internat life sci inst ILSI

=<div>Borelli!</div><div>
</div><div>=</div><div>=corp acct ballot: hall of shame<h3 style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 0.25em; line-height: 1; padding: 0px;">Coca-Cola</h3><div class="hos-nominee-detail visibility-enabled" data-visibility-name="info-about" style="box-sizing: border-box; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; opacity: 1; transition: opacity 0.75s ease 0s;">Coca-Cola’s sugary products are contributing to a global public health epidemic of diet-related diseases, especially among communities of color. That’s bad enough, but Coca-Cola has taken a page directly out of Big Tobacco’s playbook and is attempting to sow doubt about the dangers of its unhealthy products so it can continue raking in the profits. It is directly funding the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI), an industry group that has come under scrutiny for interfering in nutrition policymaking in the U.S., and across the world, and for not always disclosing its troubling ties with the industry while producing questionable studies on junk foods its benefactors, such as Coca-Cola, continue to profit from.Coca-Cola is on the ballot for fueling a public health epidemic of diet related diseases by carrying out a brazen political interference campaign blocking beneficial public health laws across the world, and funding shady industry groups that spread junk science that undermine the health of hundreds of millions of people.</div>=</div><div></div><div>le monde</div><div><h6 style="background-color: rgb(248, 248, 248); margin: 3rem 0px 1rem; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.2;">Conflicts of interests</h6>Zaruk’s “work” was also cited in Forbes magazine in an op-ed signed by a biologist affiliated with the Hoover Institution, a think tank close to the Republican party. His name appears in declassified archives of the tobacco industry. At that time, this man would offer to write columns or land media appearances to “communicat[e on] risks and science”. Rates between $5,000 and $15,000.The attacks of the Brussels blogger were also echoed by well-known propaganda websites, such as the American Council on Science and Health and the Genetic Literacy Project. Fed by PR people linked to the pesticides and biotechnology industries, the latter published an article about Christopher Portier and IARC signed by Andrew Porterfield, who <a href="https://www.scribd.com/document/351688010/Andrew-Porterfield-LinkedIn-Mai-2017" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">describes himself</a> quite simply as a “communications consultant for the biotechnology industry.”And what about the suggestion that Portier faces conflicts of interest? Did the Environmental Defense Fund—through him—weigh in in favor of IARC’s decision to classify glyphosate as a “probable carcinogen”? “Because he had a link to this organization, Portier had the status of ‘invited specialist’,” explains Kathryn Guyton, IARC’s scientist in charge of Monograph 112. This means that he was consulted by the working group but didn’t contribute to the decision to classify the chemical in one category or the other. Real conflicts of interest however exist—but elsewhere.In May 2016, while the press and the blogosphere were all out in relaying suspicions of malpractice at IARC, it was the turn of another group of UN experts to release their opinion. The Joint Meeting on Pesticides Residues (JMPR), a joint WHO and UN Food and Agriculture (FAO) organization group that rules on risks related to food (and not to exposure via inhalation, skin contact, etc) cleared glyphosate.Almost one year earlier, a coalition of NGOs had warned WHO about conflicts of interest in the JMPR. Three of its members collaborate with the International Life Science Institute (ILSI), a scientific lobby organization financed by major agribusiness, biotechnologies and chemical industries—from Mars to Bayer and from Kellogg to Monsanto.<h6 style="background-color: rgb(248, 248, 248); margin: 3rem 0px 1rem; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.2;">Serious allegations</h6>Toxicologist Alan Boobis (Imperial College, United Kingdom) was serving as copresident of JMPR but also chair of ILSI’s board of trustees. Angelo Moretto (University of Milano, Italy) was rapporteur in the JMPR while acting as an industry consultant and member of the board of trustees of a structure created by ILSI. Vicky Dellarco, also a member of JMPR, was an industry consultant and a member of various ILSI working groups.JMPR experts are supposedly subjected to the same independence rules—among the strictest in the world—as those applied at IARC, namely the WHO rules. Because it can alter the credibility of the institution and its decisions, an apparent conflict of interest is as serious as an actual conflict of interest. However, questioned by Le Monde, the WHO confirms that “no expert was deemed to have had a conflict of interest preventing their participation in the JMPR.”This answer left Hilal Elver and Baskut Tuncak dissatisfied; they are respectively the <a href="http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Environment/ToxicWastes/Pages/BaskutTuncak.aspx" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">Special UN Rapporteur on right to food</a> and the<a href="http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Environment/ToxicWastes/Pages/BaskutTuncak.aspx" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;"> Special UN Rapporteur</a> on hazardous substances and wastes.“We respectfully call upon WHO to explain how exactly it came to the conclusion that the experts’ ties to industry did not present an apparent or potential conflict of interest under its own rules” is how these two experts reacted when questioned by Le Monde. “Strong, clear and transparent processes for conflicts of interest are essential for the integrity of the system” they said before “encouraging” the organizations of the United Nations to “review” them.These two experts wrote in their report on the right to food that some “serious claims” exist “of scientists being ‘bought’ to re-state industry talking points.” The report, which was handed over to the United Nations Human Rights Council in March 2017, also underlined that: “The pesticide industry’s efforts… have obstructed reforms and paralyzed global pesticide restrictions globally.” Throwing discredit on IARC, its working group experts and the quality of the scientific work accomplished—these “efforts” are of strategic importance, even vital necessity, to Monsanto.<h6 style="background-color: rgb(248, 248, 248); margin: 3rem 0px 1rem; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.2;">Court cases underway in the United States</h6>Close on Monsanto’s heels are several U.S. law firms representing victims or relatives of victims who have died of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL), a rare cancer that affects white blood cells which they attribute to exposure to glyphosate. For their lawyers, IARC’s Monograph 112 constitutes an essential piece of evidence. For Monsanto, Monograph 112 could weigh heavily on the final verdicts. According to legal documents, the amount of damages and other payments in the U.S. could well amount to billions of dollars for the 800 plaintiffs—a number that will “probably” rise to 2,000 by the end of the year, according to Timothy Litzenburg, a lawyer at The Miller
Firm. Confidential memos, spreadsheets and internal briefs: all in all, ten million pages taken from the boxes in Monsanto’s archives and from entrails of its PCs. This is the amount of documents that the company has been forced to hand over to the court to date. In the U.S., a procedure called “discovery” allows this kind of raid on the adversary’s paperwork.From the mass of scanned documents, released drip by drip, that are the “Monsanto Papers”, the multinational’s response plan emerges. Take this “confidential” PowerPoint document dated March 11, 2015, with slides that develop a strategy of influence in the form of “Scientific Projects.” Among other ideas, a “comprehensive evaluation of carcinogenic potential” of glyphosate by “credible scientists,” and “possibly via Expert Panel Concept” is mentioned. That will be done.In September 2016, a series of six articles appeared in the scientific journal Critical Reviews in Toxicology. They exonerated glyphosate. But, as the publication was openly “sponsored and supported” by Monsanto, would anything other than this have been possible?The authors were <a href="https://www.scribd.com/document/351691109/Panel-d-experts-Glyphosate-de-Monsanto" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">the sixteen members of the “glyphosate experts panel”</a> to whom Monsanto confided the task to “review the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) monograph on glyphosate.”Their recruitment was delegated to Intertek, a consultancy specialized in the production of scientific material for companies facing regulatory or legal difficulties related to their products. Monsanto and its allies also called on the services of Exponent and Gradient, two other firms engaged in the business of “product defense.”<h6 style="background-color: rgb(248, 248, 248); margin: 3rem 0px 1rem; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.2;">“Glyphosate task force”</h6></div><div></div><div>619 ew</div><div><div class="widgetbrief" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Stacy MalkanThe International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) is a corporate-funded nonprofit group with chapters around the world that <a href="https://ilsi.org/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">claim to </a>conduct "science for the public good," but <a href="https://globalizationandhealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12992-019-0478-6" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">documents released in a new study</a> reveal that the influential ILSI science group is a actually a lobby group that protects the interests of the food industry, not public health.</div><div class="js-appear-on-expand" style="transition: all 350ms ease 0s; height: auto; overflow: hidden; opacity: 1;">The <a href="https://globalizationandhealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12992-019-0478-6" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">June 2019 paper in Globalization and Health</a> describes internal emails that were obtained by the public interest group U.S. Right to Know via state public records laws. The documents reveal clear examples of how ILSI advances the interests of the food industry, especially by promoting industry-friendly science and arguments to policymakers. "Researchers have labelled the International Life Sciences Institute an industry front group, after studying thousands of documents," <a href="https://twitter.com/bmj_latest/status/1135908825935024130" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">reported the BMJ</a>.As one example, the paper quotes an <a href="https://usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Alex-Malaspina-ILSI-Mexico.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">email from Alex Malaspina</a>, the former Coca-Cola executive who founded ILSI, lamenting the failure of ILSI Mexico to follow the industry position on soda taxes. Malaspina describes "the mess ILSI Mexico is in because they sponsored in September a sweeteners conference when the subject of soft drinks taxation was discussed. ILSI is now suspending ILSI Mexico, until they correct their ways. A real mess."<div class=" rebellt-item is--desktop col1" id="rebelltitem1" data-id="1" data-href="https://www.ecowatch.com/international-life-sciences-institute-food-industry-lobby-group-2638729365.html?rebelltpage=1#rebelltitem1" style=""><img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xOTU4MzgxOS85ODB4LnBuZyIsImV4cGlyZXNfYXQiOjE1NjA2MzAwOTV9.lJBBc2PRkuDmvONANGIFt7pVD4n79lLJ8uMvV5ZDwOs/img.png" id="93736" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="JWQ44Z1560087865" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" style="border: 0px; vertical-align: middle; max-width: 100%;" />
2015 email from Alex Malaspina, founder of ILSI.Malaspina, a former senior vice president at Coca-Cola from 1969-2001, founded ILSI in 1978. Coca-Cola has kept close ties with ILSI ever since. From 2009-2011, the president of ILSI was Michael Ernest Knowles, who was also Coca-Cola's VP of global scientific and regulatory affairs from 2008–2013. In 2015, <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20150721055103/http://ww" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">ILSI's president</a> was Rhona Applebaum, who <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-11-24/coca-cola-s-chief-science-officer-retires-after-obesity-outcry" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">retired from her job</a> as Coca-Cola's chief health and science officer (and from <a href="http://ilsi.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/ILSI_News_Q4_2015_vFinal.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">ILSI</a>) in 2015 after the <a href="https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/08/09/coca-cola-funds-scientists-who-shift-blame-for-obesity-away-from-bad-diets/?r=0" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">New York Times</a> and <a href="https://www.apnews.com/1fd235360ac94dcf893a87e3074a03a5" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">Associated Press</a> reported that Coke funded the nonprofit Global Energy Balance Network to help shift blame for obesity away from sugary drinks.Emails <a href="http://www.ehn.org/coca-cola-war-on-science-2555599081.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">obtained by U.S. Right to Know</a> and reported in <a href="http://jech.bmj.com/content/early/2018/03/14/jech-2017-210375" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">a 2016 study</a> revealed that Coke proposed and financed the Global Energy Balance Network as a "weapon" in the "growing war between the pubic health community and private industry" over obesity and the obesity epidemic.ILSI is funded by its <a href="https://ilsi.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Members.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">corporate members and company supporters</a>, including leading food and chemical companies such as Coca-Cola, BASF, Bayer, DuPont, Syngenta, Mars, McDonalds, chemical industry trade groups, and many others. <a href="https://s3.amazonaws.com/ilsiweb/ilsi/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/AR2018/index.html#22" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">In its annual report</a>, ILSI and its branches reported $17,481,251 in expenses for 2017 but did not disclose specific donor information. A document obtained via a state freedom of information request shows corporate <a href="https://www.usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/ILSI2012donors.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">contributions to ILSI Global amounting to $2.4 million</a>in 2012. The largest donations were $500,000 from Monsanto and over $500,000 from the pesticide industry trade group, Crop Life International. ILSI's <a href="https://usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/ILSI-Draft-2013-form-990.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">draft 2013 IRS tax returns</a> show $337,000 in donations from Coca-Cola and over $650,000 from six agrichemical companies, BASF, Bayer, Dow, Monsanto, Pioneer Hi Bred and Syngenta.</div><div class=" rebellt-item is--desktop col1" id="rebelltitem2" data-id="2" data-href="https://www.ecowatch.com/international-life-sciences-institute-food-industry-lobby-group-2638729365.html?rebelltpage=2#rebelltitem2" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><h3 style="display: flex; justify-content: space-between; align-items: center;">ILSI Undermined Obesity Fight in China</h3>In January 2019, two papers by <a href="https://susan-greenhalgh.com/coca-cola-goes-to-china/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">Harvard Prof. Susan Greenhalgh</a> revealed ILSI's powerful influence on the Chinese government on issues related to obesity. Prof. Geenhalgh's articles in the <a href="https://www.bmj.com/content/364/bmj.k5050" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">Journal of Public Health Policy</a> and <a href="https://www.bmj.com/content/364/bmj.k5050" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">the BMJ</a> document how Coca-Cola and other corporations worked through the China branch of ILSI to influence decades of Chinese science and public policy on obesity and diet-related illnesses such as Type 2 diabetes and hypertension.</div><div class=" rebellt-item is--desktop col1" id="rebelltitem3" data-id="3" data-href="https://www.ecowatch.com/international-life-sciences-institute-food-industry-lobby-group-2638729365.html?rebelltpage=3#rebelltitem3" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">[nyt headlin]
