Abstract
The Lancet's publication of Elisa Ong and Stanton Glantz's paper1Ong EK Glantz SA Tobacco industry's efforts subverting International Agency for Research on Cancer's second‐hand smoke study.Lancet. 2000; 355: 1253-1259Summary Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (154) Google Scholar is important to those of us who work in tobacco control. My compliments are qualified only marginally by the accompanying editorial.2Editorial. Resisting smoke and spin.Lancet. 2000; 355: 1197Summary Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (5) Google ScholarThe Lancet and many others are too quick to evade their responsibility for the tobacco industry being able to operate in Europe virtually without any serious challenge from the medical/health establishment.You say that the source of the letter you cite was “unknown to the editors of the time”, many in the tobaccocontrol community would have been immediately suspicious and would have probed its origin. The game that the tobacco industry plays in buying fronts and in dispensing disinformation through academic consultants has been known to health advocates for at least two decades. Why have others been slow to catch on?I am a critic of the USA on many issues—from that country's fascination with guns to the failure to distribute the nation's wealth in an equitable way—but I admire the way many Americans, including Ong and Glantz, are seeking accountability from the tobacco industry. My hope is that Europe soon will turn on the industry as well. The Lancet's publication of Elisa Ong and Stanton Glantz's paper1Ong EK Glantz SA Tobacco industry's efforts subverting International Agency for Research on Cancer's second‐hand smoke study.Lancet. 2000; 355: 1253-1259Summary Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (154) Google Scholar is important to those of us who work in tobacco control. My compliments are qualified only marginally by the accompanying editorial.2Editorial. Resisting smoke and spin.Lancet. 2000; 355: 1197Summary Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (5) Google ScholarThe Lancet and many others are too quick to evade their responsibility for the tobacco industry being able to operate in Europe virtually without any serious challenge from the medical/health establishment. You say that the source of the letter you cite was “unknown to the editors of the time”, many in the tobaccocontrol community would have been immediately suspicious and would have probed its origin. The game that the tobacco industry plays in buying fronts and in dispensing disinformation through academic consultants has been known to health advocates for at least two decades. Why have others been slow to catch on? I am a critic of the USA on many issues—from that country's fascination with guns to the failure to distribute the nation's wealth in an equitable way—but I admire the way many Americans, including Ong and Glantz, are seeking accountability from the tobacco industry. My hope is that Europe soon will turn on the industry as well.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
