War on Carcinogens: Industry Disputes Human Relevance of Chemicals Causing Cancer in Laboratory Animals Based on Unproven Hypotheses, Using Kidney Tumors as an Example

Financial Conflicts of Interest and Study Results in Environmental and Occupational Health Research

“…32 However, the concern is not whether a financial COI is present but whether a publication bias occurs, as well as the direction and magnitude of the bias. A publication bias can be caused by multiple factors, including inappropriate study design, 21,33 biased interpretation or presentation of results, 22 legal obstruction preventing an author from publishing results, 34 and failure to report findings that are found to be damaging to the interests of the funding organization. 35 The findings presented in this analysis show a clear association between financial COI and reported findings, and the direction, magnitude, and observed ''dose-response'' effect of the relationship is consistent with the vast majority of similar studies in other scientific fields (eg, pharmacology, biomedicine, and so on), which demonstrates the need for further research in the field of environmental and occupational health to determine whether this observed association is a product of an underlying publication bias, in particular the omission of studies showing ''positive'' findings within the public forum.…”

“…To date, there have been an array of editorials, commentaries, news reports, anecdotal evidence, and descriptions of specific cases on the relationship between COI and reporting of positive or negative findings in environmental and occupational research. 16,19,21,22 However, there are no comprehensive analytical research articles evaluating the influence of COI on the presentation of findings by researchers in the field. Sporadic anecdotal evidence is informative but cannot specifically address the overall question of whether relationships are pervasive or influence results.…”

Ethics, morality, and conflicting interests: how questionable professional integrity in some scientists supports global corporate influence in public health

“…Denying the risks of environmentally hazardous pollutants including agricultural pesticides, persistent organic pollutants, fossil fuel soot, benzene, phthalates, formaldehyde, trichloroethylene, silica, and lead by the chemical industry. 2,14 Examples also include challenges that fossil fuel emissions cause global warming, rejection of chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) gases as contributing to the hole in the ozone layer, and denial that pollution and/or diesel exhaust causes increased in morbidity and mortality. 3.…”

“…Pernicious influence of industry on public health regulations through misleading reporting and misrepresentation of industry-sponsored research. The refutation of the adverse effects of certain chemicals as endocrine disruptors on the central and peripheral nervous system, 1,15 the influence of the chemical industry of carcinogenic chemicals (the ongoing ''war on carcinogens''), 2 and respective recent academic scandals.…”

“…trying to change the status quo weaken or eliminate regulatory protections), risk assessments, and public, environmental, and occupational health policy-makers. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9] Professional ethics and personal integrity, in addition to specialized competence, are vital to ensuring sound scientific research. However, conflicting interests may affect the ethics and morality of scientists engaging in such work.…”