Jan. 9 article in New York Times.ILSI is so well-placed in China that it operates from inside the government's Centre for Disease Control and Prevention in Beijing. Dr. Greenhalgh's papers document how Coca-Cola and other Western food and beverage giants "helped shape decades of Chinese science and public policy on obesity and diet-related diseases" by operating through ILSI to cultivate key Chinese officials "in an effort to stave off the growing movement for food regulation and soda taxes that has been sweeping the west," <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/09/health/obesity-china-coke.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">reported Andrew Jacobs in the New York Times</a>.Recent studies on ILSI's influence and approach can also be found in <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09581596.2017.1371844" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">Critical Public Health</a> and the <a href="https://www.milbank.org/quarterly/articles/public-meets-private-conversations-between-coca-cola-" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">Milbank Quarterly</a>.</div><div class=" rebellt-item is--desktop col1" id="rebelltitem4" data-id="4" data-href="https://www.ecowatch.com/international-life-sciences-institute-food-industry-lobby-group-2638729365.html?rebelltpage=4#rebelltitem4" style=""><h3 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); display: flex; justify-content: space-between; align-items: center;">ILSI Sugar Study “Right Out of the Tobacco Industry’s Playbook”</h3>In 2016, public health experts denounced an ILSI-funded <a href="https://annals.org/aim/fullarticle/2593601/scientific-basis-guideline-recommendations-sugar-intake-systematic-review" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">sugar study</a> published in a prominent medical journal that presented a "scathing attack on global health advice to eat less sugar," <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/19/well/eat/a-food-industry-study-tries-to-discredit-advice-about-sugar.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">reported Anahad O'Connor in The New York Times</a>. The ILSI-funded study argued that warnings to cut sugar are based on weak evidence and cannot be trusted.The Times story quoted Marion Nestle, a professor at New York University who studies conflicts of interest in nutrition research, on the ILSI study: "This comes right out of the tobacco industry's playbook: cast doubt on the science," Nestle said. "This is a classic example of how industry funding biases opinion. It's shameful."ILSI has also been accused of working directly on the tobacco industry playbook to thwart public safety measures to reduce smoking. A <a href="https://www.who.int/tobacco/en/who_inquiry.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">July 2000 report by an independent committee of the World Health Organization</a> outlined a number of ways in which the tobacco industry attempted to undermine WHO tobacco control efforts, including using scientific groups to influence WHO's decision-making and to manipulate scientific debate surrounding the health effects of tobacco. ILSI played a key role in these efforts, according to a <a href="https://www.who.int/tobacco/media/en/ILSI.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">case study about ILSI from the WHO Tobacco Free Initiative</a>. "Findings indicate that ILSI was used by certain tobacco companies to thwart tobacco control policies. Senior office bearers in ILSI were directly involved in these actions," according to the case study.</div><div class=" rebellt-item is--desktop col1" id="rebelltitem5" data-id="5" data-href="https://www.ecowatch.com/international-life-sciences-institute-food-industry-lobby-group-2638729365.html?rebelltpage=5#rebelltitem5" style=""><h3 style="display: flex; justify-content: space-between; align-items: center;">ILSI Leaders Played Key Role in Defending Glyphosate as Chairs of WHO Panel</h3>In May 2016, ILSI was caught "in a conflict of interest row over glyphosate cancer risk," reported Arthur Neslen yyy in the Guardian, <a href="http://usrtk.org/pesticides/conflict-of-interest-concerns-cloud-meeting-as-international-experts-review-herbicide-risks/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">after revelations</a> that the vice president of ILSI Europe, Prof. Alan Boobis, was also chairman of the UN Joint Meeting on Pesticide Residues <a href="https://www.who.int/foodsafety/jmprsummary2016.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">(JMPR) panel</a> that found Monsanto's chemical <a href="https://usrtk.org/pesticides/glyphosate-health-concerns/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">glyphosate</a> was unlikely to pose a cancer risk through diet. The co-chair of the JMPR panel, Prof. Angelo Moretto, was a board member of ILSI's Health and Environment Services Institute. Neither of the chairs declared their ILSI leadership roles as conflicts of interest, despite the <a href="https://www.usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/ILSI2012donors.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">significant financial contributions ILSI has received</a> from Monsanto and the pesticide industry trade group.</div><div class=" rebellt-item is--desktop col1" id="rebelltitem6" data-id="6" data-href="https://www.ecowatch.com/international-life-sciences-institute-food-industry-lobby-group-2638729365.html?rebelltpage=6#rebelltitem6" style=""><h3 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); display: flex; justify-content: space-between; align-items: center;">ILSI’s Cozy Ties at U.S. CDC </h3>In June 2016, <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.com/carey-gillam/beverage-industry-finds-f_b_10715584.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">U.S. Right to Know reported</a> that Dr. Barbara Bowman, director of a U.S. Centers for Disease Control division charged with preventing heart disease and stroke, tried to help ILSI's founder Alex Malaspina influence World Health Organization officials to back off policies to reduce sugar consumption. Bowman suggested people and groups for Malaspina to talk to, and solicited his comments on some CDC summaries of reports, the emails show. (Bowman <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.com/carey-gillam/cdc-official-exits-agency_b_10760490.html" target="blank" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">stepped down</a> after our first article was published reporting on these ties.)A January 2019 <a href="https://www.milbank.org/quarterly/articles/public-meets-private-conversations-between-coca-cola-and-the-cdc/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">study in the Milbank Quarterly</a> describes key emails of Malaspina cozying up to Dr. Bowman.</div><div class=" rebellt-item is--desktop col1" id="rebelltitem7" data-id="7" data-href="https://www.ecowatch.com/international-life-sciences-institute-food-industry-lobby-group-2638729365.html?rebelltpage=7#rebelltitem7" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><h3 style="display: flex; justify-content: space-between; align-items: center;">ILSI Influence in India </h3>ILSI has close ties to some Indian government officials and, as in China, the nonprofit has pushed similar messaging and policy proposals as Coca-Cola — downplaying the role of sugar and diet as a cause of obesity, and promoting increased physical activity as the solution, <a href="http://www.indiaresource.org/news/2019/1011.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">according to the India Resource Center</a>. Members of ILSI India's board of trustees include Coca-Cola India's director of regulatory affairs and representatives from Nestlé and Ajinomoto, a food additive company, along with government officials who serve on scientific panels that are tasked with deciding about food safety issues.</div><div class=" rebellt-item is--desktop col1" id="rebelltitem8" data-id="8" data-href="https://www.ecowatch.com/international-life-sciences-institute-food-industry-lobby-group-2638729365.html?rebelltpage=8#rebelltitem8" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><h3 style="display: flex; justify-content: space-between; align-items: center;">Longstanding Concerns About ILSI</h3>ILSI insists it is not an industry lobby group, but concerns and complaints are longstanding about the group's pro-industry stances and conflicts of interest among the organization's leaders.In 2010, Nature reported on concerns about conflicts of interest between ILSI and the European Food Safety Authority, and noted that the<a href="https://www.nature.com/news/2010/101005/full/news.2010.513.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;"> industry ties may taint the reputation of the European regulatory body</a>.A 2019 book by Dr. Tim Noakes and Marika Sboros, <a href="http://www.realfoodontrial.com/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">Real Food on Trial</a> (Columbus Publishing), recounts the "unprecedented prosecution" of Dr. Noakes "in a multimillion rand case that stretched over more than four years. All for a single tweet giving his opinion on nutrition." Russ Greene reported on the controversy in a 2017 <a href="https://keepfitnesslegal.crossfit.com/2017/01/05/big-food-vs-tim-noakes-the-final-crusade/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.5;">article for Keep Fitness Legal</a>. "The Food Industry is attempting to use Dr. Noakes in order to set an example to anyone who dares challenge its authority in nutrition," Greene wrote.</div>Stacy Malkan is co-director of U.S. Right to Know, a nonprofit investigative research group focused on the food industry. She is author of the book, "Not Just a Pretty Face: The Ugly Side of the Beauty Industry" (New Society 2007).
<div class="around-the-web" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="around-the-webheadline" style="font-weight: 700; text-transform: uppercase; margin-top: 20px;">RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB</div><ul class="around-the-weblist" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; list-style: none;"><li class="around-the-webitem"><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jun/03/science-institute-that-advised-eu-and-un-actually-industry-lobby-group" class="around-the-web__link" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5; display: inline-block; margin-top: 10px; overflow-wrap: break-word;">Science institute that advised EU and UN 'actually industry lobby ... ›</a></li></ul></div></div></div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>=</div><div>519</div><div><div>
</div><div>Consumer Confidential: A former corn-syrup lobbyist is drafting new federal dietary rules (seriously)
Valley News<a rel="nofollow" target="blank" href="https://default.salsalabs.org/T3bfb482e-975c-407f-b167-fedf2d3d7b55/ac94ac0d-31ce-11e7-960b-0a8abee05f34" style="overflow-wrap: break-word;">Read more >></a><a href="https://www.vnews.com/Consumer-Confidential-A-former-corn-syrup-lobbyist-is-drafting-new-federal-dietary-rules-(seriously)-25428648?">https://www.vnews.com/Consumer-Confidential-A-former-corn-syrup-lobbyist-is-drafting-new-federal-dietary-rules-(seriously)-25428648</a>
Consumer Confidential: A former corn-syrup lobbyist is drafting new federal dietary rules (seriously)
A former lobbyist for the Corn Refiners Assn. is helping oversee nutrition guidelines intended to address the obesity epidemic. An advisory panel of experts, meanwhile, has close ties to food and beverage companies.(Dreamstime)
By DAVID LAZARUSLos Angeles TimesFriday, May 10, 2019
The swamp isn’t just getting deeper. It’s being ladled out for supper.
Federal dietary rules are required by law to be updated every five years. Under previous administrations, this task was performed mainly by nutritional experts focused on improving public health.Under President Trump, the process is being overseen to a large extent by a former lobbyist for the Corn Refiners Association — the high-fructose corn syrup industry.
Yes, that would be the same sweetener commonly found in soda, candy, breakfast cereal, canned fruit, condiments, and other processed foods and drinks frequently linked with the obesity crisis and increasing rates of diabetes and heart disease.
Meanwhile, a blue-ribbon committee of “nationally recognized health and nutrition experts” advising on the new guidelines contains a number of academics with significant ties to food and beverage companies.
This latest iteration of nutritional guidance “can be expected to be as industry-friendly as possible,” said Marion Nestle, a professor emeritus of nutrition, food studies and public health at New York University who helped set dietary guidelines under President Clinton.
“We were instructed to review the research and give the American public the best possible interpretation of the meaning of that research in dietary guidelines that we ourselves wrote,” she told me. “That process has now changed.”
This is important stuff.
Dietary guidelines for the American people serve as “the cornerstone of federal nutrition programs and policies, providing food-based recommendations to help prevent diet-related chronic diseases and promote overall health,” according to the Department of Health and Human Services.
The next guidelines, to be issued in 2020, are especially noteworthy because for the first time they’ll address not just things like school lunches but also dietary needs of pregnant women, infants and small children.
They also will be our latest response to an obesity epidemic that’s costing the country about $175 billion in annual health care and as much as $7.6 billion in lost productivity, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
With all that in mind, it’s not unreasonable to think the government needs to take a strong stand on upping America’s nutritional game.
