Annamaria Baba, MPH¹, Daniel M. Cook, PhD¹, and Lisa A. Bero, PhD². (1) Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, University of California San Francisco, 530 Parnassus Ave. #366, Box 1390, San Francisco, CA 94143, 415-476-9403, ababa@itsa.ucsf.edu, (2) Institute for Health Policy Studies, Department of Clinical Pharmacy, and Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, University of California, San Francisco, 530 Parnassus Avenue, Suite 366, Box 1390, Library, San Francisco, CA 94143

In an ongoing attempt to discredit the evidence that secondhand smoke is hazardous, the tobacco industry has consistently challenged the scientific basis of public health policies and regulations. Throughout the 1990’s, Philip Morris implemented a “sound science” program to create controversy regarding evidence that environmental toxins, including secondhand smoke, cause disease. The movement began as a public relations campaign but later evolved into a legislative strategy to obtain access to previously confidential research data in order to reanalyze it, and shape the standards of research data quality. This paper examines the tobacco industry’s involvement in the inclusion of a data access disclosure mandate and new data “quality” guidelines into the 1998 and 2001 Omnibus Appropriations Acts, respectively. We analyzed approximately 150 tobacco industry documents, supplemented with PubMed and media searches. Our results show that Philip Morris utilized several front groups to develop and secure implementation of the data access and data quality amendments. Their behind the scenes strategies included: recruiting other industries to form coalitions and workgroups; developing a “data integrity” outreach program; sponsoring symposiums and seminars on “research integrity”; drafting language for the data access provision and data quality guidelines; and financing political campaigns of the supporters of the Acts. Our findings highlight the tobacco industry’s use of the legislative arena as a means to undermine tobacco control efforts. The scientific research community needs to be aware that tobacco companies’ legislative activities at the federal level have implications for other regulated industries by weakening the scientific basis of regulations.

Learning Objectives: