{"title":"Warning: Anti-tobacco activism may be hazardous to epidemiologic science.","authors":"Carl V Phillips","doi":"10.1186/1742-5573-4-13","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This commentary accompanies two articles submitted to Epidemiologic Perspectives & Innovations in response to a call for papers about threats to epidemiology or epidemiologists from organized political interests. Contrary to our expectations, we received no submissions that described threats from industry or government; all were about threats from anti-tobacco activists. The two we published, by James E. Enstrom and Michael Siegel, both deal with the issue of environmental tobacco smoke. This commentary adds a third story of attacks on legitimate science by anti-tobacco activists, the author's own experience. These stories suggest a willingness of influential anti-tobacco activists, including academics, to hurt legitimate scientists and turn epidemiology into junk science in order to further their agendas. The willingness of epidemiologists to embrace such anti-scientific influences bodes ill for the field's reputation as a legitimate science.</p>","PeriodicalId":87082,"journal":{"name":"Epidemiologic perspectives & innovations : EP+I","volume":"4 ","pages":"13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-10-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2173898/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epidemiologic perspectives & innovations : EP+I","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-5573-4-13","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This commentary accompanies two articles submitted to Epidemiologic Perspectives & Innovations in response to a call for papers about threats to epidemiology or epidemiologists from organized political interests. Contrary to our expectations, we received no submissions that described threats from industry or government; all were about threats from anti-tobacco activists. The two we published, by James E. Enstrom and Michael Siegel, both deal with the issue of environmental tobacco smoke. This commentary adds a third story of attacks on legitimate science by anti-tobacco activists, the author's own experience. These stories suggest a willingness of influential anti-tobacco activists, including academics, to hurt legitimate scientists and turn epidemiology into junk science in order to further their agendas. The willingness of epidemiologists to embrace such anti-scientific influences bodes ill for the field's reputation as a legitimate science.
流行病学视角与创新》杂志曾征集关于有组织的政治利益集团对流行病学或流行病学家的威胁的论文,本评论随同两篇文章提交。与我们的预期相反,我们没有收到任何关于行业或政府威胁的投稿;所有投稿都是关于反烟草活动家的威胁。我们发表的詹姆斯-恩斯特龙(James E. Enstrom)和迈克尔-西格尔(Michael Siegel)的两篇文章都涉及环境烟草烟雾问题。本评论还补充了作者亲身经历的第三个反烟草活动家攻击合法科学的故事。这些故事表明,包括学者在内的有影响力的反烟草活动家愿意伤害合法的科学家,把流行病学变成垃圾科学,以推进他们的议程。流行病学家愿意接受这种反科学的影响,这对该领域作为一门合法科学的声誉来说是个坏兆头。