There’s certainly enough scientific evidence to make good decisions — and most experts agree on what has to be done.
Less sugar. Less salt. Fewer calories. Smaller portions. Easy on the red and processed meats.
What’s unclear, however, is whether this administration has any interest in pursuing such goals, which would run contrary to the interests of some of the country’s largest and most powerful industries.
“The potential for conflicts of interest are a concern,” said Angela Amico, a senior policy associate with the Center for Science in the Public Interest. “Look at the waiver.”
The waiver she’s referring to is an ethical get-out-of-jail-free card handed out by former White House counsel Donald McGahn to Kailee Tkacz (pronounced “T’Kash”), whose past as an industry lobbyist raises questions about whether she’s focused first and foremost on the public’s well-being.
Before Tkacz was paid by the Corn Refiners Association to influence federal policy in favor of soda pop, she lobbied on behalf of SNAC International, a trade group representing manufacturers of potato chips and other junk foods.
Normally a person with her background wouldn’t be allowed anywhere near the drafting of dietary guidelines. However, McGahn waived ethical requirements, ruling that “it is in the public interest” for Tkacz to help draft the 2020 document.
He said Tkacz’s past lobbying efforts on behalf of food and beverage companies “make her uniquely qualified” to help guide official policy.
I’m honestly not making that up.
When Tkacz was hired by the Trump administration in July 2017, Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue praised her for having “extensive knowledge of the food industry supply chain, from farm to folk.”
He also welcomed the hiring of Maggie Lyons, who before joining the Agriculture Department was a lobbyist for the National Grocers Association, which has fought providing consumers with calorie counts on product labels. Tkacz worked for the association as well earlier in her career.
I reached out to the department for comment. No one got back to me.
When the 20 members of the dietary-guidelines advisory committee were announced in February, the administration depicted them as the best and the brightest in the fields of nutrition and public health. Each committee member was identified solely by his or her academic affiliation.
For example, the committee’s chairwoman, Barbara Schneeman, was identified as being from UC Davis, where she’s listed on the university’s website as a professor emeritus in the department of nutrition.
Left unsaid in the announcement was that, according to her LinkedIn page, Schneeman is a former president of the Dannon Institute, a nonprofit foundation backed by the dairy-focused food and beverage company of the same name.
She also has served as a trustee of the International Life Sciences Institute, which, according to SourceWatch, “was first established in 1978 by Coca-Cola, Heinz, Kraft, General Foods and Procter & Gamble.”
Schneeman couldn’t be reached for comment.
Sarah Reinhardt, a food systems and health analyst for the Union of Concerned Scientists, said most of the researchers on this year’s advisory committee “have been funded by industry at one time or another.”
However, she cautioned against reading too much into food experts’ industry ties.
“You’d be hard-pressed to find any food scientists who didn’t have ties to industry funding,” Reinhardt said, noting that food and beverage companies pay for a significant amount of research in the field.
Nevertheless, she acknowledged that it’s fair to wonder if such experts bring entirely unbiased views to the table (so to speak). They may not want to jeopardize funding for future projects.
“These are valid concerns and we share them,” Reinhardt said.
Cary Kreutzer, a professor and dietitian at USC who focuses on nutrition, said the long arm of industry makes it even more important for the government to find experts who can approach the task of drawing up nutritional guidelines in an objective manner.
“There are still researchers that do not have conflicts,” she said.
And could we please stop willfully overlooking the ethical conflicts that former industry insiders bring to public policy?
Under Trump, former industry lobbyists are now in charge of the Interior Department, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Health and Human Services. A former Boeing executive is running the Defense Department.
It’s possible the next set of dietary guidelines will have the best interests of the American people at heart. Just in case, though, do yourself a favor.
Less sugar. Less salt. Fewer calories. Smaller portions. Easy on the red and processed meats.
And my only conflict, which I freely admit, is an occasional hankering for In-N-Out Burger.
David Lazarus, a Los Angeles Times columnist, writes on consumer issues. He can be reached at david.lazarus@latimes.com.</div><div></div></div><div>http://www.alternet.org/environment/republicans-rush-monsantos-aid-industry-biased-reuters-reportIn  their latest attempt to shield Monsanto from accountability, House Republicans have seized upon the flawed and biased reporting of a Reuters journalist whose work has emerged as a key lobbying tool for the embattled agrichemical company as it faces <a href="https://usrtk.org/pesticides/mdl-monsanto-glyphosate-cancer-case-key-documents-analysis/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">lawsuits</a>, regulatory threats and a wave of awful <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/01/business/monsantos-sway-over-research-is-seen-in-disclosed-emails.html?r=0" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">press</a> coverage <a href="http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2017/08/04/monsanto-ghostwriting-stanford-university-hoover-institution-fellow/amp/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">about</a> <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-09/monsanto-was-its-own-ghostwriter-for-some-safety-reviews" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">allegations</a> of improper influence over <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-pesticides-dicamba-insight-idUSKBN1AP0DN" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">research</a>.On Tuesday, House Oversight Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy <a href="http://www.lemonde.fr/planete/visuel/2017/06/01/operation-intoxication-les-reseaux-de-monsanto_5136945_3244.html" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">demanded answers</a> about “possibly withheld information” that “could change” a cancer panel’s decision to list glyphosate, the main chemical in Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide, as a probable human carcinogen. <a href="https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/2017-08-08-TG-BF-SR-to-Collins-NIH-Aaron-Blair-due-8-22.pdf" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">Gowdy’s letter</a> was heavily referenced with one source: a June 14 <a href="http://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/glyphosate-cancer-data/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">Reuters article</a> by Kate Kelland.  But the Kelland article that drove Rep. Gowdy’s lobbying was <a href="https://usrtk.org/pesticides/reuters-kate-kelland-iarc-story-promotes-false-narrative/" style="text-decoration-line: none; outline: none;">deeply flawed</a> and contained errors Reuters has refused to correct.What’s more, as I reported <a href="http://fair.org/home/reuters-vs-un-cancer-agency-are-corporate-ties-influencing-science-coverage/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">last month in FAIR</a>, the flawed Reuters-article-turned-lobbying-tool was only the latest in a series of biased articles Kelland has written about the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) since the agency <a href="http://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/iarcnews/pdf/MonographVolume112.pdf" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">listed glyphosate</a> as a Class 2 carcinogen.The IARC working group of scientists—now the chief target of Monsanto’s “war on science,” as the French newspaper <a href="http://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/2017/06/01/monsanto-operation-intoxication_5136915_3244.html" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">Le Monde reported</a>—did not conduct new research, but reviewed years of published and peer-reviewed research before concluding there was limited evidence of cancer in humans from real-world exposures to glyphosate and “sufficient” evidence of cancer in studies on animals. IARC also concluded there was strong evidence of genotoxicity for glyphosate alone and for Roundup herbicide, whose use has <a href="http://www.newsweek.com/glyphosate-now-most-used-agricultural-chemical-ever-422419" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">skyrocketed</a> alongside Monsanto’s genetically engineered “Roundup Ready” crops.In her stories about the IARC decision, Kelland has ignored much of the published research backing the classification and has instead parroted industry’s criticisms of the scientists. Her reporting has relied heavily on pro-industry sources, failed to disclose their industry connections and presented cherry-picked information out of context from documents she did not provide to readers.Raising further questions about Kelland’s objectivity as a science reporter are her close ties to the Science Media Centre, a <a href="https://usrtk.org/our-investigations/science-media-centre/" style="text-decoration-line: none; outline: none;">controversial nonprofit PR agency</a>that connects scientists with reporters and gets its <a href="http://www.sciencemediacentre.org/about-us/funding/" style="text-decoration-line: none; outline: none;">largest block of funding</a> from industry groups.<a href="https://usrtk.org/our-investigations/science-media-centre/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">Multiple researchers</a> have accused SMC, which launched in 2002 <a href="http://www.sciencemediacentre.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Science-Media-Centre-consultation-report.pdf" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">partly as an effort</a> to tamp down news stories driven by groups like Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth, of downplaying the environmental and human health risks of controversial products and technologies that are important to its funders.Kelland’s bias in favor of SMC is evident; she appears in the PR agency’s <a href="http://www.sciencemediacentre.org/film/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">promotional video</a> and <a href="http://www.sciencemediacentre.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/SMC-Views-from-the-front-line-essays-on-the-SMC.pdf" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">promotional report</a>, regularly attends <a href="https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/documents/Risk%20Communication%20with%20the%20media_0.pdf" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">SMC briefings</a>, speaks at <a href="https://storify.com/Paraphyso/wellcome-trust-science-media-centre" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">SMC workshops</a> and attended <a href="https://blogs.fco.gov.uk/sunilkumar/2013/11/26/engaging-science-and-media/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">meetings in India</a> to discuss setting up an SMC office there.Neither Kelland nor her editors at Reuters would respond to questions about her relationship with SMC or to specific criticisms about her reporting. SMC Director Fiona Fox said her group did not provide Kelland with sources for her IARC stories beyond those included in SMC’s press releases.It is clear, however, that Kelland’s reporting on glyphosate and IARC mirrors the views put forth by SMC experts and industry groups on those topics—and also raises serious concerns about bias and fairness in science reporting.Reuters takes on cancer scientistOn June 14, 2017, Reuters published a <a href="http://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/glyphosate-cancer-data/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">special report</a> by Kelland accusing Aaron Blair, an epidemiologist from the U.S. National Cancer Institute and chair of the IARC panel on glyphosate, of withholding important data from its cancer assessment.Kelland’s thesis that Blair withheld crucial data was at odds with the source documents on which she based her story, but she did not provide readers with links to any of those documents, so readers could not check the veracity of the claims. Her bombshell allegations were then widely circulated, repeated by reporters at other news outlets (including <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2017/06/monsanto-roundup-glyphosate-cancer-who/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">Mother Jones</a>) and immediately deployed as a <a href="https://www.bna.com/monsanto-cancer-study-n73014453449/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">lobbying tool</a> by the agrichemical industry.Kelland’s story went so far as to suggest that the information supposedly withheld could have changed IARC’s conclusion that glyphosate is probably carcinogenic. Yet the data in question was but a small subset of epidemiology data gathered through a long-term project known as the <a href="https://www.niehs.nih.gov/research/atniehs/labs/epi/studies/ahs/index.cfm" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">Agricultural Health Study</a> (AHS). An analysis of several years of data about glyphosate from the AHS had already been published and was considered by IARC, but a newer analysis of unfinished, unpublished data was not considered, because IARC rules call for relying only on published data.After obtaining the actual source documents, Carey Gillam, a former Reuters’ reporter and now research director of U.S. Right to Know (the nonprofit group where I also work), <a href="https://usrtk.org/pesticides/reuters-kate-kelland-iarc-story-promotes-false-narrative/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">laid out</a> multiple errors and omissions in Kelland’s piece.The analysis provides examples of key claims in Kelland’s article, including a statement supposedly made by Blair, that are not supported by the 300-page <a href="http://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/glyphosate-cancer-data/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">deposition of Blair</a> conducted by Monsanto’s attorneys, or by other source documents.Kelland’s selective presentation of the Blair deposition also ignored what contradicted her thesis—for example, Blair’s many affirmations of research showing glyphosate’s connections to cancer, as Gillam wrote in a <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/monsanto-spin-doctors-target-cancer-scientist-in-flawed_us_594449eae4b0940f84fe2e57" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">Huffington Post article</a>.Kelland inaccurately described Blair’s deposition and related materials as “court documents,” implying they were publicly available; in fact, they were not filed in court, and presumably were obtained from Monsanto’s attorneys or surrogates. (The documents were available only to attorneys involved in the case, and plaintiff’s attorneys have said they did not provide them to Kelland.)Reuters has refused to correct the errors in the piece, including the false claim about the origin of the source documents and an inaccurate description of a key source, statistician Bob Tarone, as “independent of Monsanto.” In fact, Tarone had <a href="http://governance.iarc.fr/ENG/Docs/IARC_responds_to_Reuters_15_June_2017.pdf" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">received a consultancy payment</a> from Monsanto for his efforts to discredit IARC.In response to a USRTK request to correct or retract the Kelland article, Reuters global enterprises editor Mike Williams wrote in a June 23 email:<blockquote style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">We have reviewed the article and the reporting on which it was based. That reporting included the deposition to which you refer, but was not confined to it. The reporter, Kate Kelland, was also in contact with all the people mentioned in the story and many others, and studied other documents. In the light of that review, we do not consider the article to be inaccurate or to warrant retraction.</blockquote>Williams declined to address the false citing of “court documents” or the inaccurate description of Tarone as an independent source.Since then, the lobbying tool Reuters handed to Monsanto has grown legs and run wild. A June 24 <a href="http://www.stltoday.com/opinion/editorial/editorial-in-a-scientific-dispute-over-roundup-monsanto-gets-a/article_dca54b1d-6025-5c8a-b765-cf286adac9ec.html" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">editorial</a> by the St. Louis Post Dispatch <a href="http://www.stltoday.com/opinion/mailbag/editorial-relied-on-inaccurate-reporting-about-glyphosate-study/article_754e8e59-c63a-5925-bdc0-0006af6cc05c.html" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">added errors</a> on top of the already misleading reporting. By mid-July right-wing blogs ,were using the Reuters story to accuse IARC of <a href="https://twitter.com/USRightToKnow/status/885194196839129088" times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" text-decoration-line="text-decoration-line" none="none" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">defrauding U.S. taxpayers</a>, pro-industry news sites were predicting the story would be “<a href="https://morningconsult.com/opinions/cancer-data-suppressed-international-organization/" times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" text-decoration-line="text-decoration-line" none="none" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">the final nail in the coffin</a>” of cancer claims about glyphosate and a <a href="https://www.facebook.com/pg/Science-News-Today-1927007787570501/reviews/" times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" text-decoration-line="text-decoration-line" none="none" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">fake science news group</a> was promoting Kelland’s story on Facebook with a phony headline claiming that IARC <a href="https://twitter.com/USRightToKnow/status/885192740677595137" times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" text-decoration-line="text-decoration-line" none="none" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">scientists had confessed to a cover-up</a>.Bacon attackThis was not the first time Kelland had relied on Bob Tarone as a key source and failed to disclose his industry connections in an article attacking IARC.An April 2016 <a href="http://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/health-who-iarc/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">special investigation</a> by Kelland—“Who Says Bacon Is Bad?”