[Peace-discuss] Monbiot: secret funding behind health research

[Lisa Chason]

a bit off subject but I thought might be of interest to some on our list.
Can't help asking at the end "and who's funding the journalists?"
 
Exposed: the secret corporate funding behind health research 

Academics and the media have failed dismally to ask the crucial question of
scientists' claims: who is paying you? 

By George Monbiot

02/07/06 " <http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,,1703909,00.html>
The Guardian" -- -- Three weeks ago, while looking for something else, I
came across one of the most extraordinary documents I have ever read. It
relates to an organisation called Arise (Associates for Research into the
Science of Enjoyment). Though largely forgotten today, in the 1990s it was
one of the world's most influential public-health groups. First I should
explain what it claimed to stand for.

Arise, founded in 1988, seems to have been active until 2004. It described
itself as "a worldwide association of eminent scientists who act as
independent commentators". Its purpose, these eminent scientists said, was
to show how "everyday pleasures, such as eating chocolate, smoking, drinking
tea, coffee and alcohol, contribute to the quality of life".

It maintained that there were good reasons for dropping our inhibitions and
indulging ourselves. "Scientific studies show that enjoying the simple
pleasures in life, without feeling guilty, can reduce stress and increase
resistance to disease ... Conversely, guilt can increase stress and
undermine the immune system ... This can lead to, for instance,
forgetfulness, eating disorders, heart problems or brain damage." The
"health police", as Arise sometimes called them, could be causing more harm
than good.

Arise received an astonishing amount of coverage. Between September 1993 and
March 1994, for example, it generated 195 newspaper articles and radio and
television interviews, in places such as the Wall Street Journal, the
International Herald Tribune, the Independent, the Evening Standard, El
País, La Repubblica, Rai and the BBC. Much of this coverage resulted from a
Mori poll, called Naughty but Nice, that Arise claimed to have commissioned,
into the guilty pleasures people enjoyed most. Here is a typical example
(this one from Reuters):

"Puritanical health workers who dictate whether people should smoke or drink
alcohol and coffee are trying to ruin the quality of life, a group of
academics said ... 'Many of us hold the view that it is a person's right to
enjoy these pleasures ...' said Professor David Warburton, a professor of
pharmacology at Reading University in England ... 'Much of health promotion
is based on misinformation. It is politically driven'."

The Today programme gave Warburton an uncontested interview in its prime
spot - at 8.20am. He extolled the calming properties of cigarettes and
poured scorn on public-health messages. Arise has also featured eight times
in the Guardian. Coverage like this continued until October 2004, when the
Times repeated Arise's claim that we should stop "worrying about often
ill-founded health scares" and "listen to our bodies, which naturally seek
to protect themselves from disease by doing the things we enjoy." In
hundreds of articles and transcripts covering its claims, I have found just
one instance of a journalist - Madeleine Bunting in the Guardian -
questioning either Arise's science or the motivation of the scientists.

Warburton, who claimed to run the group, was head of psychopharmacology at
the University of Reading. While Arise was active he published at least a
dozen articles on nicotine in the academic press. In 1989, in the
Psychologist, he mocked the US surgeon general's finding that nicotine is
addictive. Most of his articles were published in the journal
Psychopharmacology, of which he was a senior editor. They maintained that
nicotine improved both attention and memory. I have read seven of these
papers. On none of them could I find a declaration of financial interests,
except for two grants from the Wellcome Trust.

In 1998, as part of a settlement of a class action against the tobacco
companies in the US, the firms were obliged to place their internal
documents in a public archive. Among them is the one I came across last
month. It is a memo from an executive in the corporate services department
of Philip Morris - the world's largest tobacco company - to one of her
colleagues. The title is "Arise 1994-95 Activities and Funding". "I had a
meeting," she began, "with Charles Hay and Jacqui Smithson (Rothmans) to
agree on the 1994-1995 activity plan for Arise and to discuss the funding
needed. Enclosed is a copy of our presentation."

This showed that in the previous financial year Arise had received $373,400:
$2,000 from Coca-Cola, $900 from other firms and the rest - over 99% - from
Philip Morris, British American Tobacco, RJ Reynolds and Rothmans. In
1994-95 its budget would be $773,750. Rothmans and RJ Reynolds had each
committed to provide $200,000, and BAT "has also shown interest". She
suggested that Philip Morris put up $300,000. Then the memo becomes even
more interesting.

"The previous 'Naughty but Nice' Mori poll proved to be very effective in
getting wide media coverage. The exercise will be repeated this year on the
theme of 'Stress in the Workplace' ... A draft questionnaire was already
submitted to [Tony Andrade, Philip Morris's senior lawyer] and [Matt
Winokur, its director of regulatory affairs] for comments." "We decided to
hold" Arise's next conference in Europe, it continued, because of "positive
European media coverage". Philip Morris had appointed a London PR agency to
run the media operation, set up Arise's secretariat and help to recruit new
members. Arise's "major spending authorisation and approval would be handled
by an 'informal' Budget Committee involving PM, Rothmans and possibly RJR
and BAT".

The memo suggests Arise was run not by eminent scientists but by eminent
tobacco companies. This impression is reinforced by another document in the
tobacco archive, which explains how the group began. "In 1988 the US Surgeon
General said: 'Nicotine was as addictive as heroin or cocaine.' The industry
responded. A group of academics was identified and called together to: -
review the science of substance abuse, - separate nicotine from these
substances".

I sent a list of questions to Warburton, but he told me that he did not have
time to answer them. Reading University replied that it knew Warburton's
work had been sponsored by the tobacco companies. Indeed, the university
itself had received over £300,000 from Arise, but "from the university's
standpoint, the source of funding for Arise has always been vague". It
revealed that "Professor Warburton and the University of Reading were in
receipt of BAT research funding between 1995 and 2003". But at no time had
it questioned this funding or sought to oblige Warburton to declare his
interests in academic papers. Astonishingly, it suggested that this would
amount to "censorship" and "restricting academic freedom".

The journal Psychopharmacology told me it was unaware Warburton had been
taking money from tobacco firms. "It is an author's responsibility to
disclose sources of funding, and widely understood that journals themselves
do not expect to police this declaration." After a long career untroubled by
questions about his interests or professional ethics, Warburton retired in
2003. He still lectures at Reading as an emeritus professor.

How much more science is being published in academic journals with
undeclared interests like these? How many more media campaigns against
"overregulation", the "compensation culture" or "unfounded public fears"
have been secretly funded and steered by corporations? How many more
undeclared recipients of corporate money have been appearing on the Today
programme, providing free public relations for their sponsors? This case
suggests that academia and the media have failed dismally to exercise
sufficient scepticism. Surely there is one obvious question with which every
journal and every journalist should begin. "Who's funding you?"
 
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/private/peace-discuss/attachments/20060208/ee6b4ce5/attachment-0001.html