Tobacco firm demands university's research on children and smoking

[muriel_volestrangler]

Source: The Guardian

Stirling University is fighting attempts by one of the world's largest tobacco companies to gain detailed access to its research into the smoking habits and attitudes of teenagers.

Philip Morris International, which makes Marlboro cigarettes, wants the university's centre for tobacco control research to hand over its data on thousands of children who are smokers. The detail reveals their attitudes to smoking and reactions to packaging and advertising.
...
The university said the firm's application, originally made anonymously through a London law firm, was "vexatious" and rejected it. But Dunion has overruled the university and ordered it to respond to Philip Morris's request.

Professor Gerard Hastings, the centre's director, said the tobacco company was mining his research for confidential data on children's attitudes – details a firm would not be allowed to collect itself on medical ethics grounds.

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/sep/01/cigarette-university-smoking-research-information

---

I hope they can find a way to reject this. The last thing we want is tobacco companies getting more information on how to market to children.

[JDPriestly]

1. The tobacco companies have already done their research on this,

and they are free to do it in other countries.

They don't want this information for the reasons you might think.

[muriel_volestrangler]

2. OK, no need to be mystical about it

Why do they want it?

[JDPriestly]

4. So they can question it and make people think it is inaccurate.

[jberryhill]

10. Make people think WHAT is inaccurate?

If the data is not public, then what is the point of questioning its accuracy?

[JDPriestly]

11. Make people think the research was inaccurate.

Remember the big noise and finger-pointing over the hacking of data from a British University's research on climate change?

The tobacco companies are hoping to get private exchanges between scientists that criticize and make jokes and question results. That is my guess.

They are so foolish. Anybody in their 50s and 60s can see that their friends who are smokers die first in general. And most of the baby boomers who just can't stop smoking got hooked in their teens.

Also, of course the tobacco companies want all the research they can get for free so they can use it in countries that are less aware of the health hazards of smoking.

[jberryhill]

18. Ummm....

While I do not know the entire background to this particular news item, research conclusions presented without access to the underlying data set are garbage.

Scientific conclusions do not rest on the integrity of the people presenting results, they rest on reproducibility and independent checking of analysis.

Yes, I am familiar with the hullabaloo over intemperate commentary made by certain climate scientists, that had nothing to do with their data and conclusions. I am also familiar with the results of a review of the so-called "data" used to support the "vaccines cause autism" horseshit.

[defendandprotect]

19. Scientific integrity plays no role in research ... ??? ROFL

Global Warming deniers being a perfect example of that as they rake

in oil industry $$$$$$$$$ --

[jberryhill]

21. Try reading the sentence again

If someone says "our data shows that gravity makes things fall when you let them go" then it doesn't matter WHO is saying that, since the experiments can be reproduced.

Science is about whether a conclusion can be formed on the basis of competent analysis of the data, and not the personalities of the people doing it. Bias can be detected by attempting to analyze the same data. Without supporting data, conclusions mean nothing, no matter who is making them.

[defendandprotect]

23. Not all science is based on infallible outcomes -- neither is gravity -- !!

There are many things we don't know about gravity and how it works in the universe --

The science of Global Warming is still being contested by those on oil industry pay roll

in US -- though every other nation has acknowledged the seriousness of Global Warming.

Btw -- "Our Congress is under the control of the OIL and COAL industries" -- Al Gore

Nor is there even any way to prove that the sun will rise tomorrow -- !!

No matter what has happened yesterday, tomorrow is still in question --


With the rise of corporate/fascism we have corporate scientists on their payrolls --

and often the public isn't aware of those ties -- integrity of scientists is certainly

an important yardstick to the reliability of our science.

[JDPriestly]

28. The research that backs these conclusions has been made public

I believe. I think what they want is correspondence and discussion that is rightfully private and protected.

The court cases on this have been fought and won. The tobacco companies are just trying to make trouble.

