HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: AJPH.2004.061507v1 96/1/20    most recent Submit a response View responses View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (11) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Grüning, T. Articles by McKee, M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Grüning, T. Articles by McKee, M. Related Collections Ethics Other Tobacco Tobacco Control

Thilo Grüning, MD, MSc, DEAA, Anna B. Gilmore, MBBS, MSc, MFPH and Martin McKee, MD, FRCP

At the time of the study, Thilo Grüning was with the Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Royal Free Hospital, Royal Free Hampstead NHS Trust, London, England. Anna B. Gilmore and Martin McKee are with the European Centre on Health of Societies in Transition, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London.

Correspondence: Requests for reprints should be sent to Thilo Grüning, MD, MSc, DEAA, c/o European Centre on Health of Societies in Transition, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London WC1E 7HT, England (e-mail: t{at}gzzz.freeserve.co.uk).

Using tobacco industry documents, we examined how and why the tobacco industry sought to influence science and scientists in Germany as a possible factor in explaining the German opposition to stricter tobacco regulation.

Smoking and health research programs were organized both separately by individual tobacco companies and jointly through their German trade organization. An extensive network of scientists and scientific institutions with tobacco industry links was developed. Science was distorted in 5 ways: suppression, dilution, distraction, concealment, and manipulation.

The extent of tobacco industry influence over the scientific establishment in Germany is profound. The industry introduced serious bias that probably influenced scientific and public opinion in Germany. This influence likely undermined efforts to control tobacco use.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. Landman and S. A. Glantz Tobacco Industry Efforts to Undermine Policy-Relevant Research Am J Public Health, January 1, 2009; 99(1): 45 - 58. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. Diethelm and M. McKee Denialism: what is it and how should scientists respond? Eur J Public Health, January 1, 2009; 19(1): 2 - 4. [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. K. Tong and S. A. Glantz Tobacco Industry Efforts Undermining Evidence Linking Secondhand Smoke With Cardiovascular Disease Circulation, October 16, 2007; 116(16): 1845 - 1854. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. McKee and A. Gilmore Commentary: Smokeless tobacco: seeing the whole picture Int. J. Epidemiol., August 14, 2007; (2007) dym101v1. [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. R. Lynch, M. R.A. Cunningham, W. J. Warme, D. C. Schaad, F. M. Wolf, and S. S. Leopold Commercially Funded and United States-Based Research Is More Likely to Be Published; Good-Quality Studies with Negative Outcomes Are Not J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., May 1, 2007; 89(5): 1010 - 1018. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Kramer INDEPENDENT RESEARCH ON TOBACCO CONTROL IN GERMANY Am J Public Health, June 1, 2006; 96(6): 956 - 957. [Full Text] [PDF]

				A Bornhauser, J McCarthy, and S A Glantz German tobacco industry's successful efforts to maintain scientific and political respectability to prevent regulation of secondhand smoke. Tob. Control, April 1, 2006; 15(2): e1 - e1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

eLetters: