Search

Background Critical knowledge of what we know about health and disease, risk factors, causation, prevention, and treatment, derives from epidemiology. Unfortunately, its methods and language can be misused and improperly applied. A repertoire of methods, techniques, arguments, and tactics are used by some people to manipulate science, usually in the service of powerful interests, and particularly those with a financial stake related to toxic agents. Such interests work to foment uncertainty, cast doubt, and mislead decision makers by seeding confusion about cause-and-effect relating to population health. We have compiled a toolkit of the methods used by those whose interests are not aligned with the public health sciences. Professional epidemiologists, as well as those who rely on their work, will thereby be more readily equipped to detect bias and flaws resulting from financial conflict-of-interest, improper study design, data collection, analysis, or interpretation, bringing greater clarity—not only to the advancement of knowledge, but, more immediately, to policy debates. Methods The summary of techniques used to manipulate epidemiological findings, compiled as part of the 2020 Position Statement of the International Network for Epidemiology in Policy (INEP) entitled Conflict-of-Interest and Disclosure in Epidemiology, has been expanded and further elucidated in this commentary. Results Some level of uncertainty is inherent in science. However, corrupted and incomplete literature contributes to confuse, foment further uncertainty, and cast doubt about the evidence under consideration. Confusion delays scientific advancement and leads to the inability of policymakers to make changes that, if enacted, would—supported by the body of valid evidence—protect, maintain, and improve public health. An accessible toolkit is provided that brings attention to the misuse of the methods of epidemiology. Its usefulness is as a compendium of what those trained in epidemiology, as well as those reviewing epidemiological studies, should identify methodologically when assessing the transparency and validity of any epidemiological inquiry, evaluation, or argument. The problems resulting from financial conflicting interests and the misuse of scientific methods, in conjunction with the strategies that can be used to safeguard public health against them, apply not only to epidemiologists, but also to other public health professionals. Conclusions This novel toolkit is for use in protecting the public. It is provided to assist public health professionals as gatekeepers of their respective specialty and subspecialty disciplines whose mission includes protecting, maintaining, and improving the public’s health. It is intended to serve our roles as educators, reviewers, and researchers.

Epidemiology is a core science that informs the development of rational public health policy. The obligation of epidemiologists, as part of the community of health scientists, is to protect public health and safety from established, as well as suspected avoidable harms. This obligation is discussed in the context of ecological and related environmental damage. It underscores why ecological integrity is a concern for those in public health and, indeed, with the survival of our species.

This review integrates historical developments and key events in bringing ethics into epidemiology in general and into environmental epidemiology in particular. The goal is to provide context for and discern among the various approaches and motivations that drive the need for ethical conduct in support of the public interest. The need for ethics guidelines in epidemiology is different from developments in other biomedical-related fields by virtue of its focus on populations rather than on individuals. The need for ethics guidelines in environmental epidemiology as a subspecialty of epidemiology stems from the larger scale of its mission than that of epidemiology per se. Ethics guidelines in the field of environmental epidemiology have been established. They articulate not only the profession’s core values and mission, but more specifically, they address the environmental epidemiologist’s obligations to the participants in research, to colleagues, and to employers. They are the product of consensus, scholarship, and diligent stewardship over several decades. The next challenge is ensuring their value and impact. The forces that support professional and institutional success, and the power of special interests, are the major threats to achieving the goals of ethical conduct and research for the public good. In environmental epidemiology, these threats have global implications.