—portrayed IARC as a confusing agency that is bad for science. The piece was built largely on quotes from Tarone, two other pro-industry sources whose industry connections were also not disclosed, and one anonymous observer.IARC’s methods are “poorly understood,” “do not serve the public well,” sometimes lack scientific rigor, are “not good for science,” “not good for regulatory agencies” and do the public “a disservice,” the critics said.The agency, Tarone said, is “naïve, if not unscientific”—an accusation emphasized with capital letters in a sub-headline.Tarone works for the pro-industry <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/company-beta/1929869/" style="text-decoration-line: none; outline: none;">International Epidemiology Institute</a> and was once involved with a <a href="http://news.cision.com/the-investor-relations-group/r/environmental-health-trust-questions-new-study-claiming-no-cell-phone-brain-cancer-link-among-childr,c9147452" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">controversial cell phone study</a>, funded in part by the cell phone industry, that found no cancer connection to cell phones, contrary to <a href="http://science.time.com/2010/09/27/health-a-cancer-muckraker-takes-on-cell-phones/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">independently funded studies</a> of the same issue.The other critics in Kelland’s bacon story were Paulo Boffetta, a controversial ex-IARC scientist who wrote a paper defending asbestos while also <a href="http://www.rightoncanada.ca/?p=2400" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">receiving money to defend</a> the asbestos industry in court; and Geoffrey Kabat, who once <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/James_E.Enstrom" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">partnered</a> with a tobacco industry-funded scientist to write <a href="http://www.bmj.com/content/326/7398/1057" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">a paper</a> defending secondhand smoke.Kabat also serves on the advisory board of the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH), a <a href="https://usrtk.org/hall-of-shame/why-you-cant-trust-the-american-council-on-science-and-health/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">corporate front group</a>.The day the Reuters story hit, ACSH posted a <a href="http://www.acsh.org/news/2016/04/18/whats-ailing-iarc-another-round-of-criticism-ensues" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">blog item</a> bragging that Kelland had used its advisor Kabat as a source to discredit IARC.The industry connections of her sources, and their history of taking positions at odds with mainstream science, seems relevant, especially since the IARC bacon exposé was paired with a Kelland <a href="http://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/health-who-iarc/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">article about glyphosate</a> that accused IARC advisor Chris Portier of bias because of his affiliation with an environmental group.The conflict-of-interest framing served to discredit a letter, organized by Portier and <a href="http://jech.bmj.com/content/early/2016/03/03/jech-2015-207005" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">signed by 94 scientists</a>, that described “serious flaws” in a European Union risk assessment that exonerated glyphosate of cancer risk.The Portier attack, and the good science/bad science theme, <a href="https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2016/04/18/glyphosate-battles-different-european-agencies-came-different-cancer-conclusions/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">echoed through</a>chemical industry <a href="https://usrtk.org/hall-of-shame/jon-entine-the-chemical-industrys-master-messenger/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">PR channels</a> on the same day the Kelland articles appeared.IARC pushes backIn October 2016, in another <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-cancer-iarc-exclusive-idUSKCN12P2FW" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">exclusive scoop</a>, Kelland portrayed IARC as a secretive organization that had asked its scientists to withhold documents pertaining to the glyphosate review. The article was based on correspondence provided to Kelland by a <a href="https://www.desmogblog.com/energy-environment-legal-institute" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">pro-industry law group</a>.In response, IARC took the unusual step of posting Kelland’s questions and the <a href="http://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/iarcnews/pdf/Reuters_questions_and_answers_Oct2016.pdf" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">answers they had sent her</a>, which provided context left out of the Reuters story.IARC explained that Monsanto’s lawyers were asking scientists to turn over draft and deliberative documents, and in light of the ongoing lawsuits against Monsanto, “the scientists felt uncomfortable releasing these materials, and some felt that they were being intimidated.” The agency said they had faced similar pressure in the past to release draft documents to support legal actions involving asbestos and tobacco, and that there was an attempt to draw deliberative IARC documents into PCB litigation.The story didn’t mention those examples, or the concerns about draft scientific documents ending up in lawsuits, but the piece was heavy on critiques of IARC, describing it as a group “at odds with scientists around the world,” which “has caused controversy” with cancer assessments that “can cause unnecessary health scares.”IARC has “secret agendas” and its actions were “ridiculous,” according to a Monsanto executive quoted in the story.IARC wrote <a href="http://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/iarcnews/pdf/Reuters_Readmore_Oct2016.pdf" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">in response</a> (emphasis in original):<blockquote style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">The article by Reuters follows a pattern of consistent but misleading reports about the IARC Monographs Programme in some sections of the media beginning after glyphosate was classified as probably carcinogenic to humans.</blockquote>IARC also <a href="http://governance.iarc.fr/ENG/Docs/IARC_responds_to_Reuters_15_June_2017.pdf" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">pushed back on</a> Kelland’s reporting about Blair, noting the conflict of interest with her source Tarone and explaining that IARC’s cancer evaluation program does not consider unpublished data, and “does not base its evaluations on opinions presented in media reports,” but on the “systematic assembly and review of all publicly available and pertinent scientific studies, by independent experts, free from vested interests.”PR agency narrativeThe Science Media Centre—which Kelland <a href="http://archives.cjr.org/the_observatory/science_media_centers_the_pres_1.php" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">has said</a> has influenced her reporting—does have vested interests, and has also been criticized for pushing pro-industry science views.<a href="http://www.sciencemediacentre.org/about-us/funding/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">Current and past funders</a> include Monsanto, Bayer, DuPont, Coca-Cola and food and chemical industry trade groups, as well as government agencies, foundations and universities.By all accounts, SMC is influential in shaping how the media cover certain science stories, often getting its <a href="http://www.sciencemediacentre.org/working-with-us/for-journalists/roundups-for-journalists/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">expert reaction</a> quotes in media stories and driving coverage with its <a href="http://www.sciencemediacentre.org/working-with-us/for-journalists/briefings-for-journalists/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">press briefings</a>.As Kelland explained in the SMC <a href="http://www.sciencemediacentre.org/film/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">promotional video</a>, “By the end of a briefing, you understand what the story is and why it’s important.”That is the point of the SMC effort: to signal to reporters whether stories or studies merit attention, and how they should be framed.Sometimes, SMC experts downplay risk and offer assurances to the public about controversial products or technologies; for example, researchers have criticized SMC’s media efforts on <a href="http://www.talkfracking.org/frackademics/frackademics-case-study-4/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">fracking</a>, <a href="http://www.emfacts.com/download/Science_media_centre_spin.pdf" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">cell phone safety</a>, <a href="http://www.meactionuk.org.uk/The-SMC-and-its-campaign-against-MECFS.pdf" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">Chronic Fatigue Syndrome</a> and <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-pJR4cGo9ckcG9udmZWVGxmMkk/view" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">genetically engineered foods</a>.SMC campaigns sometimes feed into lobbying efforts. A 2013 <a href="http://www.nature.com/news/science-media-centre-of-attention-1.13362" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">Nature article</a> explained how SMC turned the tide on media coverage of animal/human hybrid embryos away from ethical concerns and toward their importance as a research tool—and thus stopped government regulations.The media researcher hired by SMC to analyze the effectiveness of that campaign, Andy Williams of Cardiff University, came to see the SMC model as problematic, worrying that it <a href="http://www.nature.com/news/science-media-centre-of-attention-1.13362" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">stifled debate</a>. Williams <a href="http://www.scidev.net/global/journalism/feature/uk-s-science-media-centre-lambasted-for-pushing-corporate-science.html" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">described SMC briefings</a> as tightly managed events pushing persuasive narratives.On the topic of glyphosate cancer risk, SMC offers a clear narrative in its press releases.The IARC cancer classification, according to <a href="http://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-carcinogenicity-classification-of-five-pesticides-by-the-international-agency-for-research-on-cancer-iarc/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">SMC experts</a>, “failed to include critical data,” was based on “a rather selective review” and on evidence that “appears a bit thin” and “overall does not support such a high-level classification.” <a href="https://monsanto.com/company/media/responses-iarc-glyphosate-classification/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">Monsanto</a> and other <a href="https://scottsmiraclegro.com/media/glyphosate-answers/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">industry</a><a href="https://gmoanswers.com/iarc%E2%80%99s-classification-glyphosate-%E2%80%93-what-does-it-mean-you" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">groups</a> promoted the quotes.SMC experts had a much more favorable view of risk assessments conducted by the European Food Safety Authority (<a href="https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/press/news/151112" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">EFSA</a>) and the European Chemicals Agency (<a href="https://echa.europa.eu/-/glyphosate-not-classified-as-a-carcinogen-by-echa" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">ECHA</a>), which cleared glyphosate of human cancer concerns.<a href="http://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-efsas-conclusions-on-glyphosate-safety/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">EFSA’s conclusion</a> was “more scientific, pragmatic and balanced” than IARC’s, and the <a href="http://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-the-european-chemicals-agency-echa-committee-for-risk-assessment-not-classifying-glyphosate-as-a-carcinogen/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">ECHA report</a> was objective, independent, comprehensive and “scientifically justified.”Kelland’s reporting in Reuters echoes those pro-industry themes, and sometimes used the same experts, such as a <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-monsanto-glyphosate-idUSKCN0T61QL20151117" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">November 2015 story</a> about why European-based agencies gave contradictory advice about the cancer risk of glyphosate. Her story quoted two experts directly from an <a href="http://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-efsas-conclusions-on-glyphosate-safety/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">SMC release</a>, then summarized their views:<blockquote style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">In other words, IARC is tasked with highlighting anything that might in certain conditions, however rare, be able to cause cancer in people. EFSA, on the other hand, is concerned with real life risks and whether, in the case of glyphosate, there is evidence to show that when used in normal conditions, the pesticide poses an unacceptable risk to human health or the environment.</blockquote>Kelland included two brief reactions from environmentalists: Greenpeace called the EFSA review “whitewash,” and Jennifer Sass from the Natural Resources Defense Council said IARC’s review was “a much more robust, scientifically defensible and public process involving an international committee of non-industry experts.” (An <a href="https://www.nrdc.org/experts/jennifer-sass/glyphosate-iarc-got-it-right-efsa-got-it-monsanto" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">NRDC statement</a> on glyphosate put it this way: “IARC Got It Right, EFSA Got It From Monsanto.”)Kelland’s story followed up the environmental group comments with “critics of IARC…say its hazard identification approach is becoming meaningless for consumers, who struggle to apply its advice to real life,” and ends with quotes from a scientist who “declares an interest as having acted as a consultant for Monsanto.”When asked about the criticisms of pro-industry bias of the SMC, Fox responded:We listen carefully to any criticism from the scientific community or news journalists working for U.K. media, but we do not receive criticism of pro-industry bias from these stakeholders. We reject the charge of pro-industry bias, and our work reflects the evidence and views of the 3,000 eminent scientific researchers on our database. As an independent press office focusing on some of the most controversial science stories, we fully expect criticism from groups outside mainstream science.Expert conflictsScientific experts do not always disclose their conflicts of interest in news releases issued by SMC, nor in their high-profile roles as decision-makers about the cancer risk of chemicals like glyphosate.Frequent SMC expert Alan Boobis, professor of biochemical pharmacology at Imperial College London, offers views in SMC releases on <a href="http://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-the-european-food-safety-authority-efsa-draft-scientific-opinion-on-the-safety-of-the-artificial-sweetener-aspartame/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">aspartame</a> (“not a concern”), <a href="http://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-press-release-from-fote-and-gm-freeze-about-glyphosate-in-urine/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">glyphosate in urine</a> (no concern), <a href="http://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-paper-on-insecticides-and-birth-defects-to-be-published-in-occupational-and-environmental-medicine-a-bmj-specialist-journal-2-2/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">insecticides and birth defects</a>(“premature to draw conclusions”), <a href="http://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-research-on-alcohol-and-cancer/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">alcohol</a>, <a href="http://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-efsa-report-conclusion-that-seralini-study-conclusions-were-not-supported-by-data/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">GMO corn</a>, <a href="http://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-study-of-trace-metals-and-lower-or-higher-cancer-risk-as-published-in-gut-2-2/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">trace metals</a>, <a href="http://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-study-investigating-content-of-and-contaminants-in-laboratory-rodent-diets/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">lab rodent diets</a> and more.The <a href="http://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-the-european-chemicals-agency-echa-committee-for-risk-assessment-not-classifying-glyphosate-as-a-carcinogen/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">ECHA decision</a> that glyphosate is not a carcinogen “is to be congratulated,” according to Boobis, and the <a href="http://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-carcinogenicity-classification-of-five-pesticides-by-the-international-agency-for-research-on-cancer-iarc/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">IARC decision</a> that it is probably carcinogenic “is not a cause for undue alarm,” because it did not take into account how pesticides are used in the real world.Boobis declared no conflicts of interest in the IARC release or any of the earlier SMC releases that carry his quotes. But he then sparked a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/may/17/unwho-panel-in-conflict-of-interest-row-over-glyphosates-cancer-risk" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">conflict-of-interest scandal</a> when news broke that he held leadership positions with the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI), a <a href="https://usrtk.org/sweeteners/ilsi-wields-stealthy-influence-for-the-food-and-agrichemical-industries/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">pro-industry group</a>, at the same time he co-chaired a U.N. panel that found glyphosate <a href="http://www.who.int/foodsafety/jmprsummary2016.pdf?ua=1" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">unlikely to pose a cancer risk</a> through diet. (Boobis is currently <a href="http://ilsi.org/about/leadership-support/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">chair</a> of the ILSI Board of Trustees, and <a href="http://ilsi.eu/about-us/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">vice president ad interim</a> of ILSI/Europe.)ILSI has received <a href="https://usrtk.org/sweeteners/ilsi-wields-stealthy-influence-for-the-food-and-agrichemical-industries/" style="text-decoration-line: none; outline: none;">six-figure donations</a> from Monsanto and CropLife International, the pesticide trade association. Professor Angelo Moretto, who co-chaired the U.N. panel on glyphosate along with Boobis, also held a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/may/17/unwho-panel-in-conflict-of-interest-row-over-glyphosates-cancer-risk" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">leadership role in ILSI</a>. Yet the panel <a href="http://www.who.int/foodsafety/faq/en/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">declared</a> no conflicts of interest.Kelland did not report on those conflicts, though she did <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-who-glyphosate-idUSKCN0Y71HR" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">write about</a> the findings of the “U.N. experts” who exonerated glyphosate of cancer risk, and she once recycled a Boobis quote from an <a href="http://www.sciencemediacentre.org/experts-respond-to-the-news-that-high-levels-of-dioxins-have-been-found-in-slaughtered-pigs-in-the-republic-of-ireland-2/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">SMC press release</a> for an article about <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-ireland-food-recall-idUSL751490720081207" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">tainted Irish pork</a>. (The risk to consumers was low.)When asked about the SMC conflict of interest disclosure policy, and why Boobis’ ISLI connection was not disclosed in SMC releases, Fox responded:<blockquote style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">We ask all researchers we use to provide their COIs and proactively make those available to journalists. In line with several other COI policies, we are unable to investigate every COI, though we welcome journalists doing so.