Misplaced Pages

Center for Indoor Air Research

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Tobacco industry front group

Center for Indoor Air Research
AbbreviationCIAR
FormationMarch 1988
DissolvedNovember 16, 1998; 26 years ago (1998-11-16)
TypeNon-profit
Legal statusDefunct
HeadquartersLinthicum, Maryland

The Center for Indoor Air Research (often abbreviated CIAR) was a tobacco industry front group established by three American tobacco companies—Philip Morris, R.J. Reynolds, and Lorillard—in Linthicum, Maryland, in 1988. The organization funded research on indoor air pollution, some of which pertained to passive smoking and some of which did not. It also funded research pertaining to causes of lung cancer other than passive smoking, such as diet. The organization disbanded in 1998 as a result of the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement.

History

The CIAR was founded in March 1988 by Philip Morris, R.J. Reynolds, and Lorillard. It was based in Linthicum, Maryland. The Swedish tobacco company Svenska Tobaks joined the organization in 1994. Soon after it was founded, it became the largest non-governmental source of funding for research on indoor air pollution. In 1998, a master settlement, known as the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement, was reached between American tobacco companies and a number of American state attorneys general. This agreement required the tobacco industry to disband the CIAR, as well as the Council for Tobacco Research. According to Alisa Tong and Stanton Glantz, the CIAR has "been essentially reconstituted as the Philip Morris External Research Program."

Stated mission

The original stated mission of the CIAR was to conduct "high-quality, objective research" pertaining to indoor air, including the health effects of environmental tobacco smoke (ETS). A confidential memo from 1988 described the CIAR as part of a plan to "carry out work on ETS to keep the controversy alive." In 1992, the reference to passive smoking was removed from the organization's mission statement. This was, in turn, followed by a decrease in the amount of research funded by the CIAR that pertained to the health effects of passive smoking.

Structure

The CIAR awarded both "peer-reviewed" projects after review by their Science Advisory Board, as well as "special-reviewed" projects awarded after review by tobacco company executives. The aim of the CIAR's peer-reviewed projects was mainly to divert attention from ETS as an indoor air pollutant, whereas special-reviewed projects were more likely to produce evidence that the tobacco industry could later use to argue against anti-smoking legislation.

Funding of scientific research

From 1989 to 1999, the CIAR funded at least 244 published studies. The CIAR has been called "a buffer between the tobacco industry and scientists." This refers to the fact that many scientists who published research favorable to the industry's position on ETS, although unwilling to accept funds directly from the tobacco industry, were willing to (and often did) accept funds from the CIAR. The majority of peer-reviewed studies funded by the CIAR were unrelated to ETS, and served instead to divert attention from its health effects and focus attention on other indoor air toxins instead. Anti-smoking activists argued that the center was a front for the tobacco industry, and that the industry funding the center received "tainted" the research it funded.

Beginning in 1988, Philip Morris funded a study investigating the air quality in the cabin of Scandinavian Airlines planes. Philip Morris then hired the Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research (TNO) to collect data for the study, though the industry, through CIAR, still controlled the study's conclusions and the way its results were presented. Accordingly, CIAR subsequently asked TNO to remove 21 pages of analysis from the report, and TNO complied. In 1992, a CIAR-funded study conducted by Healthy Buildings International was published in Environment International. A Congressional inquiry subsequently found that 25% of the data may have been falsified, although the study's author has disputed this conclusion. Also in 1992, the CIAR awarded $72,760 to Antonio H. Miguel, Jari Cardoso, and Aquino Neto to study indoor air quality in offices and restaurants in the Brazilian cities of São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro. The CIAR also awarded Miguel additional funding in 1998 for another indoor air quality study, this time measuring air quality in Santiago, Chile, and São Paulo, Brazil. This study was based on the hypothesis that although both outdoor air and ETS could increase aerosol concentrations indoors, outdoor air was responsible for a significantly larger proportion of indoor aerosol concentrations than ETS was. The CIAR also funded research by Arthur Penn, of New York University, into the effects of exposure to tobacco smoke in chickens from 1990 to 1994. After some of his studies found that this exposure caused increased plaque buildup in the chickens' arteries, the CIAR refused to fund any more of his work. Another study funded by the CIAR was authored by Johns Hopkins researcher Genevieve Matanoski in 1995, and claimed that some cases of lung cancer previously attributed to passive smoking might actually be caused by other factors, such as diet. Another was the "16 cities study", authored by Roger Jenkins and published in 1996, examining levels of second-hand smoke measured by subjects in sixteen different cities at work and at home. The study concluded that homes were a greater source of exposure to second-hand smoke than workplaces, which led the tobacco industry to use its conclusions to argue that workplace smoking restrictions were unnecessary. This study has been criticized for suffering from "serious biases" that led to low values of exposure being reported.

