Hirschhorn N, Bialous S Aguinaga, Shatenstein S
Tob Control. 2006 Jun;15(3):267-9. doi: 10.1136/tc.2005.012799.
Philip Morris (PM) launched the Philip Morris External Research Program (PMERP) in 2000, two years after the company agreed to the dissolution of two industry-wide, external research programmes: the Council for Tobacco Research (CTR) and the Center for Indoor Air Research (CIAR). Our previous analysis of PMERP's Request for Applications noted that PMERP's structure, while ostensibly concerned with new product development, was remarkably similar to that of CIAR. We also found the majority of designated peer-reviewers had previous ties to the tobacco industry and the research solicitation seemed to invite mitigating evidence concerning cigarettes and constituent risks. We concluded that a prime reason for PMERP's existence was to garner scientific credibility for PM.
To examine the grants awarded in the first round of PMERP and subsequent peer-reviewed publications.
Searches of industry documents available on the internet using PMERP and its variations as initial keywords; searches on Medline for publications from PMERP grantees.
Of 153 applications, 61 proposals were funded, 36 of which generated 78 scientific publications. Of these, 65% deal specifically with the tobacco plant or constituents. Over half the researchers listed as PMERP participants had previously received or applied for tobacco funding. One internal document indicated PMERP's objectives included gaining "credibility" and "goodwill", and finding "young scientists". In addition, PM has launched its own and more extensive internal product design research programme.
PMERP appears to exist less as a conduit for critical scientific inquiry than to fit into a corporate strategy intended to burnish PM's public image.
菲利普·莫里斯公司(PM)于2000年启动了菲利普·莫里斯外部研究项目(PMERP),此前两年该公司同意解散两个全行业范围的外部研究项目:烟草研究理事会(CTR)和室内空气研究中心(CIAR)。我们之前对PMERP申请要求的分析指出,PMERP的结构虽然表面上关注新产品开发,但与CIAR的结构非常相似。我们还发现,大多数指定的同行评审员此前与烟草行业有关联,而且研究招标似乎在邀请提供有关香烟及其成分风险的减轻证据。我们得出结论,PMERP存在的一个主要原因是为PM赢得科学信誉。
审查PMERP第一轮授予的资助以及随后经过同行评审的出版物。
使用PMERP及其变体作为初始关键词在互联网上搜索行业文件;在Medline上搜索PMERP受资助者发表的文章。
在153份申请中,61份提案获得资助,其中36份产生了78篇科学出版物。其中,65%专门涉及烟草植株或其成分。列为PMERP参与者的研究人员中,超过一半此前曾获得或申请过烟草行业的资助。一份内部文件表明,PMERP的目标包括获得“信誉”和“善意”,以及寻找“年轻科学家”。此外,PM还启动了自己更广泛的内部产品设计研究项目。
PMERP的存在似乎与其说是作为关键科学探究的渠道,不如说是为了符合旨在提升PM公众形象的企业战略。