</blockquote>Boobis could not be reached for comment, but told the Guardian lnx, “My role in ILSI (and two of its branches) is as a public sector member and chair of their boards of trustees, positions which are not remunerated.”But the conflict “sparked furious condemnation from green MEPs and NGOs,” the Guardian reported, “intensified by the [U.N. panel] report’s release two days before an EU relicensing vote on glyphosate, which will be worth billions of dollars to industry.”And so goes it with the tangled web of influence involving corporations, science experts, media coverage and the high-stakes debate about glyphosate, now playing out on the world stage as Monsanto <a href="https://usrtk.org/pesticides/mdl-monsanto-glyphosate-cancer-case-key-documents-analysis/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">faces lawsuits</a> over the chemical due to cancer claims, and seeks to complete a <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2017-07-13/does-the-world-s-top-weed-killer-cause-cancer-trump-s-epa-will-decide" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">$66 billion deal with Bayer</a>.Meanwhile, in the U.S., as Bloomberg <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2017-07-13/does-the-world-s-top-weed-killer-cause-cancer-trump-s-epa-will-decide" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">reported</a> on July 13: “Does the World’s Top Weed Killer Cause Cancer? Trump’s EPA Will Decide.”A version of this story originally ran in <a href="http://fair.org/home/reuters-vs-un-cancer-agency-are-corporate-ties-influencing-science-coverage/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting</a>.<div wibbitz="embed-main-player" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="bio-new body_environment" style="width: 630px; line-height: 22px; height: auto; border-top: 3px solid rgb(223, 223, 218); clear: both;"><div class="author-bio">Stacy Malkan is co-director of <a href="http://usrtk.org/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">U.S. Right to Know</a>,</div></div></div></div><div>
<div>http://www.independentsciencenews.org/science-media/the-goodman-affair-monsanto-targets-the-heart-of-science/</div><div>...
<div><p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;"> strategy, often with the willing cooperation of publishers, is effective and sometimes blatant. In 2009, the scientific publishing giant Elsevier was found to have invented an <a href="http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/27376/title/Merck-published-fake-journal/" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">entire medical journal</a>, complete with editorial board, in order to publish papers promoting the products of the pharmaceutical manufacturer Merck. Merck provided the papers, Elsevier published them, and doctors read them, unaware that the <em style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Australasian Journal of Bone and Joint Medicine was simply a stuffed dummy.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Fast forward to September 2012, when the scientific journal <em style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; border-image-source: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-width: initial; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Food and Chemical Toxicology (<em style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; border-image-source: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-width: initial; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">FCT) published a study that caused an international storm (<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2012.08.005" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; border-image-source: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-width: initial; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Séralini, et al. 2012</a>). The study, led by Prof Gilles-Eric Séralini of the University of Caen, France, suggested a Monsanto genetically modified (GM) maize, and the Roundup herbicide it is grown with, pose serious health risks. The two-year feeding study found that rats fed both suffered severe organ damage and increased rates of tumors and premature death. Both the herbicide (Roundup) and the GM maize are Monsanto products. Corinne Lepage, France’s former environment minister, called the study <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.fr/corinne-lepage/ogm-une-etude-et-une-demarche-historiques_b_1907658.html?utm_hp_ref=france" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; border-image-source: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-width: initial; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">“a bomb</a>”.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Subsequently, an <a href="http://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-gm-maize-causing-tumours-in-rats/" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">orchestrated campaign</a> was launched to <a href="http://www.independentsciencenews.org/health/seralini-and-science-nk603-rat-study-roundup/" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">discredit the study</a> in the media and persuade the journal to retract it. Many of those who wrote letters to <em style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">FCT (which is published by Elsevier) had conflicts of interest with the GM industry and its lobby groups, though these were <a href="http://gmwatch.org/latest-listing/51-2012/14514" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">not publicly disclosed</a>.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">The journal did not retract the study (editor’s note: later they did). But just a few months later, in early 2013 the <em style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; border-image-source: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-width: initial; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">FCT editorial board acquired a new “<a href="http://www.journals.elsevier.com/food-and-chemical-toxicology/editorial-board/" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; border-image-source: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-width: initial; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Associate Editor for biotechnology</a>”, Richard E. Goodman. This was a new position, seemingly established especially for Goodman in the wake of the “Séralini affair”.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Richard E. Goodman is professor at the Food Allergy Research and Resource Program, University of Nebraska. But he is also a former Monsanto employee, who worked for the company between <a href="http://www.hesiglobal.org/files/public/Committees/PATC/Meetings/2012%20Prague/SpeakerBiosPATC_Sym2012.pdf" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">1997 and 2004</a>. While at Monsanto he assessed the allergenicity of the company’s GM crops and published papers on its behalf on allergenicity and safety issues relating to GM food (Goodman and Leach 2004).<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Goodman had no documented connection to the journal until February 2013. His fast-tracked appointment, directly onto the upper editorial board raises urgent questions. Does Monsanto now effectively decide which papers on biotechnology are published in <em style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">FCT? And is this part of an attempt by Monsanto and the life science industry to seize control of science?<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">To equate one journal with “science” may seem like an exaggeration. But peer-reviewed publication, in the minds of most scientists, is science. Once a paper is published in an academic journal it enters the canon and stands with the discovery of plate tectonics or the structure of DNA. All other research, no matter how groundbreaking or true, is irrelevant. As a scientist once scathingly said of the “commercially confidential” industry safety data that underpin approvals of chemicals and GM foods, “If it isn’t published, it doesn’t exist.”<h4 style="margin: 0px 0px 0.5em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1.2em; clear: both; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Goodman’s ILSI links</h4><p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">The industry affiliations of <em style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">FCT’s new gatekeeper for biotechnology are not restricted to having worked directly for Monsanto. Goodman has an <a href="http://www.hesiglobal.org/files/public/ParticipantsList.pdf" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">active</a> and <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjsBLqhhKkc" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">ongoing</a> involvement with the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI). ILSI is funded by the multinational GM and agrochemical companies, including Monsanto. It develops industry-friendly risk assessment methods for GM foods and chemical food contaminants and inserts them into government regulations.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">ILSI describes itself as a public interest non-profit but its infiltration of regulatory agencies and influence on risk assessment policy has become highly controversial in North America and Europe. In 2005 US-based non-profits and trade unions <a href="http://www.nrdc.org/media/pressreleases/060131.asp" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">wrote</a> to the World Health Organization (WHO) protesting against ILSI’s influence on international health standards protecting food and water supplies. As a result, the WHO <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1570087/" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; border-image-source: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-width: initial; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">barred ILSI</a> from taking part in WHO activities setting safety standards, because of its funding sources.  And in Europe in 2012, Diana Banati, then head of the management board at the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), had to resign over her undisclosed long-standing involvement with ILSI (Robinson et al. 2013).<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Goodman’s appointment to <em style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">FCT is surprising also for the fact that the journal already has expertise in GM food safety. Of the four senior editors, José L. Domingo is a professor of toxicology and environmental health and author of two comprehensive reviews of GM food safety studies (<a href="http://www.biosafety.ru/ftp/domingo.pdf" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Domingo</a>  2007; <a href="http://maurin.bnk.free.fr/Domingo%20et%20al.,%202011.pdf" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Domingo and Bordonaba</a> 2011). Both reviews expressed skepticism of the thesis that GMOs are safe. Consequently, it is far from clear why <em style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">FCT needs an “associate editor for biotechnology”, but it is clear why Monsanto would have an interest in ensuring that the “Séralini affair” is never repeated.<h4 style="margin: 0px 0px 0.5em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1.2em; clear: both; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Editing the scientific record: The case of Paul Christou</h4><p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;"><em style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">FCT is not the only academic journal that appears to have been captured by commercial interests. After the initial campaign failed to get<em style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; border-image-source: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-width: initial; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">FCT to retract the Séralini study, the journal <em style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; border-image-source: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-width: initial; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Transgenic Research published a heavy-handed critique of the study and of the researchers themselves (<a href="http://www.ask-force.org/web/Seralini/Arjo-Plurality-Opinion-Scientific-Discourse-Seralini-2013.pdf" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; border-image-source: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-width: initial; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Arjo et al</a>., 2013). The lead author of that critique was Paul Christou.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Christou and co-authors castigated the editor of <em style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">FCT for publishing the study, calling it “a clear and egregious breach of the standards of scientific publishing”. They insisted that the journal editor retract the study “based on its clearly flawed data, its breaches of ethical standards, and the strong evidence for scientific misconduct and abuse of the peer-review process”. “Even a full retraction of the Séralini article” wrote Christou, “will not cleanse the Internet of the inflammatory images of tumorous rats.”<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">The same writers further implied that the Séralini study was “fraudulent”, that the researchers failed to analyse the data objectively, and that the treatment of the experimental animals was inhumane.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">This is not the first time Christou has attacked scientific findings that have raised doubts about GM crops. In 2001 Ignacio Chapela and David Quist of the University of California, Berkeley, reported in the journal <em style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; border-image-source: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-width: initial; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Nature that indigenous Mexican maize varieties had become contaminated with GM genes (<a href="http://boards.cannabis.com/attachments/cannabis-com-lounge/113024d1168890567-global-warming-article-chapela-i.-transgenic-dna-native-mexican-corn.pdf" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; border-image-source: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-width: initial; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Quist and Chapela</a>, 2001). This issue was, and remains, highly controversial since Mexico is the genetic centre of origin for maize. In an exact parallel with the Séralini study, an <a href="http://www.gmwatch.org/latest-listing/1-test/10959" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; border-image-source: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-width: initial; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">internet campaign</a> was waged against Chapela and Quist demanding that the journal retract the study. Then Christou, just as he was later to do with the Séralini study, attacked Chapela and Quist’s paper in an article in <em style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; border-image-source: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-width: initial; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Transgenic Research. The title said it all: “No credible scientific evidence is presented to support claims that transgenic DNA was introgressed into traditional maize landraces in Oaxaca, Mexico” (<a href="https://research.cip.cgiar.org/confluence/download/attachments/3487/ak7.pdf" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; border-image-source: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-width: initial; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Christou</a>, 2002).<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Responding to the campaign, <em style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Nature editor Philip Campbell asked Chapela and Quist for more data, which they provided, and arranged another round of peer review. Only one reviewer in the final group of three supported retraction, and no one had presented any data or analysis that contradicted Chapela and Quist’s main finding. Nevertheless, <em style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Nature <a href="http://www.twnside.org.sg/title/info10.htm" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">asserted</a>, “The evidence available is not sufficient to justify the publication of the original paper”. Some subsequent investigations, testing different samples, reported finding GM genes in native landraces of Mexican corn (<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3001031/" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Pineyro-Nelson et al.</a> 2009), while others did not (<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1184035/" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Ortiz-Garcia et al.</a> 2005).