Download the Omni™
Download

Seeking Validation for Our Science

Scientist examining sample in laboratory
17 September 2024
CHAPTER 4 . OUR SMOKELESS SCIENCE

Seeking Validation of Our Science

Words by

Portrait of Dr Chris Junker, Vice President, U.S. Scientific & Regulatory Affairs, RAI Services Company
"All science irrespective of who conducts it should be judged on its merit."

 

Dr Chris Junker

Group Head of Life Sciences

Sign up for more exclusive the Omni™ content

Access full Omni™

The scientific ecosystem works best when science is judged on its merits

More journals are refusing to even consider industry-funded research for publication[1,2] and some scientific meetings refuse entry to industry scientists.[3] Academic researchers who do accept industry funding risk the loss of government funding and, in some cases, the designation of their institution.

 

We can draw on the experience of other industries to address these challenges. For example, the Institute for the Advancement of Food and Nutrition Sciences (IAFNS) Assembly on Scientific Integrity recently updated its Guiding Principles for Funding Food and Nutrition Research.[4] These provide a framework for minimising bias and promoting integrity in industry-funded research.

 

With these challenges in mind, our three tenets to drive validation amongst the scientific community are:

01 Transparency of industry science

 

Industry researchers are encouraged to publish in available peer-reviewed journals and present at scientific meetings. Sharing data with external researchers (e.g. online) increases research transparency.

02 Collaborative research

 

Researchers are encouraged to collaborate within and across industries to develop external acceptance of appropriate scientific methods. Where possible, academic collaborations or independent academic research on Smokeless Products can serve to validate research findings.

03 Cross-party dialogue

 

Parties across the scientific and regulatory ecosystem are encouraged to come together in constructive scientific discussion. While all differing opinions may not be resolved, there can be areas of common ground that can move the broader community forward. 

 

Many of these same concepts have been articulated by thought leaders in the public health community; noting that these actions create an environment that incentivises sound science, rewards innovation in Smokeless Products and accelerates the decline in smoking.[5]

Figure 1. Validation of our science

Figure 1. Validation of our science

References

[1] Briggs, J. and Vallone, D., The tobacco industry’s renewed assault on science: a call for a United public health response. Am J Public Health, 2022. 112(3): p. 388-390. DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2021.306683

[2] Godlee, F., et al., Journal policy on research funded by the tobacco industry. Br Med J, 2013. 347: f5193. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.f5193

[3] SRNT, SRNT Membership Categories. (Accessed: 3 July 2024)

[4] Larrick, B.M., et al., An updated framework for industry funding of food and nutrition research: managing financial conflicts and scientific integrity. J Nutr, 2022. 152(8): p. 1812-1818. DOI: 10.1093/jn/nxac106

[5] Cummings, K.M., et al., The past is not the future in tobacco control. Prev Med, 2020. 140:106183. DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2020.106183