Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume 63, Issue 8 , Pages 841-853, August 2010

“A delicate diplomatic situation”: tobacco industry efforts to gain control of the Framingham Study

  • Janine K. Cataldo

      Affiliations

    • Department of Physiological Nursing—Gerontology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Department of Physiological Nursing—Gerontology, University of California San Francisco, 2 Koret Way, N611, San Francisco, CA 94143-0610, USA. Tel.: +415-476-4721; fax: +415-476-8899.
  • ,
  • Lisa A. Bero

      Affiliations

    • Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Health Policy, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
  • ,
  • Ruth E. Malone

      Affiliations

    • Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA

Accepted 30 January 2010.

Abstract 

Background

The Framingham Heart Study (henceforth Framingham) is among the gold standards for epidemiological research. Being a prospective cohort study of 5,000+ men and women, it provided early findings about the causes of coronary heart disease (CHD), following a cohort over the course of 24 years. After US government funding ended, the tobacco industry funded Council for Tobacco Research (CTR) provided continued funding for analyses related to smoking.

Objective

This study sought to understand the tobacco industry's motivation and activities in funding Framingham.

Study Design and Setting

We analyzed previously undisclosed tobacco industry documents, conducting iterative searches of the Legacy Tobacco Documents Library (http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/), and assembled a historical case study.

Results

CTR funded Framingham to obtain full access to Framingham data. CTR planned for long-time industry consultant Carl Seltzer to reanalyze them to suggest that tobacco-related morbidity and mortality primarily resulted from “constitutional” factors, such as age or ethnicity. Once data were obtained, CTR terminated funding for the Framingham principal investigator, who disagreed with Seltzer. Seltzer's critical analyses of subsequently published work by the Framingham team created confusion about the association between CHD and cigarette smoking.

Conclusion

Researchers accepting tobacco industry funding risk losing control of data, analysis, and publication.

Keywords: Tobacco industry, Research ethics, Smoking, Cardiovascular disease, Funding sources, Cohort studies

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0895-4356(10)00135-6

doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.01.021

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume 63, Issue 8 , Pages 841-853, August 2010