<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Paul Christou, in contrast, probably did not have much trouble getting either of his critiques published in <em style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; border-image-source: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-width: initial; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Transgenic Research. He is the journal’s editor-in-chief. And, like Goodman, Christou is connected to Monsanto. Monsanto bought the GM seed company Agracetus (<a href="http://www.icrea.cat/web/ReportViewer.aspx?entidad=W0LloaT1B7Y%3d&id=KT0JBsyZN78%3d" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Christou’s former employer</a>) and Monsanto now holds <a href="http://www.ptodirect.com/Results/Patents?p=1&r=10&query=Christou-Paul.INNM." style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">patents</a> for the production of GM crops on which Christou is <a href="http://www.ptodirect.com/Results/Patents?query=PN/6288312" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">named</a> as the inventor.  It is normal practice to declare inventor status on patents as a competing interest in scientific articles, but Christou did not disclose either conflict of interest – his editorship of the journal or his patent inventor status – in his critique of the Séralini study.<h4 style="margin: 0px 0px 0.5em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1.2em; clear: both; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">The Ermakova affair: Preemptive editing of the scientific record</h4><p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Not only can journal editors prevent the publication of research showing problems with GM crops in their own journals – they can effectively prevent publication elsewhere. In 2007, the leading academic journal <em style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Nature Biotechnology featured an extraordinary attack on the work of Russian scientist, Irina Ermakova (Marshall, 2007). Her laboratory research had found decreased weight gain, increased mortality, and decreased fertility in rats fed GM Roundup-tolerant soy over several generations (Ermakova, 2006; Ermakova, 2009).<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">The editor of <em style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Nature Biotechnology, Andrew Marshall, contacted Ermakova, inviting her to answer questions about her findings, which she had only presented at conferences. He <a href="http://www.nature.com/nbt/journal/v25/n12/extref/nbt1207-1359-S1.pdf" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">told her</a> it was “an opportunity to present your own findings and conclusions in your own words, rather than a critique from one side”. Ermakova agreed.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">The process that followed was as deceptive as it was irregular. The editor <a href="http://www.nature.com/nbt/journal/v25/n12/extref/nbt1207-1359-S1.pdf" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">sent </a>Ermakova a set of questions about her research, which she answered. In due course she was sent a proof of what she thought was to be ‘her’ article, with her byline as author.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">However, the article that was finally published was very different. Ermakova’s byline had been removed and Marshall’s substituted. Each of Ermakova’s answers to the questions was followed by a lengthy critique by four pro-GM scientists (Marshall, 2007). The proof sent to Ermakova, now revealed as a ‘<a href="http://www.nature.com/nbt/journal/v25/n12/extref/nbt1207-1359-S1.pdf" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">dummy proof</a>’, had not included these critical comments. Consequently, she was denied the chance to address them in the same issue of the journal. And in the final article the editor had preserved the critics’ references but removed many of Ermakova’s, with the effect that her statements <a href="http://www.ask-force.org/web/Ermakova/Marshall-Ermakova-et-al-Controversy-all-reactions.pdf" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">appeared unsubstantiated</a>.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;"><em style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Nature Biotechnology’s treatment of Ermakova <a href="http://www.ask-force.org/web/Ermakova/Marshall-Ermakova-et-al-Controversy-all-reactions.pdf" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">attracted condemnation</a> from many scientists. It was also strongly criticized in some<a href="http://www.gmwatch.org/latest-listing/46-2007/5861" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">media</a> <a href="http://independentsciencenews.org/health/nature-biotechnology/" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">outlets</a>. Harvey Marcovitch, former editor of a scientific journal and now director of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), which sets ethical standards for academic journals, <a href="http://www.gmwatch.org/latest-listing/46-2007/5861-the-excommunication-of-a-heretic" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">commented</a>, “This is a type of publication which I have never encountered.” He said that while reading it he was struck by “some surprising things”. He was unwilling to speculate as to what exactly happened: “Either the editor was trying out a new form of experimentation, in which not everything went according to plan, or there was indeed a conspiracy or whatever one wants to call it.”<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Dr Brian John of the Wales-based campaign group GM-Free Cymru was more <a href="http://www.gmfreecymru.org.uk/pivotal_papers/rottweiler.htm" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">blunt</a>, calling the process “tabloid academic publishing involving deception, lies, duplicity and editorial malpractice”.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Amid the uproar, editor Marshall released his email correspondence with Ermakova on the internet. It showed that far from his having “solicited” the comments from the critics, as he had originally claimed, the four pro-GM scientists had themselves approached the journal proposing their “critique”, and even though none of them are toxicologists, Marshall had agreed. The self-selected critics judged Ermakova’s research – which they had never even seen in its complete form – “demonstrably flawed”.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;"><em style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; border-image-source: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-width: initial; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Nature Biotechnology also failed to fully disclose the conflicts of interest of Ermakova’s critics. <a href="http://www.powerbase.info/index.php/Bruce_Chassy" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; border-image-source: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-width: initial; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Bruce Chassy</a> was lead author on two influential ILSI publications, which defined weak risk assessment methodologies for GM crops that were <a href="http://www.testbiotech.org/en/node/426" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; border-image-source: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-width: initial; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">later inserted</a> into the guidelines of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA).  Vivian Moses was chairman of <a href="http://www.powerbase.info/index.php/CropGen" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; border-image-source: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-width: initial; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">CropGen</a>, a GM industry lobby group with Monsanto among its funders.  <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/pub/l-val-giddings/4/2a1/2b1" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; border-image-source: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-width: initial; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">L. Val Giddings</a>, an industry consultant, was described in the article as formerly of the Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO). <em style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; border-image-source: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-width: initial; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Nature Biotechnology omitted to say that Giddings occupied a senior position at BIO – <a href="http://mybio.zerista.com/profile/member/391888" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; border-image-source: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-width: initial; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">vice president for food and agriculture </a>– and that <a href="http://www.bio.org/articles/bio-members-web-site-links" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; border-image-source: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-width: initial; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">BIO’s funders</a> include the GM crop companies, Monsanto, Dow and DuPont. The last of the four critics, <a href="http://www.powerbase.info/index.php/Alan_McHughen" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; border-image-source: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-width: initial; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Alan McHughen</a>, developed a GM flax called Triffid that in 2009 was found to have contaminated flax supplies coming into Europe from Canada. If these interests had been disclosed, readers might have judged the criticism of Ermakova differently.<h4 style="margin: 0px 0px 0.5em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1.2em; clear: both; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Open source scientific publishing?</h4><p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">These examples show that the threat to scientific publishing from industry influence is real. The avenues for researchers to publish critical views in science are already few. This is especially true for the high-impact journals that the media notices and that therefore influence public discourse. Equally problematic is that few scientific institutions will support researchers whose findings contradict industry viewpoints, as Chapela found out when UC Berkeley tried to <a href="http://www.insidebayarea.com/trivalleyherald/localnews/ci_2668826" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">deny him tenure</a> following the controversial maize study. Even fewer funding sources will give to such researchers. Consequently almost all funding of biosafety research finds its way into the hands of researchers with industry ties.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">This directly affects the quality of the science produced. A recent literature review found that most studies concluding that GM foods are as safe as non-GM counterparts were performed by the developer companies or their associates (Domingo and Bordonaba, 2011). It is no coincidence that Norway, a country without an agricultural industry lobby, hosts the only publicly funded <a href="http://www.genok.com/about_genok" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">institute</a> in the world with a mission to conduct research on the environmental, health and social consequences of genetic engineering.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">There are in principle ways within the existing system to mitigate or neutralize the influence of industry on the ability of scientists to publish independent and critical research. The first is transparency in publishing. Journal editors should adopt the COPE <a href="http://publicationethics.org/files/Code_of_conduct_for_journal_editors_Mar11.pdf" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; border-image-source: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-width: initial; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">guidelines</a> and publish all conflicts of interest among staff and editors.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Also in line with COPE’s stipulation, peer reviewers should be selected to avoid conflicts of interest. If this proves impossible due to the spread of patents and industry research funding, then care must be taken to select a balanced panel representing a plurality of views.<em style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">FCT is a member of COPE, but does not publish information on editors’ conflicts of interest, and its appointment of Goodman over Domingo shows that it does not seek to avoid them.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">There may in fact be a need to critically examine the entire concept of peer review. The limitations of all types of expert opinion – whether that of an individual expert or of an expert panel – are recognized in the field of evidence-based medicine. To address this problem, bodies such as the non-profit <a href="http://www.cochrane.org/" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Cochrane Collaboration</a> have developed systematic and transparent methodologies to review and evaluate data on the effectiveness of different medical interventions. The aim is to enable healthcare practitioners to make well-informed clinical decisions. The <a href="http://handbook.cochrane.org/" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">reviewing criteria</a> are transparently set out in advance, so there is less scope for bias in evaluations of studies. When disagreements do occur, it is easy to pinpoint the reason and resolve the problem. Cochrane also implements <a href="http://handbook.cochrane.org/chapter_2/box_2_6_a_the_cochrane_collaboration_code_of_conduct_for.htm" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">rules </a>to prevent conflicts of interest among its reviewers and editorial board.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">The Cochrane approach is widely respected and the lessons learned in evidence-based medicine about conflicts of interest and resisting industry pressure are being <a href="http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/go/38673" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">applied</a> to other fields, such as hazardous environmental exposures (<a href="http://content.healthaffairs.org/content/30/5/931.short" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Woodruff et al</a>., 2011).  There is no reason why scientific journals, including those publishing GMO research, cannot use similar methods to evaluate papers, so that less discretion is given to experts with conflicts of interest.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Implementing such policies presumes strong support among the scientific community for independent science. But this support may not exist outside of medical research.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;"><em style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; border-image-source: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-width: initial; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">FCT took on Goodman, a former Monsanto employee and well-known supporter of industry viewpoints, immediately following the publication of a controversial paper that was critical of Monsanto’s principal products. In doing so, <em style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; border-image-source: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-width: initial; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">FCT senior management bypassed the normal scientific editorial culture of gradual promotion from within.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Meanwhile, two other prominent academic journals have served as platforms for their editors to generate unsubstantiated and unscientific abuse without any repercussions for their editorial positions. Marshall remains editor of <em style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Nature Biotechnology. The fact that journal editors get away with such behavior suggests that support for independent research among scientists is generally lacking and that accountability within the scientific publishing world barely exists.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">It seems unlikely that scientific journals will address unaided the defects in scientific publishing at <em style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">FCT and elsewhere. To do so would require confronting the fundamental problem that academic science now largely makes its money from exploiting conflicts of interest. This has become the underlying business model of science. Universities offer ‘independent’ advice to governments while taking corporate money for ‘research’. Corporations offer that money to universities, not for the knowledge it generates, but primarily for the influence it buys.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">These same incentives are reinforced at the personal level as well. Individual scientists occupy taxpayer-funded academic positions while benefitting from patents, stocks and industry consultancies. If journals and government agencies took action to eliminate conflicts of interest, the corporate money for science would dry up, because industry-funded scientists would lose influence.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">But if scientific journals do not find a way to level the playing field for critical studies, the few scientists who are still able to carry out independent public interest research may need to find an alternative publishing model: public peer review, or ‘open-source science’. Such online collaborative approaches could even revitalize scientific publishing.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Unless radical reform is achieved, peer-reviewed publication, which many hold to be the defining characteristic of science, will have undergone a remarkable inversion. From its origin as a safeguard of quality and independence, it will have become a tool through which one vision, that of corporate science, came to assert ultimate control. Richard Goodman, <em style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">FCT’s new Associate Editor for biotechnology, now has the opportunity to throw down the stairs only those papers marked “industry approved”.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Note: Click <a href="http://www.independentsciencenews.org/health/seralini-and-science-nk603-rat-study-roundup/" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">here</a> to see a response from scientists to the attacks on Séralini<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Postcript: FCT has <a href="http://www.gmwatch.org/files/Letter_AWHayes_GES.pdf" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">now retracted</a> (Nov 28 2013) the Séralini study. The editors’ letter is at the bottom of this link.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Post-postscript (Feb 25 2015): Food and Chemical Toxicology has expelled Richard Goodman and demoted Wallace Hayes, apparently because of numerous complaints.