Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2005 Dec;62(12):843-6.
doi: 10.1136/oem.2005.021410.

The threat to scientific integrity in environmental and occupational medicine

Affiliations

The threat to scientific integrity in environmental and occupational medicine

S Tong et al. Occup Environ Med. 2005 Dec.

Abstract

Over the last century, environmental and occupational medicine has played a significant role in the protection and improvement of public health. However, scientific integrity in this field has been increasingly threatened by pressure from some industries and governments. For example, it has been reported that the tobacco industry manipulated eminent scientists to legitimise their industrial positions, irresponsibly distorted risk and deliberately subverted scientific processes, and influenced many organisations in receipt of tobacco funding. Many environmental whistleblowers were sued and encountered numerous personal attacks. In some countries, scientific findings have been suppressed and distorted, and scientific advisory committees manipulated for political purposes by government agencies. How to respond to these threats is an important challenge for environmental and occupational medicine professionals and their societies. The authors recommend that professional organisations adopt a code of ethics that requires openness from public health professionals; that they not undertake research or use data where they do not have freedom to publish their results if these data have public health implications; that they disclose all possible conflicts; that the veracity of their research results should not be compromised; and that their research independence be protected through professional and legal support. The authors furthermore recommend that research funding for public health not be directly from the industry to the researcher. An independent, intermediate funding scheme should be established to ensure that there is no pressure to analyse data and publish results in bad faith. Such a funding system should also provide equal competition for funds and selection of the best proposals according to standard scientific criteria.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Nature. 2004 Mar 11;428(6979):206-7 - PubMed
    1. Ethics Behav. 1993;3(1):73-93 - PubMed
    1. Pediatrics. 1994 Sep;94(3):408-10 - PubMed
    1. JAMA. 1999 Oct 20;282(15):1453-7 - PubMed
    1. Nat Med. 1999 Jan;5(1):15-7 - PubMed