Epidemiologic studies

In 1995, a CIAR-funded study on secondhand smoke exposure by Peter Lee was published. The tobacco industry hoped that the study would undermine the validity of a 1981 study by Takeshi Hirayama, which reported a positive association between secondhand smoke and lung cancer risk. The final paper concluded that studies like Hirayama's were subject to misclassification bias, and therefore, had "little scientific basis". In 1995, the journal Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology published two studies funded by the CIAR examining the association between ETS and heart disease. Both studies concluded that ETS exposure from spouses did not increase the risk of heart disease, and that previous conclusions to the contrary were due to publication bias. Both of these studies have been criticized for suffering from exposure misclassification, because both studies failed to distinguish between current and former smokers. In 2003, a study funded by the center was published in the BMJ. Authored by James Enstrom and Geoffrey Kabat, the study found little association between secondhand smoke and coronary heart disease or lung cancer. This study has been criticized for failing to distinguish between those who were exposed to second-hand smoke and those who were not, because, according to the American Cancer Society, the study's participants were enrolled in 1959, "when exposure to secondhand smoke was so pervasive that virtually everyone was exposed to ETS, whether or not they were married to a smoker." In a US racketeering lawsuit against tobacco companies, the Enstrom and Kabat paper was cited by the US District Court as "a prime example of how nine tobacco companies engaged in criminal racketeering and fraud to hide the dangers of tobacco smoke."

Efforts to influence IARC

In the 1990s, the CIAR's executive director met with head investigators from the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), hoping to persuade them to cooperate with CIAR. These efforts were mostly unsuccessful, though the CIAR did hire one IARC investigator to conduct a study. Tobacco companies, through the CIAR, subsequently funded research aimed at undermining the validity of epidemiologic research, intending to have these studies published before the IARC released its then-ongoing study on secondhand smoke. In 1997, the CIAR co-hosted a conference in China, along with the Guangzhou Institute for Chemical Carcinogens and the Chinese Epidemiological Association. The conference, entitled "International Workshop on Risk Assessment and Good Epidemiological Practices", brought together over 100 lung cancer researchers, some of whom had received tobacco industry funding. The workshop was part of the industry's "Asia-specific IARC preparation" effort to convince the public and the media to view the IARC report skeptically when it was published.