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;"><strong style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">References<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Arjo G, et al. (2013). Plurality of opinion, scientific discourse and pseudoscience: an in depth analysis of the Séralini et al. study claiming that Roundup Ready corn or the herbicide Roundup cause cancer in rats. Transgenic Research 22: 2 255-267<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Christou P (2002). No credible scientific evidence is presented to support claims that transgenic DNA was introgressed into traditional maize landraces in Oaxaca, Mexico. Transgenic Research 11: iii–v<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Domingo JL (2007). Toxicity studies of genetically modified plants: a review of the published literature. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 47(8): 721-733<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Domingo JL and JG Bordonaba (2011). A literature review on the safety assessment of genetically modified plants. Environ Int 37: 734–742.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Ermakova I (2006). Genetically modified soy leads to the decrease of weight and high mortality of rat pups of the first generation. Preliminary studies. Ecosinform. 2006;1:4–9.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Ermakova I (2009). [Influence of soy with gene EPSPS CP4 on the physiological state and reproductive function of rats in the first two generations] [Russian text]. Contemporary Problems in Science and Education 5:15–20.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Marshall A (2007). GM soybeans and health safety – a controversy reexamined. Nat Biotechnol 25: 981–987.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Ortiz-Garcia S, et al. (2005). Absence of detectable transgenes in local landraces of maize in Oaxaca, Mexico. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 102: 18242.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Pineyro-Nelson A, et al. (2009). Transgenes in Mexican maize: molecular evidence and methodological considerations for GMO detection in landrace populations. Mol Ecol 18(4): 750-761.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Quist D and IH Chapela (2001). Transgenic DNA introgressed into traditional maize landraces in Oaxaca, Mexico. Nature 414(6863): 541-543.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Robinson, C, et al. (2013). Conflicts of interest at the European Food Safety Authority erode public confidence. J Epidemiol Community Health.doi:10.1136/jech-2012-202185.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Séralini GE, et al. (2012). Long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize. Food and Chemical Toxicology 50(11): 4221-4231.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Woodruff TJ, et al. (2011). An evidence-based medicine methodology to bridge the gap between clinical and environmental health sciences. Health Aff (Millwood) 30(5): 931-937.</div><div>=
<div>
</div><div><div id="mw-content-text" lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr" style="direction: ltr; line-height: 19.2000007629395px;">International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) is a Washington-D.C. based <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Lobby_group" title="Lobby group" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">lobby group</a> funded by food, chemical and drug companies. Primarily it acts on behalf of the global food manufacturing industry, but it also includes operations involved with agriculture and genetic modification; pesticides and pharmaceuticals; confectionery; and even with such dubious consumables as cigarettes.On its website the ILSI states that it works "to further the understanding of scientific issues relating to nutrition, food safety, toxicology, risk assessment, and the environment by bringing together scientists from academia, government, and industry." In particular it states that four "key issues" that it addresses are "overweight/obesity", "food biotechnology", "functional foods" and "risk assessment". It also states that "these initiatives are in addition to ongoing efforts to provide new knowledge on: the role of nutrition in human health; the alleviation of worldwide micronutrient deficiency; the safety of food ingredients and additives; and evaluation of water purification methodologies and standards."<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-1" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[1]</a>However, its private agenda has often been designed to thwart attempts to regulate or reduce public exposure to many dangerous or environmentally-damaging substances. Its private interests are focussed on the financial benefits of its major backers – the larger food companies and their <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Trade_association" title="Trade association" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">trade associations</a>.This imbalance led, eventually, to the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/World_Health_Organization" title="World Health Organization" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">World Health Organization</a> banning the organisation from direct involvement in WHO (and related agencies) activities.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-2" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[2]</a>The ILSI certainly has sponsored genuine research, run real educational workshops around the world, and held many genuine conferences. It has done this both under its own name, and also under the auspices of the seemingly-independent <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Toxicology_Forum&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Toxicology Forum (page does not exist)" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Toxicology Forum</a> which it runs (or perhaps 'guides') in parallel … using the same staff and venues … yet without any obvious connections.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-3" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[3]</a> The Toxicology Forum also seems to have extremely close ties to the Society of Toxicology (they share a fax number) and both the International Association of Environmental Mutagenesis and Genomics Societies (IAEMGS) and the American College of Toxicology (ACT), with which it shares an address in Reston VA.The Toxicology Forum is three years older than the ILSI (established in 1975) and wider in that it draws its membership from petroleum industries as well as from the ILSI's traditional sources in food, chemical, and drug companies.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-4" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[4]</a> It's President until recently has been Phillippe Schubik<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-5" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[5]</a> <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-6" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[6]</a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-7" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[7]</a> of the Eppley Institute at the University of Nebraska, and its Administrative Vice President is ILSI President/Coca-Cola VP Alex Malaspina.<div id="toc" class="toc" style="border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 7px; display: table; zoom: 1; background-color: rgb(249, 249, 249);"><div id="toctitle" style="direction: ltr; text-align: center;"><h2 style="margin: 0px 0px 0.6em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border: none; display: inline; background: none;">Contents</h2>  [<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#" class="internal" id="togglelink" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">hide</a>] </div><ul style="line-height: 1.5em; list-style-type: none; margin: 0.3em 0px 0.5em; padding: 0px; list-style-image: none;"><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-1" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#Activities" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">1 Activities</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-2" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#Foundation" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">2 Foundation</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-3" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#Hidden_links" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">3 Hidden links</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-4" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#Expansion" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">4 Expansion</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-5" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#Legal_and_structural_coordination" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">5 Legal and structural coordination</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-6" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#Dealing_with_Tobacco" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">6 Dealing with Tobacco</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-7" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#Good_Work" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">7 Good Work</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-8" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#WHO.27s_NGO_status" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">8 WHO's NGO status</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-9" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#ILSI.27s_status_with_WHO_Downgraded_Following_Protests" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">9 ILSI's status with WHO Downgraded Following Protests</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-10" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#Funding" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">10 Funding</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-11" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#Member_companies" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">11 Member companies</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-12" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#Contact_Details" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">12 Contact Details</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-13" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#Articles_and_Resources" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">13 Articles and Resources</a><ul style="line-height: 1.5em; list-style-type: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 2em; padding: 0px; list-style-image: none;"><li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-14" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#Sources" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">13.1 Sources</a></li><li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-15" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#Related_SourceWatch_Articles" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">13.2 Related SourceWatch Articles</a></li><li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-16" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#External_links" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">13.3 External links</a></li></ul></li></ul></div><h2 style="font-weight: normal; margin: 0px 0px 0.6em; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0.17em; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-color: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Activities</h2>Today the ILSI specialises in lobbying national and international agencies such as the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Food_and_Agriculture_Organization" title="Food and Agriculture Organization" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Food and Agriculture Organization</a> (FAO) and the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/World_Health_Organisation" title="World Health Organisation" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">World Health Organisation</a> (WHO). Its membership consists of 400 of 'the world’s leading manufacturers of food and food ingredients, chemicals, pharmaceuticals and other consumer products', and the list it publishes includes the names of <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Burger_King" title="Burger King" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Burger King</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Cargill" title="Cargill" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Cargill</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Cadbury" title="Cadbury" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Cadbury</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Coca-Cola" title="Coca-Cola" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Coca-Cola</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Heinz" title="Heinz" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Heinz</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Hershey" title="Hershey" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Hershey</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Kellogg%E2%80%99s&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Kellogg’s (page does not exist)" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Kellogg’s</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Kraft" title="Kraft" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Kraft</a> Foods, Masterfoods (<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Mars" title="Mars" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Mars</a>), <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Monsanto" title="Monsanto" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Monsanto</a>, Nabisco, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Nestl%C3%A9" title="Nestlé" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Nestlé</a>, NutraSweet, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Pepsi-Cola&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Pepsi-Cola (page does not exist)" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Pepsi-Cola</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Procter%26_Gamble" title="Procter & Gamble" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Procter & Gamble</a>, Red Bull and Tate & Lyle. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-8" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">[8]</a>There are also strong links between the ILSI, alcoholic beverage associations, and confectionery-industry lobby groups such as the US Sugar Association, the UK Sugar Bureau, and the World Sugar Research Organisation (WSRO).<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-9" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[9]</a>The WSRO and the ILSI both make claims that sugar is good for you, and in 2004 they were charged with paying off the Expert Consultation on Carbohydrates in Human Nutrition, effectively botching the WHO's research on sugar and its health effects. The BBC's Panorama program also says they affected the removal of the WHO's director of the International Obesity Task Force, Derek Yach (who, famously, also ran the Tobacco Free Initiative program at WHO and was an architect of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control).<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-10" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[10]</a>The US Sugar Association (whose members include Coca-Cola, Pepsi and <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/General_Foods" title="General Foods" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">General Foods</a>) has recently lobbied Congress to withdraw $406 million of WHO funding because of its promotion of low-sugar intake to counter obesity.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-11" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[11]</a>However the ILSI is even-handed; see how it caved in to <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/G.D.Searle%26_Company" title="G.D. Searle & Company" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">G.D.Searle</a> over Nutrasweet trials, and how it rejected two grant proposals in 1985 when a researcher raised questions about the sweetener’s effects on children.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-Gregory_Gordon-12" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[12]</a> The researcher later commented that; "There’s an internal conflict of interest, when a company, which has profit at the bottom line, is charged with finding out the true safety of its product."The ILSI also lobbies to promote the acceptance of genetic modification of foodstuffs, which is not particularly surprising since both Monsanto and <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Syngenta" title="Syngenta" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Syngenta</a> are on ILSI's governing board of trustees, and play a substantial role on many committees.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-13" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[13]</a><h2 style="font-weight: normal; margin: 0px 0px 0.6em; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0.17em; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-color: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Foundation</h2>Since it was first established in the 1978 by Coca-Cola, Heinz, Kraft, General Foods, and Procter & Gamble, the overall direction of the ILSI has been largely under the control of the Coca-Cola Company, although, as the organisation grew, the control has become more diffuse.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-14" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[14]</a>Alex Malaspina, a Vice President at Coca Cola, took on the role of President (between 1978 and 1991) and he set about building a global empire. Coca-Cola also provided the initial secretarial staff, and it used the organisation as a way to build self-funding coalitions of like-minded corporation to further its aims of deregulation and small-government.