Background The sciences, and especially the research subspecialties of occupational and environmental health, are being misused. The misuse serves to interfere with the advancement of policies that depend on rational evidence needed for policies to protect public health. Methods We selectively surveyed the independent scientific literature. In addition, the efforts of respected international professional organizations of scientists whose focus is on maintaining and improving public health have been considered. This commentary is unique in assembling not only the factual basis for sounding alarms about significant bias in occupational and environmental health research, but also about the manipulative mechanisms used, and, in turn, the methods needed to keep science honest. Results Scientific integrity is based on the principle that research is conducted as objectively as possible; it cannot be compromised by special interests whose primary goals are neither to seek truth nor to protect human health. Evidence demonstrates a significant risk of bias in research reports sponsored by financial interests. Practices of corporate malfeasance include the orchestrated contamination of editorial boards of peer-reviewed scientific journals with industry apologists; interference with activities of national regulatory bodies and international review panels engaged in safeguarding occupational and public health; constructing roadblocks by capitalizing on uncertainty to undermine scientific consensus for much-needed government regulation of carcinogenic, endocrine-disrupting and/or immunotoxic agents; promoting “causation” criteria that lack foundation and effectively block workers’ access to legal remedies for harms from occupational exposures resulting in morbidity and premature mortality; and, violating standards of professional conduct by seducing reputable scientists with financial incentives that make them beholden to corporate agendas. Conclusions Well-orchestrated assaults on science continue unabated and must now be met head-on. Success could be achieved by promoting and protecting the integrity of research. Furthermore, avoiding influence by conflicted corporate affiliates in occupational and public health regulations is needed. Identifying, managing and, ideally, eliminating corporate influence on science and science policy are needed to protect research integrity. Protecting the public’s health, preventing disease, and promoting well-being must be the unambiguous goals of research in occupational and environmental health.

Radiation exposure has long been a concern for the public, policy makers, and health researchers. Beginning with radar during World War II, human exposure to radio-frequency radiation1 (RFR) technologies has grown substantially over time. In 2011, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) reviewed the published literature and categorized RFR as a “possible” (Group 2B) human carcinogen. A broad range of adverse human health effects associated with RFR have been reported since the IARC review. In addition, three large-scale carcinogenicity studies in rodents exposed to levels of RFR that mimic lifetime human exposures have shown significantly increased rates of Schwannomas and malignant gliomas, as well as chromosomal DNA damage. Of particular concern are the effects of RFR exposure on the developing brain in children. Compared with an adult male, a cell phone held against the head of a child exposes deeper brain structures to greater radiation doses per unit volume, and the young, thin skull's bone marrow absorbs a roughly 10-fold higher local dose. Experimental and observational studies also suggest that men who keep cell phones in their trouser pockets have significantly lower sperm counts and significantly impaired sperm motility and morphology, including mitochondrial DNA damage. Based on the accumulated evidence, we recommend that IARC re-evaluate its 2011 classification of the human carcinogenicity of RFR, and that WHO complete a systematic review of multiple other health effects such as sperm damage. In the interim, current knowledge provides justification for governments, public health authorities, and physicians/allied health professionals to warn the population that having a cell phone next to the body is harmful, and to support measures to reduce all exposures to RFR.

This chapter focuses on the role of vested interests and dominant narratives in science as these pertain to risk management and risk communication. Misconduct and dishonesty in science have been known since the times of Galileo Galilea and Newton in the basic and physical sciences. Epidemiology is the applied science of population health. The results from epidemiological research are used to inform evidence-based policy. The work of epidemiologists involves navigating through all types of bias that can influence research in public health. The International Joint Policy Committee of the Societies of Epidemiology works at the interface of research and policy. By persistently holding corporate leaders' feet to the fire on their obligation to protect worker and passenger safety and health based on valid evidence, decency, common sense, and rational policy should eventually prevail. The obligation of the industry is to avoid supply-air contaminating cabin air.

ispartof: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OCCUPATIONAL MEDICINE AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH vol:31 issue:6 pages:837-839 ispartof: location:Poland status: published

BACKGROUND Evidence for a role of dietary risk factors in the cause of breast cancer has been inconsistent. The evaluation of overall dietary patterns instead of foods in isolation may better reflect the nature of true dietary exposure in a population. OBJECTIVE We used 2 cohort studies to identify and confirm associations between dietary patterns and breast cancer risk. DESIGN Dietary patterns were derived by using a principal components factor analysis in 1097 breast cancer cases and an age-stratified subcohort of 3320 women sampled from 39,532 female participants in the Canadian Study of Diet, Lifestyle and Health (CSDLH). We conducted a confirmatory factor analysis in 49,410 subjects in the National Breast Screening Study (NBSS) in whom 3659 cases of incident breast cancer developed. Cox regression models were used to estimate HRs for the association between derived dietary factors and risk of breast cancer in both cohorts. RESULTS The following 3 dietary factors were identified from the CSDLH: healthy, ethnic, and meat and potatoes. In the CSDLH, the healthy dietary pattern was associated with reduced risk of breast cancer (HR for high compared with low quintiles: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.58, 0.91; P-trend = 0.001), and the meat and potatoes dietary pattern was associated with increased risk in postmenopausal women only (HR for high compared with low quintiles: 1.26; 95% CI: 0.92, 1.73; P-trend = 0.043). In the NBSS, the association between the meat and potatoes pattern and postmenopausal breast cancer risk was confirmed (HR: 1.31; 95% CI: 0.98, 1.76; P-trend = 0.043), but there was no association between the healthy pattern and risk of breast cancer. CONCLUSION Adherence to a plant-based diet that limits red meat intake may be associated with reduced risk of breast cancer, particularly in postmenopausal women.

