Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

3 Conflicts of Interest, Bias, and Ethics
Pages 35-44

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 35...
... Avoiding conflict of interest in order to achieve sound, unbiased science is in the vested interest of the scientific community as well as the general public. However, creating a system in which scientific decisions are made in an ethical manner while free of conflict and individual bias is a challenge.
From page 36...
... Another form of conflict, at times overlooked, involves status and power as prime motivators. Most of the time and effort put into creating rules and guidelines focuses on a larger set of concerns about the influence of power and money on public policy decisions.
From page 37...
... This was an argument over what could be called "allocating the burden of uncertainty." Such arguments are typical when public policy confronts scientific data over causal relationships, whether they involve environmental or occupational hazards or global warming. The misuse of scientific information in making, interpreting, and enforcing public policy is illustrative of the concern regarding the overall issue of conflict of interest.
From page 38...
... This would raise the signal to noise ratio and thus make it possible to identify potentially significant conflicts. Managing ConflictS of Interest: the International Agency for Research on Cancer Vincent Cogliano, Ph.D., Head of the Monographs Programme, International Agency for Research on Cancer The International Agency for Research on Cancer's (IARC's)
From page 39...
... These questions were also designed to highlight activities that are suggestive of an ongoing relationship with an interested party and not just a one-time offering of scientific information on a particular issue. As an extra cautionary step, IARC has also instituted a policy to verify the absence of conflicting interest by conducting a review of recent papers for acknowledgment of research support as well as simple Internet searches.
From page 40...
... A 2003 Lancet editorial criticized the IARC conflict identification process by saying "it only needs the perception, let alone the reality, of financial conflict and commercial pressures to destroy the credibility of important organizations such as IARC and its parent, WHO" (Baines, 2003)
From page 41...
... They are available at IARC meetings to contribute their unique knowledge and experience but are not serving in key decision-making or influencing positions. This approach ensures that IARC meetings include the best qualified experts, but the meeting positions are developed by experts with no conflicting interest.
From page 42...
... Equal scrutiny should be applied not only to the data reviewed at a public regulatory meeting, but also to the review of the public comments submitted in support of, or against, a particular regulatory issue. Cogliano agreed that the interests of any person or party submitting a public comment should be clearly disclosed, yet this should not weigh down the decision-making process.
From page 43...
... In closing, Portier raised the issue of cultural differences in science and how these differences may lead to a level of conflict because of the many different countries involved in research. Cogliano agreed it is difficult to understand the public–private structure in some countries and suggested that the best way to address the potential for conflicts is for researchers around the world to continually refine the definition of conflicting interest and disclose whatever is pertinent.


This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.