The Philip Morris-funded Foundation for a Smoke-Free World: tax return sheds light on funding activities
2019; Elsevier BV; Volume: 393; Issue: 10190 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1016/s0140-6736(19)31347-9
ISSN1474-547X
AutoresTess Legg, Silvy Peeters, Phil Chamberlain, Anna Gilmore,
Tópico(s)Climate Change and Health Impacts
ResumoIn September, 2017, Philip Morris International, one of the world's largest tobacco companies, set up the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World, with almost US$1 billion of funding over 12 years.1Foundation for a Smoke-Free WorldFunding.https://web.archive.org/web/20190530131004/https://www.smokefreeworld.org/our-vision/fundingDate accessed: May 30, 2019Google Scholar The Foundation claims to be an independent scientific body aiming to "accelerate an end to smoking".2Foundation for a Smoke-Free WorldGlobal foundation launches to accelerate an end to smoking.http://web.archive.org/web/20190416105839/https://www.smokefreeworld.org/newsroom/global-foundation-launches-accelerate-end-smokingDate accessed: May 30, 2019Google Scholar Yet controversy has surrounded the Foundation since its inception; its claims of legitimacy and independence have been strongly disputed3Daube M Moodie R McKee M Towards a smoke-free world? Philip Morris International's new Foundation is not credible.Lancet. 2017; 390: 1722-1724Summary Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (30) Google Scholar, 4van Der Eijk Y Bero LA Malone RE Philip Morris International-funded 'Foundation for a Smoke-Free World': analysing its claims of independence.Tob Control. 2018; (published online Sept 21.)DOI:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2018-054278Crossref Scopus (19) Google Scholar and WHO5WHOWHO statement on Philip Morris funded Foundation for a Smoke-Free World.https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/28-09-2017-who-statement-on-philip-morris-funded-foundation-for-a-smoke-free-worldDate: Sept 28, 2017Date accessed: May 30, 2019Google Scholar and hundreds of public health organisations globally6Global Center for Good Governance in Tobacco ControlAn open letter to the Director General and Executive Board of the World Health Organization.https://ggtc.world/2019/01/28/an-open-letter-to-the-director-general-and-executive-board-of-the-world-health-organization/Date: Jan 28, 2019Date accessed: May 30, 2019Google Scholar have taken a strong stance in rejecting collaboration with the Foundation. Until now, information concerning the research the Foundation is funding, and who has accepted its money, has been scant. This changed when the Foundation filed its 2018 tax return.7Foundation for a Smoke-Free WorldForm 990-PF return of private foundation.https://web.archive.org/web/20190530134308/https://www.smokefreeworld.org/sites/default/files/uploads/documents/fsfw_2018_form_990-pf_public_inspection.pdfDate: May 13, 2018Date accessed: May 30, 2019Google Scholar Our analysis of this filing adds to mounting evidence that the Foundation should be seen neither as an independent organisation nor as a primarily scientific one, and suggests that it might be having difficulty convincing researchers and potential funders of its legitimacy and independence as a scientific body. This analysis provides the following key findings. The Foundation is still funded solely by Philip Morris International. Although its initial funding came from the tobacco company, the Foundation stated it is "seeking and expects to receive funding from other sources".1Foundation for a Smoke-Free WorldFunding.https://web.archive.org/web/20190530131004/https://www.smokefreeworld.org/our-vision/fundingDate accessed: May 30, 2019Google Scholar The tax return reveals that it has been unable to secure funding from any other donors. Of the $80 million annual donation from Philip Morris International, the Foundation spent $6·46 million on research grants in 2018, $7·59 million on communications (the majority of which was spent on public relations organisations), and $7·03 million on staffing. $47·45 million remain unspent. With only a further $19·2 million of grant funding identified as approved for future payment, the Foundation appears to be struggling to fund research using the money it has received from the tobacco industry. This greater expenditure on public relations than on research does not match the picture the Foundation paints of itself as a scientific body but instead supports the growing consensus6Global Center for Good Governance in Tobacco ControlAn open letter to the Director General and Executive Board of the World Health Organization.https://ggtc.world/2019/01/28/an-open-letter-to-the-director-general-and-executive-board-of-the-world-health-organization/Date: Jan 28, 2019Date accessed: May 30, 2019Google Scholar that the Foundation provides a key public relations function for Philip Morris International. The Foundation claims to be independent but is contracting organisations with long-standing tobacco industry links. In 2018, it spent $5·22 million with Ogilvy Public Relations Worldwide and another $665 000 with Mercury Public Affairs. Ogilvy has worked with tobacco giants for decades, both to promote tobacco and hide its harms,8TobaccoTacticsOgilvy Group.https://www.tobaccotactics.org/index.php?title=Ogilvy_GroupDate accessed: May 30, 2019Google Scholar and Mercury has recent industry ties through its 2018 lobbying work for Altria (the American parent company of Philip Morris USA).9TobaccoTacticsMercury.https://www.tobaccotactics.org/index.php?title=MercuryDate accessed: May 30, 2019Google Scholar The Foundation previously announced its plans to fund Centres of Excellence as hubs for research on tobacco control and harm reduction.10Foundation