The silicate mineral asbestos is categorized into two main groups based on fiber structure: serpentine asbestos (chrysotile) and amphibole asbestos (crocidolite, amosite, anthophyllite, tremolite, and actinolite). Chrysotile is used in more than 2 000 applications and is especially prevalent in the construction industry. Although its use is banned or restricted in more than 52 countries, an estimated 107 000 workers die from asbestos exposure each year, and approximately 125 million workers continue to be exposed. Furthermore, ambient exposures persist to which the public is exposed, globally. Today, the primary controversies regarding the use of asbestos are the potencies of different types of asbestos, as opposed whether or not asbestos causes morbidity and mortality. The asbestos industry has promoted and funded research based on selected literature, ignoring both clinical and scientific knowledge. In this piece, we highlight a prominent example of a conflicted publication that sought to undermine the World Health Organization (WHO) campaign to stop the use of all forms of asbestos, including chrysotile asbestos. Independent and rigorous scientific data provide sufficient evidence that chrysotile asbestos, like other forms of asbestos, is a cause of asbestos-related morbidity and premature mortality.

The International Joint Policy Committee of the Societies of Epidemiology (IJPC-SE) promotes the ethical and unbiased application of epidemiology, striving to bring clarity to the science underlying policy options. Its purpose is to promote and protect public health by serving as an ethical and effective counterweight to the misuse of epidemiological evidence. As an applied science, epidemiology can be misapplied, misused, misinterpreted and abused by those intent on so doing. This chapter brings to attention how moneyed influence is being used to infiltrate the epidemiological literature in order to derail the scientific discourse and its role in public policy formulation through the misuse of this science. The need for disclosure of real or perceived Conflict-of-Interest (COI) must be taken seriously especially if those engaged in public health are to protect the public interest. A case study involving asbestos industry influence in a Quebec, Canada, university, and one concerning the development of policy around gift acceptance by the IJPC-SE as a public interest organization are used to demonstrate the realities faced in the modern world of influence in science.

This paper brings understanding to the ethical dimensions of human health research conducted in the context of contaminated sites. Principle-based ethical analysis, complemented with virtuous traits of character, aid in bringing clarity to recommendations for actions following research. Epidemiology is the discipline for conducting health research not only because of its methodological foundations, but also because of its social justice focus. Because contaminated sites include communities that have been exposed to excessive concentrations of hazardous substances, extra care is needed when using epidemiology. For instance, vigilance over potential influence and engagement with affected communities are needed. Community engagement not only aids in understanding the contextual framework, but also demonstrates respect for both community and individual autonomy. Ethical analysis makes transparent the rationale for decisions against which researchers can be held accountable and provides a basis for evaluating observed outcomes as a function of the rationale provided for past actions.

