Since the publication of this article [1], the journal and the authors have received further context about the position of ILSI on the issue with the ILSI Mexico branch

McKee, Martin

Ruskin, Gary

Sarcevic, Lejla

Steele, Sarah

Stuckler, David

English

BACKGROUND: Industry sponsorship of public health research has received increasing scrutiny, and, as a result, many multinational corporations (MNCs), such as The Coca-Cola Company and Mars Inc., have committed to transparency with regard to what they fund, and the findings of funded research. However, these MNCs often fund charities, both national and international, which then support research and promote industry-favourable policy positions to leaders. We explore whether one industry funded charity, the International Life Sciences Institute ('ILSI'), is the scientifically objective, non-lobby, internationally-credible body that it suggests it is, so as to aid the international health and scientific communities to judge ILSI's outputs. METHODS: Between June 2015 and February 2018, U.S. Right to Know), a non-profit consumer and public health group, submitted five U.S. state Freedom of Information requests (FOIs) to explore ILSI engagement with industry, policy makers, and/or researchers, which garnered a total of 17,163 pages for analysis. Two researchers explored these documents to assess the activities and conduct of ILSI against its purported objectives. RESULTS: Within the received documents we identified instances of ILSI seeking to influence research, conferences, public messages, and policy, including instances of punishments for ILSI bodies failing to promote industry-favourable messaging. We identified ILSI promoting its agenda with national and international bodies to influence policy and law, causing the World Health Organization to withdraw from official relations with what it now considers a private sector entity. CONCLUSIONS: ILSI seeks to influence individuals, positions, and policy, both nationally and internationally, and its corporate members deploy it as a tool to promote their interests globally. Our analysis of ILSI serves as a caution to those involved in global health governance to be wary of putatively independent research groups, and to practice due diligence before relying upon their funded studies and/or engaging in relationship with such groups

LSHTM Research Online

Are industry-funded charities promoting "advocacy-led studies" or "evidence-based science"?: a case study of the International Life Sciences Institute.

Apollo (Cambridge)

CORRECTION Open AccessCorrection to: Are industry-funded charitiespromoting “advocacy-led studies” or“evidence-based science”?: a case study ofthe International Life Sciences InstituteSarah Steele1,2*, Gary Ruskin3, Lejla Sarcevic2, Martin McKee4 and David Stuckler4,5Correction to: Glob Health (2019) 15:36https://doi.org/10.1186/s12992-019-0478-6Since the publication of this article [1], the journal andthe authors have received further context about the pos-ition of ILSI on the issue with the ILSI Mexico branch.ILSI have provided redacted minutes, four pages inlength, from an extraordinary conference call dated 2November 2015 with the ILSI Board of Trustees Execu-tive Committee. This document, unavailable publicly,describes the actions taken by ILSI Mexico as amountingto lobbying or advocacy, and suggests the courses of ac-tion open to ILSI’s Executive Committee related to thisviolation of ILSI’s Code of Ethics/Standards of Conduct.In light of these minutes, we believe that the correspon-dences we cite related to ILSI Mexico should be reinter-preted, and the authors wish to correct the record.In these minutes, ILSI offers to suspend ILSI Mexico’scharter for a fixed period of time, rather than removingthe organisation’s charter, until the organisation demon-strates an understanding of ILSI’s policies and willing-ness to abide by them. ILSI proposes exercisingsignificant oversight of the branch, a change inpersonnel, and the submission of an annual plan. ILSIMexico was subsequently reinstated in September 2016.Author details1Department of Politics and International Studies, University of Cambridge,Cambridge, UK. 2Jesus College, Jesus Lane, Cambridge CB58BL, UK. 3U.S.Right to Know, Cambridge, USA. 4Department of Public Health and Policy,London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK. 5DondenaResearch Centre and Department of Policy Analysis and Public Management,University of Bocconi, Milan, Italy.Reference1. Steele S, et al. Are industry-funded charities promoting “advocacy-ledstudies” or “evidence-based science”?: a case study of the International LifeSciences Institute. Glob Health. 2019;15:36. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12992-019-0478-6.© The Author(s). 2019 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, andreproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link tothe Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver(http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.* Correspondence: ss775@cam.ac.ukThe original article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1186/s12992-019-0478-61Department of Politics and International Studies, University of Cambridge,Cambridge, UK2Jesus College, Jesus Lane, Cambridge CB58BL, UKFull list of author information is available at the end of the articleSteele et al. Globalization and Health           (2019) 15:61 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12992-019-0512-8

Correction to: Are industry-funded charities promoting "advocacy-led studies" or "evidence-based science"?: a case study of the International Life Sciences Institute.

Since the publication of this article [Steele S, et al. Are industry-funded charities promoting “advocacy-led studies” or “evidence-based science”?: a case study of the International Life Sciences Institute. Glob Health. 2019;15:36. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12992-019-0478-6.], the journal and the authors have received further context about the position of ILSI on the issue with the ILSI Mexico branch. ILSI have provided redacted minutes, four pages in length, from an extraordinary conference call dated 2 November 2015 with the ILSI Board of Trustees Executive Committee. This document, unavailable publicly, describes the actions taken by ILSI Mexico as amounting to lobbying or advocacy, and suggests the courses of action open to ILSI’s Executive Committee related to this violation of ILSI’s Code of Ethics/Standards of Conduct. In light of these minutes, we believe that the correspondences we cite related to ILSI Mexico should be reinterpreted, and the authors wish to correct the record. In these minutes, ILSI offers to suspend ILSI Mexico's charter for a fixed period of time, rather than removing the organisation’s charter, until the organisation demonstrates an understanding of ILSI’s policies and willingness to abide by them. ILSI proposes exercising significant oversight of the branch, a change in personnel, and the submission of an annual plan. ILSI Mexico was subsequently reinstated in September 2016

Steele Sarah

Ruskin Gary

Sarcevic Lejla

McKee Martin

Stuckler David

Archivio istituzionale della Ricerca - Bocconi

Correction to: Are industry-funded charities promoting “advocacy-led studies” or “evidence-based science”?: a case study of the International Life Sciences Institute

Industry sponsorship of public health research has received increasing scrutiny, and, as a result, many multinational corporations (MNCs), such as The Coca-Cola Company and Mars Inc., have committed to transparency with regard to what they fund, and the findings of funded research. However, these MNCs often fund charities, both national and international, which then support research and promote industry-favourable policy positions to leaders. We explore whether one industry funded charity, the International Life Sciences Institute (‘ILSI’), is the scientifically objective, non-lobby, internationally-credible body that it suggests it is, so as to aid the international health and scientific communities to judge ILSI’s outputs

Are industry-funded charities promoting “advocacy-led studies” or “evidence-based science”?: a case study of the International Life Sciences Institute

https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/1810/312563/12992_2019_Article_512.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y

Correction to: Are industry-funded charities promoting "advocacy-led studies" or "evidence-based science"?: a case study of the International Life Sciences Institute.

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

LSHTM Research Online

Apollo (Cambridge)

LSHTM Research Online

Apollo (Cambridge)

Archivio istituzionale della Ricerca - Bocconi

Archivio istituzionale della Ricerca - Bocconi

Apollo (Cambridge)