I saw the effects of the Joe Camel ads on a little girl whose father showed her the ads as if they were funny cartoons. Although no one in her family smoked, she started smoking. Fortunately, she stopped later.

Smoking can kill. Not every smoker becomes its victim, but it raises the risk so high of death by gruesome cancer (and not just lung cancer -- check the data) or emphysema to say nothing of heart disease, that you can safely say that smoking kills far too often.

The statistical proof is in. Why should the tobacco companies be allowed to harass researchers in this way?

(As a high school student, my husband used to work in a laboratory that studied the effects of smoking. This was long, long ago and the proof was pretty obvious way back then. There is no denying that tobacco is a danger. There is no denying that tobacco companies used to market to kids.)

[monmouth]

5. One of the things some convenience stores are doing in poorer neighborhoods

is selling "loosies." I don't know the price per cigarette, but much less than buying by the pack..

[SwissTony]

6. I don't think that's legal in Scotland. nt.

[virgogal]

7. Never seen it in MA,I think it's illegal.

[saras]

9. What does legal have to do with it?

[gratuitous]

3. Hard to imagine Philip Morris needing more information on how to market to children

They're pretty accomplished at it already, and have had decades to research and refine their methods to attract new generations of smokers to buy their deadly and addictive (But legal! Oh, so legal) product.

But apparently, Philip Morris is ethically barred (quaint notion, no?) from doing some of the research that went into doing this study, and would like to make sure they haven't missed any tricks by plumbing the work of others, work that would ordinarily be off limits to them.

[defendandprotect]

20. True -- interesting that both in PORN and TOBACCO ads the trick of using very young-looking models .

arose --

many looking childlike --

[dogmoma56]

8. ~1200 a day die from smoking, 1080 were addicted as children, 540 addicted 12 or younger

tobacco companies only survive by child abuse/child endangerment and addicting an equal amount they kill every day.

by the time you're 18 your money is allocated to other necessities.. getting layed and some place private to screw.

[plumbob]

12. Why would ANYONE be entitled to this kind of info on university research?

Tell 'em to go fuck themselves.

[petronius]

13. Generally speaking, university-created data sets -should- be publicly available

Both because they are often created with government funding, and in support of the scientific need for verification and reproducibility. Stirling may not like the request, but unless Scotland's FOI laws are quite different from ours I'm pretty sure they'll have to accede to it in large part...

[Lance_Boyle]

15. This. Sunshine laws cover research funded by the public in many places. n/t

[AngryAmish]

16. If you are doing research everyone should see your data

Otherwise it is not science.

[defendandprotect]

14. THIS is what our Founders imagined ... capitalists/corporations pushing us all around ... ????

[AngryAmish]

17. How are we being pushed around?

This data exists. It was paid for by the public (of Scotland). The researchers are making claims based upon this data. You have to look at the data in order to check it and reproduce it. Otherwise it is not science.

[defendandprotect]

22. "Demand" is quite clear ....

The university said the firm's application, originally made anonymously through a London law firm, was "vexatious" and rejected it. But Dunion has overruled the university and ordered it to respond to Philip Morris's request.

This would be the equivalent of giving the GOP the codes to all of our voting computers -- :evilgrin:


Meanwhile, if you're asking in general how corporations/elites are pushing the public around,

then you need more help than I can give you!

[dipsydoodle]

24. Even Freedom of Information Acts

have their occasional downsides and I guess this is one such occasion.

[defendandprotect]

25. True -- An exception to every rule -- !! And corporations are quite willing to twist intent

and spirit of our laws -- !!

[AngryAmish]

26. Voting machine code should be open code

That way the vulnerabilities would be discovered.

[defendandprotect]

29. True -- and was trying to highlight the ironies of GOP control over the computers ...!!

[jberryhill]

27. You do realize that this is all happening in Scotland, yes?

[defendandprotect]

30. Tobacco companies don't advertise and sell tobacco in America?

:rofl: --