See also

References

  1. ^ Muggli, ME; Forster, JL; Hurt, RD; Repace, JL (September 2001). "The smoke you don't see: uncovering tobacco industry scientific strategies aimed against environmental tobacco smoke policies". American Journal of Public Health. 91 (9): 1419–1423. doi:10.2105/ajph.91.9.1419. PMC 1446797. PMID 11527774.
  2. Kessler 2006, pp. 1380–1383
  3. "6 Members of Panel on Smoking Have Ties to Tobacco Group". New York Times. Associated Press. 10 November 1990. Retrieved 19 August 2015.
  4. ^ Bero, LA. (2005). "Tobacco industry manipulation of research". Public Health Rep. 120 (2): 200–208. doi:10.1177/003335490512000215. PMC 1497700. PMID 15842123.
  5. Murphy, Michelle (2006). Sick Building Syndrome and the Problem of Uncertainty. Duke University Press. p. 82. ISBN 978-0822336716.
  6. Schick, S. F; Glantz, S. A (1 June 2007). "Old ways, new means: tobacco industry funding of academic and private sector scientists since the Master Settlement Agreement". Tobacco Control. 16 (3): 157–164. doi:10.1136/tc.2006.017186. PMC 2598497. PMID 17565125.
  7. ^ Tong, EK.; Glantz, SA. (Oct 2007). "Tobacco industry efforts undermining evidence linking secondhand smoke with cardiovascular disease". Circulation. 116 (16): 1845–1854. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.715888. PMID 17938301.
  8. ^ Barnes, D. E.; Bero, L. A. (1 September 1996). "Industry-Funded Research and Conflict of Interest: An Analysis of Research Sponsored by the Tobacco Industry through the Center for Indoor Air Research". Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law. 21 (3): 515–542. doi:10.1215/03616878-21-3-515. PMID 8784687.
  9. ^ "American Cancer Society Condemns Tobacco Industry Study for Inaccurate Use of Data" (PDF). American Cancer Society. 15 May 2003. Retrieved 21 August 2015.
  10. Bero, L (2003). "Implications of the tobacco industry documents for public health and policy". Annual Review of Public Health. 24: 267–288. doi:10.1146/annurev.publhealth.24.100901.140813. PMID 12415145.
  11. Hirschhorn, N; Bialous, SA; Shatenstein, S (September 2001). "Philip Morris' new scientific initiative: an analysis". Tobacco Control. 10 (3): 247–252. doi:10.1136/tc.10.3.247. PMC 1747596. PMID 11544389.
  12. Drope, J (1 August 2001). "Tobacco industry efforts at discrediting scientific knowledge of environmental tobacco smoke: a review of internal industry documents". Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health. 55 (8): 588–594. doi:10.1136/jech.55.8.588. PMC 1731959. PMID 11449018.
  13. Brandt, Allan (2009). The Cigarette Century: The Rise, Fall, and Deadly Persistence of the Product That Defined America. Basic Books. p. 294. ISBN 978-0465070480.
  14. Shane, Scott (14 November 1998). "Tobacco deal would disband controversial research center". Baltimore Sun. Archived from the original on 25 March 2016. Retrieved 8 July 2016.
  15. Neilsen, K (1 March 2004). "A tobacco industry study of airline cabin air quality: dropping inconvenient findings". Tobacco Control. 13 (90001): 20i–29. doi:10.1136/tc.2003.004721. PMC 1766143. PMID 14985613.
  16. McKee, M (1 September 2000). "Smoke and mirrors: clearing the air to expose the tactics of the tobacco industry" (PDF). The European Journal of Public Health. 10 (3): 161–163. doi:10.1093/eurpub/10.3.161.
  17. ^ Barnoya, J; Glantz, S (December 2002). "Tobacco industry success in preventing regulation of secondhand smoke in Latin America: the "Latin Project"". Tobacco Control. 11 (4): 305–314. doi:10.1136/tc.11.4.305. PMC 1747685. PMID 12432156.
  18. Butler, Kiera (16 October 2007). "Tobacco Industry Cover Up". Mother Jones. Retrieved 19 August 2015.
  19. Stolberg, Sheryl (28 May 1994). "Researchers Try to Separate Smoking Fact From Fiction". Los Angeles Times. p. 3. Retrieved 19 August 2015.
  20. Shane, Scott (17 May 1998). "Center tied to tobacco industry". Baltimore Sun. Retrieved 19 August 2015.
  21. Jenkins, RA; Palausky, A; Counts, RW; Bayne, CK; Dindal, AB; Guerin, MR (1996). "Exposure to environmental tobacco smoke in sixteen cities in the United States as determined by personal breathing zone air sampling". Journal of Exposure Analysis and Environmental Epidemiology. 6 (4): 473–502. PMID 9087866.
  22. ^ Drope, J (1 March 2004). "Tobacco industry efforts to present ventilation as an alternative to smoke-free environments in North America". Tobacco Control. 13 (90001): 41i–47. doi:10.1136/tc.2003.004101. PMC 1766145. PMID 14985616.
  23. Hong, M.-K. (14 December 2002). "How the tobacco industry responded to an influential study of the health effects of secondhand smoke". BMJ. 325 (7377): 1413–1416. doi:10.1136/bmj.325.7377.1413. PMC 1124865. PMID 12480862.
  24. Enstrom, JE.; Kabat, GC. (May 2003). "Environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality in a prospective study of Californians, 1960–98". BMJ. 326 (7398): 1057. doi:10.1136/bmj.326.7398.1057. PMC 155687. PMID 12750205.
  25. Dalton R (March 2007). "Passive-smoking study faces review". Nature. 446 (7133): 242. Bibcode:2007Natur.446..242D. doi:10.1038/446242a. PMID 17361147. S2CID 27691890.
  26. Ong, Elisa K; Glantz, Stanton A (April 2000). "Tobacco industry efforts subverting International Agency for Research on Cancer's second-hand smoke study". The Lancet. 355 (9211): 1253–1259. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(00)02098-5. PMID 10770318. S2CID 25145666.
  27. Ong, Elisa K.; Glantz, Stanton A. (November 2001). "Constructing "Sound Science" and "Good Epidemiology": Tobacco, Lawyers, and Public Relations Firms". American Journal of Public Health. 91 (11): 1749–1757. doi:10.2105/AJPH.91.11.1749. PMC 1446868. PMID 11684593.

External links

Categories: