Stay Informed

Sign up for news & alerts

Already signed up?
Login here
What Can I Do?


Get Help
Need alcohol or drug help for yourself or someone else? GET HELP
Resources
Resources
Find useful publications, online documents & more.


DrugScreening.org


 

Industry Funds Controversial UCLA Tobacco Study
February 12, 2008

Email
Email
Print
Print
SubscribeSubscribe
News Summary

A UCLA addiction study that includes teen smokers, animal testing and unusual secrecy is being funded with $6 million from tobacco company Philip Morris, sparking condemnation from animal-rights activists as well as critics who decry the involvement of the tobacco industry, the Los Angeles Times reported Feb. 9.

The goal of the study led by UCLA professor Edythe London is to help people quit smoking and develop new addiction treatments. "We are doing this because we really want to save lives," London said. "I am really proud of what we are doing. We have a track record for contributing to science, and we would like to bring that to bear on the problem of nicotine addiction."

But London has been targeted for attacks by animal-rights groups outraged over the killing of lab monkeys for the study, including having her house flooded with a garden hose, causing $20,000 in damage. Antismoking groups, meanwhile, suspect that Philip Morris' real interest in the research is to develop a more addictive cigarette.

"It's stunning in this day and age that a university would do secret research for the tobacco industry on the brains of children," said Matt Meyers of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. "It raises fundamental questions about the integrity, honesty and openness of research anywhere at the University of California."

"I have no idea why Philip Morris decides to fund this antismoking research, but they do," replied Roberto Peccei, vice chancellor of research at UCLA. "As long as we do not feel that we are interfered with and that the research is done with the highest intentions, what's in the mind of the funder is irrelevant."

Philip Morris officials denied that they had any ulterior motives in funding the research.

Some of London's colleagues also expressed dismay over the study. "Edythe is a very good researcher, and frankly I'm shocked she would take the money," said Michael Cummings of the Roswell Park Cancer Institute in Buffalo, N.Y. "I think she's naive."

UCLA faculty members may accept funding for research from any source, but antismoking activists have been pushing the school to change that policy. Instead, the state's Board of Regents agreed to establish a committee to review research proposals that -- like London's study -- originate with the tobacco industry.

London maintains that it would be "immoral" not to take money from Philip Morris, and UCLA Chancellor Gene D. Block defended London and her study. "All the evidence leads me to believe that the research supported by Philip Morris is independent research of high quality," he said. "Edythe London's program is celebrated. She is studying addiction, important issues, human issues, that have an enormous effect on people's lives."

COMMENTS ON THIS ARTICLE:

Posted by Steve Heilig on 19 Feb 08 01:00 PM EST
I had the following letter published in the LA Times in response to this story. Officials there continued their willful denial. But as a journal editor, I can assure anyone that they are way behind the times - and ethical standards - on this. But I guess money is money. Steve Heilig (Join Together Fellow) http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-le-thursday14feb14,0,6176849.story?page=2 Letters to the editor February 14 2008 As a graduate of the UCLA School of Public Health, I am dismayed to learn of Philip Morris funding being accepted for tobacco research. The professed naivete of the undoubtedly qualified scientist and UCLA officials is more troubling. A modicum of research would show them that the only reason the tobacco industry takes such actions is to increase profits -- which necessitates addicting people. The industry's motive is far from "immaterial," as UCLA's vice chancellor for research must know -- it's called the profit motive. It will taint any published research that might result from this work. Steve Heilig San Francisco

Posted by Juan TalamonĂ­ on 13 Feb 08 03:36 PM EST
$ 6 million should be the amount for this researcher? She says "We are doing this because we really want to save lives" Would she certify How Much for each child or monkey?

Your Turn! Post a public comment (guidelines):

Name:

Comment:
(limit 200
words)

Enter this word: Change

GUIDELINES:

  1. Keep it clean, courteous, non-commercial, and on-topic.

  2. Please do not post personal requests for help or personal contact information (Click here for help resources).

  3. Proof your comments carefully. They are published immediately and cannot be edited by you or by us.

  4. Making your post readable with careful spelling and punctuation will strengthen your point.  Don't use ALL CAPS.

We reserve the right to remove comments that do not conform to these guidelines (Report an inappropriate comment).

Have questions or feedback? Contact us.