With 5.9 billion reported users, mobile phones constitute a new, ubiquitous and rapidly growing exposure worldwide. Mobile phones are two-way microwave radios that also emit low levels of electromagnetic radiation. Inconsistent results have been published on potential risks of brain tumors tied with mobile phone use as a result of important methodological differences in study design and statistical power. Some studies have examined mobile phone users for periods of time that are too short to detect an increased risk of brain cancer, while others have misclassified exposures by placing those with exposures to microwave radiation from cordless phones in the control group, or failing to attribute such exposures in the cases. In 2011, the World Health Organization, International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) advised that electromagnetic radiation from mobile phone and other wireless devices constitutes a "possible human carcinogen," 2B. Recent analyses not considered in the IARC review that take into account these methodological shortcomings from a number of authors find that brain tumor risk is significantly elevated for those who have used mobile phones for at least a decade. Studies carried out in Sweden indicate that those who begin using either cordless or mobile phones regularly before age 20 have greater than a fourfold increased risk of ipsilateral glioma. Given that treatment for a single case of brain cancer can cost between $100,000 for radiation therapy alone and up to $1 million depending on drug costs, resources to address this illness are already in short supply and not universally available in either developing or developed countries. Significant additional shortages in oncology services are expected at the current growth of cancer. No other environmental carcinogen has produced evidence of an increased risk in just one decade. Empirical data have shown a difference in the dielectric properties of tissues as a function of age, mostly due to the higher water content in children's tissues. High resolution computerized models based on human imaging data suggest that children are indeed more susceptible to the effects of EMF exposure at microwave frequencies. If the increased brain cancer risk found in young users in these recent studies does apply at the global level, the gap between supply and demand for oncology services will continue to widen. Many nations, phone manufacturers, and expert groups, advise prevention in light of these concerns by taking the simple precaution of "distance" to minimize exposures to the brain and body. We note than brain cancer is the proverbial "tip of the iceberg"; the rest of the body is also showing effects other than cancers.

This paper focuses on identified challenges for sustainable development across various sectors and the actions needed by different institutions and individuals for the achievement of a sustainable path. For finding solutions that impede sustainable development, emphasis is given to collaborative, inter- and trans-disciplinary problem-solving approaches. The ‘ecological modernization’ view is based on the belief that science and technology will result in continuous improvement in human welfare, while the emerging postmodern ‘ecological paradigm’ also emphasizes harmony with nature and other actors. Global societies are in the midst of a number of challenges: (1) implementation of existing and new hard- and soft-law instruments, (2) the degradation of natural resources, (3) an inadequate global mechanism for handling environmental and social responsibilities by the international community, (4) an unbalanced distribution of wealth, locally and internationally, (5) unethical and unsustainable business practices, (6) consequent unethical and unsustainable consumer practices, (7) selective application of ethical principles by rich countries and (8) the absence of norms of good conduct by powerful and wealthy peoples pertaining to sustainable development. Governments, civil societies, academicians, indigenous peoples, communities, businesses and international organizations need to become engaged in the formulation and enforcement of environmentally and ecologically sound development policies along with relevant research, education, training, awareness and a change in social values as provided in the Earth Charter to support actions for sustainable development.

International audience; Occupational exposure to strong inorganic acid mists containing sulfuric acid has been recognized as a carcinogen (Group 1) since 1992. An augmented, secondary data analysis of a population-based case-control study of lung cancer was conducted to assess lung cancer-specific risks using 772 lung cancer cases diagnosed between 1981 and 1985. Individually matched controls--on age, gender, and borough of residence--were identified. Lifetime exposure to 10 acidic agents, including strong inorganic acids and some gases, was assessed from complete lifetime occupational histories in terms of concentration, frequency, and reliability of the various exposure assessments. Smoking-adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were determined for overall and histology-categorized lung cancers using conditional logistic regression. No excess risk for overall lung cancer was associated with any of the acids, and effect modification by gender could not be identified. The absence of an acid lung cancer effect reinforces more recent toxicological data that suggest specificity to the larynx.

Pulp and paper mills use a variety of chemical substances potentially hazardous to human health. Compounds of both short- and long-term toxicological significance are found in workplaces, air emissions, and water effluent. In this paper we evaluate the body of published literature on cancer associated with working in pulp and paper mills as well as in surrounding communities. Multiple comparisons, questionable statistical power, and the absence of individual exposure assessments have resulted in non-corroborative findings over the years. However, a new generation of study sophistication, international in scale and coordinated by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), has catalogued tens of thousands of exposure measurements made at a large number of work stations within the pulp and paper industry, allowing for greatly improved individual-level exposure assessments. This approach reduces non-differential misclassification of exposure, increasing the power of these studies to detect exposure disease relationships, especially for rarer cancers. While the ability to associate specific chemical exposures with cancer outcomes in the large IARC multinational cohort may yet help to resolve the status of some of the many chemicals not currently classifiable as to their carcinogenicity by IARC, this effort has, to date, not added significantly to knowledge. Of the three studies they have published to date, one involved a well-established carcinogen (asbestos) and another involved a mixture containing probable carcinogens (volatile organochlorines). While the asbestos study is somewhat unremarkable for finding an association with pleural cancer in the expected direction, the volatile organochlorine study may be most notable for failing to find an association between volatile organochlorine exposure and liver cancer, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, or esophageal cancer, as some previous studies had found. Nonetheless, given the known hazards and the potential for both environmental and human exposure by any of a number of pathways, vigilance on the part of governments for regulation and for ongoing workplace and environmental monitoring remains a health imperative.

