More on the dynamics of dust generation: the effects of mixing and sanding chrysotile, calcium carbonate, and other components on the characteristics of joint-compound dusts

Scientific journals and conflict of interest disclosure: what progress has been made?

The article addresses the failure of the scientific community to create an effective mechanism to protect the integrity of the scientific literature from improper influence by vested interests. The seriousness of this threat is increasingly recognized. Scientists willing to distort scientific research to serve vested interests receive millions of dollars for their services. Organizations such as the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, the World Association of Medical Editors and the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) have launched initiatives to establish international standards for Conflict of Interest (COI) disclosure. COPE requires its 7,000 member journals to comply with its Code of Conduct for Journal Editors. While these initiatives are encouraging, they are internal educational endeavours only. Five examples are given showing failure of COPE member journals to comply with COPE's Code of Conduct. While COPE offers a complaint process, it involves only discussion and voluntary compliance. COPE neither polices nor enforces its Code. Instead of the current feeble, un-resourced process, which delivers neither transparency nor accountability, the article proposes the creation of a mechanism that will employ specific, effective measures to address contraventions of COI disclosure requirements.

Dust diseases and the legacy of corporate manipulation of science and law

BACKGROUND

The dust diseases silicosis and asbestosis were the first occupational diseases to have widespread impact on workers. Knowledge that asbestos and silica were hazardous to health became public several decades after the industry knew of the health concerns. This delay was largely influenced by the interests of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (MetLife) and other asbestos mining and product manufacturing companies.

OBJECTIVES

To understand the ongoing corporate influence on the science and politics of asbestos and silica exposure, including litigation defense strategies related to historical manipulation of science.

METHODS

We examined previously secret corporate documents, depositions and trial testimony produced in litigation; as well as published literature.

RESULTS

Our analysis indicates that companies that used and produced asbestos have continued and intensified their efforts to alter the asbestos-cancer literature and utilize dust-exposure standards to avoid liability and regulation. Organizations of asbestos product manufacturers delayed the reduction of permissible asbestos exposures by covering up the link between asbestos and cancer. Once the decline of the asbestos industry in the US became inevitable, the companies and their lawyers designed the state of the art (SOA) defense to protect themselves in litigation and to maintain sales to developing countries.

CONCLUSIONS

Asbestos product companies would like the public to believe that there was a legitimate debate surrounding the dangers of asbestos during the twentieth century, particularly regarding the link to cancer, which delayed adequate regulation. The asbestos-cancer link was not a legitimate contestation of science; rather the companies directly manipulated the scientific literature. There is evidence that industry manipulation of scientific literature remains a continuing problem today, resulting in inadequate regulation and compensation and perpetuating otherwise preventable worker and consumer injuries and deaths.

Protecting our science

In response to a recent court decision, the Annals of Occupational Hygiene is reviewing our procedures to ensure transparency in authorship and direct and indirect conflicts of interest. These improvements are intended to help protect the integrity of the science presented in the journal.