Assessing the reliability and credibility of industry science and scientists.
The chemical industry extensively researches and tests its products to implement product stewardship commitments and to ensure compliance with governmental requirements. In this commentary we argue that a wide variety of mechanisms enable policymakers and the public to assure themselves that studies performed or funded by industry are identified as such, meet high scientific standards, and are not suppressed when their findings are adverse to industry's interests. The more a given study follows these practices and standards, the more confidence one can place in it. No federal laws, rules, or policies express a presumption that scientific work should be ignored or given lesser weight because of the source of its funding. To the contrary, Congress has consistently mandated that agencies allow interested or affected parties to provide information to them and fairly consider that information. All participants in scientific review panels should disclose sources of potential biases and conflicts of interest. The former should be considered in seeking a balanced panel rather than being used as a basis for disqualification. Conflicts of interest generally do require disqualification, except where outweighed by the need for a person's services. Within these constraints, chemical industry scientists can serve important and legitimate functions on scientific advisory panels and should not be unjustifiably prevented from contributing to their work.
Barrow
Craig S
CS
Dow Chemical Company, Washington, DC, USA.
Conrad
James W
JW
D002617:Chemical Industry; D016265:Conflict of Interest; D003253:Consultants; D004785:Environmental Pollutants; D004995:Ethics, Professional; D006801:Humans; D017056:Medical Laboratory Personnel / Q000941:ethics*; D011050:Policy Making; D011640:Public Policy; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012106:Research / Q000592:standards*
D004785:Environmental Pollutants