All asbestos types cause asbestosis (cancer): chrysotile is not biopersistent, so fibre analysis is not diagnostic http://ow.ly/BOLC30grqYg

We describe our efforts to find and assess governance instruments: laws, regulations, guidelines, addressing specifically the issue of children's environmental health in OECD countries in the European Union (EU) and in the United States of America (US). The ultimate purpose is to inform policy that will further Canada's commitment to children's environmental health. Among governance instruments found, most EU country governance instruments duplicated EU Directives; American governance instruments were found at both the federal and state level. With a few clear exceptions, the effects of environmental agents on the child have not been considered specifically in those OECD governance instruments that address environmental health concerns. We found multiple governance instruments with a clear children's environmental health focus, but little emphasis on the uniqueness of children. We also found laws not specifically addressing children in the text, but which clearly involved concern for child health. Some legislation was impeded because of scientific uncertainty, which, on occasion, appeared to be industry-driven. The precautionary principle appeared to be applied most frequently in European legislation. We conclude that children's environmental health is not well-addressed for the majority of laws relating to the environment.

The global environment is in critical decline. Whether one's concern about environmental epidemiology stems from the perspectives of environmental health, climate change, ecological collapse, or growing inequity, clear problems exist. Natural capital resources are being depleted; disregard for the integrity of ecosystems is entrenched in current business practices. Indeed, despite increasing rhetoric to the contrary, the disregard displayed by those who hold power globally toward long-term sustainability and, thus, the health and well-being of future generations, could be described as wanton. Six years ago, the Millennium Development Goals were announced by the United Nations as a rallying point for action to achieve a sustainable future, particularly by reducing the gap between the "have mores" and "have nots." The attainment of these Goals is now endangered, as is, apparently, the spirit of optimism and idealism that inspired them at the Millennium Summit. We call for a reinvigoration of both concern about-and action on-sustainability. In particular, we appeal to those engaged in the field of environmental epidemiology (and other specialties with whom they engage) to consider how they might help by incorporating sustainability issues (including global ecological integrity and global environmental justice) into their own research programs. This incorporation would make a vital contribution to protect both present and future generations and to reduce resource and health gaps between North and South. Simply put, we propose that sustainability becomes integral to advancing the science of environmental epidemiology and related environmental disciplines.

Clinical and public health research, education, and medical practice are vulnerable to influence by corporate interests driven by the for-profit motive. Developments over the last 10 years have shown that transparency and self-reporting of corporate ties do not always mitigate bias. In this article, we provide examples of how sound scientific reasoning and evidence-gathering are undermined through compromised scientific enquiry resulting in misleading science, decision-making, and policy intervention. Various medical disciplines provide reference literature essential for informing public, environmental, and occupational health policy. Published literature impacts clinical and laboratory methods, the validity of respective clinical guidelines, and the development and implementation of public health regulations. Said literature is also used in expert testimony related to resolving tort actions on work-related illnesses and environmental risks. We call for increased sensitivity, full transparency, and the implementation of effective ethical and professional praxis rules at all relevant regulatory levels to rout out inappropriate corporate influence in science. This is needed because influencing the integrity of scientists who engage in such activities cannot be depended upon.

Reanalysis and reinterpretation occur when a person other than the original investigator obtains an epidemiologic data set and conducts analyses to evaluate the quality, reliability or validity of the dataset, methods, results or conclusions reported by the original investigator. We propose ethical guidelines with regard to the duty of original investigators to cooperate with competent impartial reanalysis and for the sponsors of reanalysis and reinterpretation and the epidemiologists who carry it out. The rights and interests of these parties and of the public interest need to be protected.