Egilman David, Howe Samantha
Brown University, Attleboro, MA 02703, USA.
Int J Occup Environ Health. 2007 Jan-Mar;13(1):118-24. doi: 10.1179/107735207800244938.
In response to several articles on corporate corruption of science that appeared earlier in this journal, a critic outlined an epistemological model based on an unsupported assertion that epidemiologic evidence is always required to support cause-effect relationships. This model, if adopted, would eliminate compensation to victims of toxic exposures and impede regulation of accepted hazards. Epidemiology is only one element in support of cause-effect determinations. The critic's proposal of an anti-health epidemiology was initially developed by corporations with the goal of providing defense in litigation, and is based not on science but on a corporate need to enhance profits at the expense of public health.
针对本刊早些时候发表的几篇关于企业科学腐败的文章，一位批评者勾勒了一种认识论模型，该模型基于一个无根据的断言，即总是需要流行病学证据来支持因果关系。如果采用这种模型，将取消对有毒暴露受害者的赔偿，并阻碍对公认危害的监管。流行病学只是支持因果关系判定的一个要素。这位批评者提出的反健康流行病学最初是由企业开发的，目的是在诉讼中提供辩护，它不是基于科学，而是基于企业以牺牲公众健康为代价提高利润的需求。