for a Smoke-Free WorldCenters of Excellence.https://web.archive.org/web/20190530135806/https://www.smokefreeworld.org/centers-grants/centers-excellenceDate accessed: May 30, 2019Google Scholar The tax return7Foundation for a Smoke-Free WorldForm 990-PF return of private foundation.https://web.archive.org/web/20190530134308/https://www.smokefreeworld.org/sites/default/files/uploads/documents/fsfw_2018_form_990-pf_public_inspection.pdfDate: May 13, 2018Date accessed: May 30, 2019Google Scholar identifies several upcoming centres (in addition to the existing,11COREISSThe Centre of Research Excellence: Indigenous Sovereignty & Smoking.https://web.archive.org/web/20190530140737/https://coreiss.com/homeDate accessed: May 30, 2019Google Scholar recently criticised,12Waa A Robson B Gifford H et al.Foundation for a Smoke-Free World and healthy Indigenous futures: an oxymoron?.Tob Control. 2019; (published online May 10.)DOI:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2018-054792Crossref PubMed Scopus (19) Google Scholar centre in New Zealand), one of which is the Center of Excellence for the Acceleration of Harm Reduction (CoEHAR) at the University of Catania, Italy. CoEHAR's Founder and Director, Riccardo Polosa, previously accepted a grant from Philip Morris International of nearly €1 million to investigate its heated tobacco products.13TobaccoTacticsRiccardo Polosa.https://www.tobaccotactics.org/index.php/Riccardo_PolosaDate accessed: May 30, 2019Google Scholar The Glasgow-based Centre for Substance Use Research, led by Neil McKeganey,14CSUROur team.https://web.archive.org/web/20190530142540/https://www.csures.com/our-teamDate: 2019Date accessed: May 30, 2019Google Scholar has in recent years received funding from Philip Morris International and other tobacco industry actors.15CSUROur funding.https://web.archive.org/web/20190530142812/https://www.csures.com/fundingDate: 2019Date accessed: May 30, 2019Google Scholar Given the tobacco industry's long history of using public relations firms and external scientists in its manipulation of research,16Bero LA Tobacco industry manipulation of research. Chapter 7. Late lessons from early warnings: science, precaution, innovation. EEA report number 1/2013. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg2013Google Scholar, 17Brandt AM Inventing conflicts of interest: a history of tobacco industry tactics.Am J Public Health. 2012; 102: 63-71Crossref PubMed Scopus (104) Google Scholar the connections between the Foundation and these bodies raise serious concerns about the legitimacy of scientific messages and research originating from the Foundation. Overall, our findings suggest that as it reaches its second anniversary, the Foundation might be failing. It is seemingly struggling both to recruit independent researchers and to spend its resources on much other than public relations. In line with public rejections from Bloomberg Philanthropies and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation,18TobaccoTacticsFoundation for a Smoke-Free World.https://tobaccotactics.org/index.php?title=Foundation_for_a_Smoke-Free_WorldDate accessed: May 30, 2019Google Scholar no further funders have materialised. Furthermore, several key staff members left the Foundation in its first 21 months of operation.18TobaccoTacticsFoundation for a Smoke-Free World.https://tobaccotactics.org/index.php?title=Foundation_for_a_Smoke-Free_WorldDate accessed: May 30, 2019Google Scholar Now, more than ever, we must reinforce the hitherto successful calls from WHO5WHOWHO statement on Philip Morris funded Foundation for a Smoke-Free World.https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/28-09-2017-who-statement-on-philip-morris-funded-foundation-for-a-smoke-free-worldDate: Sept 28, 2017Date accessed: May 30, 2019Google Scholar and the public health community6Global Center for Good Governance in Tobacco ControlAn open letter to the Director General and Executive Board of the World Health Organization.https://ggtc.world/2019/01/28/an-open-letter-to-the-director-general-and-executive-board-of-the-world-health-organization/Date: Jan 28, 2019Date accessed: May 30, 2019Google Scholar to reject collaboration with the Foundation. Robust science is indeed needed to reduce harms caused by tobacco, but this science must be independent from the tobacco industry. The only appropriate way to utilise the funds the industry clearly has at its disposal for research is through legally mandated tobacco industry financial contributions, as suggested by Cohen and colleagues.19Cohen JE Zeller M Eissenberg T et al.Criteria for evaluating tobacco control research funding programs and their application to models that include financial support from the tobacco industry.Tob Control. 2009; 18: 228-234Crossref PubMed Scopus (25) Google Scholar If Philip Morris International is really committed to reducing harm from tobacco through robust research, it surely cannot challenge such an approach. TL receives financial support from the South West Doctoral Training Partnership. All authors receive financial support from Bloomberg Philanthropies Stopping Tobacco Organizations and Products (STOP) project funding. We declare no competing interests. Foundation for a Smoke-Free World: independent and making progressTess Legg and colleagues1 make unsubstantiated claims about the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World's progress and independence. They cite disclosures made in our 2018 tax return2 to suggest we are struggling.1 However, the authors' assessment disregards the substantial progress outlined in our annual report,3 which was released alongside the tax return. The Foundation is where it was projected2 to be when we launched in 2017.4 Full-Text PDF
Referência(s)