Keep UC Away From Big Tobacco

Source from:  dailycal.org BY Betty Yang Monday, August 6, 2007 08/07/2007

Two weeks ago, a question was posed to the readers of the Daily Cal: "Can academic integrity be preserved while Big Bad Tobacco is involved?" The answer? A strong and fervent "NO!" RE-89 was first proposed in September of 2006 to call for the ceasing of acceptance of tobacco industry funding for tobacco-related research, and the decision has been consistently put off since then. The issue was first thrown to the Regents, then to the faculty senate and now it is again up in the air. While these two groups have been taking the most heat on the issue, it may really be UC President Bob Dynes who, along with the administration, thwarting the no-tobacco research funding policy. Although Dynes continues to claim he is just supporting the faculty, his actions in the past on issues such as executive compensation and support for graduate students demonstrate that he has consistently ignored their input. But why would we hesitate to accept such a policy? A great number of prestigious research and teaching institutions across the nation and throughout the world have taken a stance to refuse tobacco industry money, either at the university or individual academic unit level, and it's about time the University of California joined them. The University of California is one of the top university systems in the world, with some of the best faculty and students; our funders should be held to the same high standards. Our financial backers shouldn't be involved in the number one cause of preventable death in the United States, our backers shouldn't be responsible for the deaths of over four million people worldwide in the year 2000, and even more today. But even setting the death tolls aside, our funders certainly shouldn't be industries that have already been convicted of being corrupt organizations! Just last fall, in August 2006, a federal court found Big Bad Tobacco guilty of using external research programs (sound familiar?) to "undermine independent research … to generate industry favorable results, and to suppress adverse research results," in violation of the Federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. What we want to prevent from happening at the University of California research institutions has already happened elsewhere; shouldn't we take a lesson from history and fight the problem at the source? Besides increasing profits through partnership, the tobacco companies in funding UC scientific research seek to undermine the research and peer review process and create public confusion. Just imagine the corrupt deals, the faulty research results and skewed science for the sake of better profit on a product that kills, all tainting the esteemed UC name. And really, it's our name that Big Tobacco is after. The sole purpose of funding the UCs is for the industry to create a positive public image, and also happening to thwart public health efforts while at it. The money given is really just a nominal advertising fee for an addictive, toxic, lethal product. Another point to note is that the policy wouldn't ban tobacco funding for research dealing with issues other than tobacco. The industry can fund all the tomato plant or C. elegans protein research they want-as long as there isn't any tobacco involved. So what's stopping us? Why haven't we joined those other universities around the world saying "no" to tobacco industry funded tobacco research? Rejecting this specific funding is only a drop in the bucket when compared to the millions upon millions the UC receives from other sources. Our goal as an institution of higher learning is to preserve academic freedom and seek truth, as the UC seal exemplifies: "Fiat Lux," "Let there be light" indeed! We must prevent the University of California from falling prey to the influence and persuasion of Big Tobacco and other similar corrupt corporations, and hopefully at this September's Regents' meeting, decisions will be made to accomplish just that. Enditem