific misconduct. There is room for vehement and heartfelt disagreement about the soundness of particular scientific analysis and conclusions, and the scientific and academic community has well-established mechanisms for judging which results are ultimately deemed to withstand lose and sustained scientific scrutiny."

http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2007/03/enstrom-cleared-of-scientific.html

hum I searched for the orginal news artical that clears Dr.Enstrom of the scientific misconduct,,

all the local rags feel its not news worthy bet if they found him guilty of misconduct the new would have had a hay day

its a PDF file. in the article at the start where it says "cleared", the word is hyperlinked to the PDF below.

http://scientificintegrityinstitute.org/HumeUCOP032207.pdf

i like the name of that website link. i might have to explore that site when i have the time.

Now its time for Penn & Teller to face the fact that they had been played for fools by the antis. They withdrew their position on the episode on their "Bullshit" show dealing with second hand smoke based on Engstrom receiving tobacco pass through money. Now that Engstrom and Kabat were indicted (one letter from ACS), tried and proven to be innocent of any type of misconduct. Penn & Teller also need to apologize to E & K and withdraw all statements made based on the anti- BULLSHIT!