By Elizabeth M. Whelan, Sc.D., M.P.H.
Posted: Thursday, April 17, 2008

LETTER
Publication Date: April 17, 2008

This letter appeared in the Washington Times on April 17, 2008 and is a response to Center for Science in the Public Interest head Michael Jacobson's criticism of Dr. Whelan's earlier op-ed, "'Conflict' Chills Research":

Michael F. Jacobson's Monday letter, "The perils of corporate funding," is a misinformed, scurrilous, ad hominem attack on me and the group I head, the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH).

As I stated in my April 8 Commentary column, "'Conflict' chills research," those who target "industry funding" as an inherent source of bias (a) are wrong and (b) ignore the fact that there are myriad other sources of bias in scientific research. Cooperation between corporations and individual scientists has been extremely beneficial to scientific research. The quality of a study is evaluated in the peer-review processes and if the quality is deemed to be good enough to publish, what does it matter who funded the research?

Mr. Jacobson's characterization of ACSH as a "fringy group" is outrageous and insulting to the more than 350 distinguished physicians and scientists who sit on ACSH trustee and advisory boards. These scientists are leaders in their fields and include many members of the National Academy of Sciences and one Nobel laureate. Mr. Jacobson's group, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), lacks any such scientific leadership and its frequent pronouncements do not come from published studies in peer-reviewed journals, as do ACSH statements.

For nearly thirty years, ACSH, using a strict peer-review system, has defended sound science frequently in opposition to Mr. Jacobson and CSPI, who specialize in hype and scares about everything from food additives and pesticides to products such as olestra.

I would like to know where all these "payments" Mr. Jacobson claims ACSH receives from "pharmaceutical, chemical, biotechnology, food and other companies" are going. ACSH has a budget of less than $2 million per year (as compared to Mr. Jacobson's nearly $20 million). ACSH has very limited funding from such companies (and when we do accept a donation, it is always on a "no-strings-attached" basis). The largest (and growing) sector of ACSH's funding is from family foundations and thousands of individual supporters who are sick and tired of being scared to death by individuals like Mr. Jacobson who claim there is a "carcinogen" or "toxin" on every plate.

Also, talk about sources of bias: CSPI would not exist unless there were heath scares. It is CSPI's bread and butter, and it is at least as important a potential source of bias as industry funding.

Given CSPI's belief that funding influences ACSH, we at ACSH have a modest proposal: that CSPI become a generous ACSH funder in an attempt to influence our work and see how successful it is in getting ACSH to support CSPI's scare-mongering agenda.


Dr. Elizabeth Whelan
President
American Council on Science and Health
New York


See also: ACSH's report on Scrutinizing Industry-Funded Science by Ron Bailey.