UC regents should ban tobacco funding for research ...

By Michael Ong and Linda Sarna

The University of California Board of Regents is currently considering a proposal to prohibit future acceptance of research funds from "manufacturers or distributors of tobacco products, their affiliates, or any entity controlling or controlled by such companies that are used to study tobacco-related diseases, the use of tobacco products or the individual or societal impacts of such use." The regents want feedback from the Academic Senate to gauge faculty opinion.

Opponents of this proposal argue that restricting research funds from the tobacco industry unduly encroaches on academic freedom, and will create a "slippery slope" that could lead to restrictions on other sources of research funds. They fear that a decision about tobacco will threaten academic freedom.

We could not disagree more. The tobacco industry has a history of restricting and undermining academic freedom. Scientific analyses of the tobacco industry's internal documents show a systematic and continuing effort by the industry to restrict and undermine academic freedom by suppressing, manipulating and distorting scientific research on tobacco. These scientific findings have also been affirmed in a 1,700-page federal court ruling last year that the tobacco industry violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act.

This discussion is not merely about a "moral" issue of a "bad" product. It has been known for decades that the tobacco industry produces products antithetical to the mission of the UC. The industry's products, when used as intended, kill users and non-smoking bystanders. Cigarette smoking continues to be the leading preventable cause of death in the United States. Globally, tobacco use is projected to cause 10% of all mortality by 2015.

This discussion is about academic freedom. We strongly value academic freedom and believe that stringent and rigorous thresholds must be met before undertaking any decision about restricting funding sources. The tobacco industry has an unparalleled history of working to restrict and undermine academic freedom, and lower levels of safeguards are unlikely to result in adequate protection from manipulation by the industry.

Nothing in the proposed policy to reject funds from the tobacco industry limits the freedom of speech, freedom of scientific exploration or discussion of ideas. This policy is only about money from a source that has been documented to corrupt science and scientists, the antithesis of academic freedom.

Other leading institutions, including the Harvard School of Public Health, Massachusetts General Hospital, and the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, have implemented policies that prohibit acceptance of funds from the tobacco industry. This is an opportunity for the University of California to take leadership on this issue by becoming the first university in the nation to reject the acceptance of funds from the tobacco industry.

We feel that continued acceptance of money from the tobacco industry by scientists at UC, especially for tobacco-related research, will cause grave harm to the reputation and stature of the university and will undermine its mission to seek the truth.

Ong is assistant professor in residence at the David Geffen School of Medicine while Sarna is a professor in the School of Nursing. More information about academic freedom and tobacco-industry funding can be found at www.ucsf.edu/senate/townhallmeeting/. To read the final report of the RICO findings, go to www.tobaccofreekids.org/reports/doj/FinalOpinion.pdf.