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-15" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[15]</a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-16" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[16]</a>ILSI Europe was founded in 1986, and other regional operations followed. Now the organisation has branches in <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Argentina" title="Argentina" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Argentina</a>, Australasia, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Brazil" title="Brazil" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Brazil</a>, Europe, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/India" title="India" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">India</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Japan" title="Japan" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Japan</a>, Korea, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Mexico" title="Mexico" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Mexico</a>, North Africa and the Gulf Region, North America, North Andean, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/South_Africa" title="South Africa" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">South Africa</a>, South Andean, Southeast Asia, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Thailand" title="Thailand" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Thailand</a> and <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/China" title="China" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">China</a>.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-17" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[17]</a>From 1979 it also published the scientific journal Nutrition Review in English, while each national organisation also publishes scientific monographs and journals in its own language.The ILSI has also cooperated with, and sometimes absorbed, other closely-related industry associations.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-18" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[18]</a> However it has always been keen to preserve a 'clean' image by not openly associating with industries like that of tobacco. However food and tobacco are inextricably linked through their share of retail outlets as well as group ownership structures.In the USA, the food and tobacco industries were dominated by multi-industry corporate structures such as that of Kraft General Foods / Millers Beer / Philip Morris; and Nabisco / Kentucky Fried Chicken / Del Monte / RJ Reynolds Tobacco. In Australia, AMATIL held the Coca Cola franchise (and had other foods interests), while still controlling HD Wills & Company, the local manufacturer and distributor of <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/British_American_Tobacco" title="British American Tobacco" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">British American Tobacco</a> (BAT) cigarettes. The structural linkage of soft-drink, alcoholic beverage, and tobacco companies is common in other countries also.<h2 style="font-weight: normal; margin: 0px 0px 0.6em; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0.17em; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-color: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Hidden links</h2>During the 1980s, many food-related companies felt threatened by the emerging public health, nutrition and environmental concerns, and they were reluctant to associate with the pariah tobacco industry. So Kraft and Nabisco became the corporate sponsors of the ILSI Research Foundation, not Philip Morris and RJ Reynolds Tobacco.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-19" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[19]</a> However the ILSI continued to provide special services to the cigarette companies behind the scene.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-20" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[20]</a>More recently, the interests of food, pharmaceutical, tobacco, energy, and other industries have become even more entwined. They have learned to cooperate (rather than blaming each other for the cancer epidemic) and they now form coalitions to fight health and environmental regulations. It is notable that they generally employ the same lawyers, lobbyists and PR companies, and use essentially the same tactics.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-21" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[21]</a>It should also be remembered that tobacco and the food/beverage industries shared a concern with additives, preservatives, flavourings and pesticide residues. There is also a shared determination to ensure that the threat of such regulations can't impact their bottom line.However, by keeping tobacco publicly at arms length (thus preserving its apparent virginal purity), the ILSI was able to convince US government health organisations and those of the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/United_Nations" title="United Nations" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">United Nations</a>, to accept it as a genuine science-based (almost philanthropic) association intent only on advancing the science of nutrition and food technology. However, sometimes the potential exposure of the real behind-the-scene links to tobacco became, itself, a risk-factor to their status. (See page 4 Philip Morris report – Jim Tozzi – a tobacco lobbyist.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-22" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[22]</a>Maintaining distance from the tobacco industry while taking its money was comparatively easy for ILSI to do for the first years, since a large part of their early activities were genuine, and most of its scientist-members were well-intentioned. As a result, they were soon widely accepted around the world in government regulatory and WHO conferences and other activities.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-23" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[23]</a><h2 style="font-weight: normal; margin: 0px 0px 0.6em; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0.17em; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-color: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Expansion</h2>Right from the start, with the backing of large food corporations, the ILSI was soon in a position to expand its operations and it set about creating a number of subsidiary-divisions then later, foundations, which were often independently funded and controlled. The earliest and most prominent of these was the Nutrition Foundation (based in the USA), which by 1986 was being characterised by Nabisco executives as continuing "along a wreakless (sic) path of unrestrained growth without visible payback".<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-24" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[24]</a> President Alex Malaspina was seen as the person to blame.Dissatisfaction with the ILSI in 1987 led to RJ Reynolds and its associated food companies establishing their own Center for Excellence in Toxicology as a pseudo-International scientific organisation.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-25" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[25]</a> But nothing much came of it.In 1985 the ILSI sloughed off the Nutrition Foundation's Risk Assessment Committee as a separate ILSI Risk Sciences Institute. The aim appears to be one of raising $40 million at a time when risk characterisation had become the new fashion in anti-regulatory rhetoric,<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-26" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[26]</a> and this new Institute would help them get on this funding-bandwagon. They sought direct (but hidden) tobacco industry funding also.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Carol_Henry" title="Carol Henry" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Carol Henry</a> from Microbiological Associates was brought in to manage the new Institute in August of that year. She had been in charge of a major animal inhalation study contracted by the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Council_for_Tobacco_Research" title="Council for Tobacco Research" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Council for Tobacco Research</a>, and was seen as a risk-expert. This gave the new Institute a focus on the problems of tobacco smoke.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-27" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[27]</a>In July 1987 the ILSI held a meeting to discuss the potential impacts of Proposition 65 in California, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-28" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[28]</a> which lead to the USA's first major strict health and environmental law, and the tobacco industry took a lead position (along with Carol Henry and ILSI) because it featured prohibitions on "second-hand smoke" (called '<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Environmental_Tobacco_Smoke" title="Environmental Tobacco Smoke" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Environmental Tobacco Smoke</a>, or ETS') and closed many loopholes in cigarette labeling laws.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-29" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[29]</a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-30" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[30]</a>Henry must have impressed Californian Governor <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Pete_Wilson" title="Pete Wilson" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Pete Wilson</a>, because a few years later, when he became governor, he persuaded her to head the state's EPA's Health Hazards Risk Assessment division. Wilson and Henry then began taking a strong position against the strict health, environmental and warning-label regulations created by Proposition 65.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-31" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[31]</a>But after two years of battling the environmentalists, Henry left the Californian EPA for the calmer Washington DC climate of the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/U.S.Department_of_Energy" title="U.S. Department of Energy" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">U.S. Department of Energy</a> and then the American Petroleum Institute, the energy industries two main lobby forces in the Federal capital. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-32" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[32]</a> This effectively took her full circle since the petroleum companies were now key funders of the ILSI.In 1989 Malaspina had created the ILSI Health & Environmental Sciences Institute (HESI)<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-Food_regulation-33" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[33]</a> to encourage funding and membership by non-food companies. The organisation emphasised its 'global-independent' image, and NGO (at WHO) status. These were good reasons, it said, why the chemical, petroleum and pharmaceutical companies should join for their mutual benefit – and even tobacco - provided this wasn't publicised.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-34" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[34]</a><h2 style="font-weight: normal; margin: 0px 0px 0.6em; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0.17em; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-color: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Legal and structural coordination</h2>In all of its political battles and the proliferation of divisions, committees, institutes and the like, the ILSI had the faithful support of Washington DC lawyer/lobbyist Roger D Middlekauff, (of McKenna, Conner & Cuneo,). His name appears everywhere and it gives you some idea of the hidden reach of the ILSI's influence.He represented the ILSI when it was seeking tax-exempt status for its foundation (1983) from the IRS, and pledged to the tax authorities that the organization "does not have any plans to engage in commercially sponsored scientific research." Under IRS rules, it is not permitted to engage in any form of political lobbying,Middlekauff said that the ILSI would "direct the research toward benefiting the public" and would release all research results. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-Gregory_Gordon-12" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[12]</a> He was also closely associated in the Toxicology Forum with Alex Malaspina and Carol Henry, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-Meeting_on_Prop_65-35" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[35]</a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-36" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[36]</a> and with Phillippe Shubrik.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-Food_regulation-33" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[33]</a>Then in February 1988 he was involved in the incorporation (by the ILSI) of the International Food Biotechnology Council (IFBC) <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-37" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[37]</a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-38" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[38]</a> which was specifically set up to counter California's Proposition 65. He also figures in the documents as a driving force in the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Chemical_Sources_Association&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Chemical Sources Association (page does not exist)" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Chemical Sources Association</a> (CSA) and the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Flavor_and_Extract_Manufacturers_Association&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Flavor and Extract Manufacturers Association (page does not exist)" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Flavor and Extract Manufacturers Association</a> <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/FEMA" title="FEMA" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">FEMA</a>.Middlekauff's name often appears in the cc lists or letterhead of many chemical/food related organisations:<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-Meeting_on_Prop_65-35" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[35]</a> <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-39" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[39]</a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-40" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[40]</a> The International Technical Caramel Association was also favoured by his legal and chemical knowledge<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-41" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[41]</a> He is now deceased, but The American Chemical Association has a Roger Middlekauff Award for 'Chemistry and The Law' subsidiary.<h2 style="font-weight: normal; margin: 0px 0px 0.6em; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0.17em; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-color: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Dealing with Tobacco</h2>In 1989 the ILSI created a Division of Environmental Sciences which "provided a mechanism for companies from the chemical and pharmaceutical industries to become members of the ILSI while preserving ILSI-NF's concentration on issues of importance to the food industry."The <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Tobacco_industry" title="Tobacco industry" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">tobacco industry</a>'s interest in the ILSI had been boosted in 1985 when, after attending the Brighton UK, International Congress on Nutrition, a long-term tobacco consultant Dr. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Francis_J.C.Roe" title="Francis J. C. Roe" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Francis J. C. Roe</a> reported to <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Philip_Morris" title="Philip Morris" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Philip Morris</a> that "Many of the audience were surprised at the scale and breadth of ILSI activities" following a 35 minute promotional speech by Coca-Cola's Malaspina.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-42" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[42]</a>At about this time, the tobacco industry must have established some links to ILSI (probably via Kraft), because the following year Roe was asked to help organise an ILSI symposium on 'Inhalation Studies' (eg. the problems of second-hand tobacco smoke in everything but name) to be held in <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Germany" title="Germany" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Germany</a> during March 1987.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-43" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[43]</a>Roe suggested to the organiser (Dr Mohr from ILSI Germany) that they eliminate clinical or epidemiological studies from the discussion, thus removing anything related to humans. He wanted the symposium to focus entirely on toxicology, which is almost entirely studies on animals. This is much safer territory for tobacco science, since claim can always then be made that 'mice aren't men'.Between 1983 and 1998 the ILSI provided assistance to the tobacco industry in its attempts to subvert many attempts at legislative control over the industry's activities. It was effective, because it represented itself as an independent and unbiased scientific body, with international (including <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/World_Health_Organization" title="World Health Organization" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">World Health Organization</a>) credentials. It was only interested in maintaining scientific standards in the debate over questions of smoking and health, it claimed.In fact, by various surreptitious means, it was being financed liberally by the tobacco industry, and it was linked through various administrative channels to tobacco companies and PR organisations.Moreover, the tobacco industry was ruthless in using their food company subsidiaries, when required, to further tobacco company influence. For instance, when <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/John_D.Graham" title="John D. Graham" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">John D. Graham</a> of the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Harvard_Center_for_Risk_Analysis" title="Harvard Center for Risk Analysis" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Harvard Center for Risk Analysis</a> organised a $20,000 'grant' from Philip Morris<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-44" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[44]</a>, and then discovered that such payments were against Harvard University rules against tobacco industry involvement (a token of academic ethics half-heartedly promoted by the university), the Philip Morris check was returned, and an acceptable new one issued by Kraft.Between 1987 and 1989 <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Alex_Malaspina&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Alex Malaspina (page does not exist)" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Alex Malaspina</a> assiduously cultivated the links he had built with the tobacco industry. He signed a personal contract with <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/R.J.Reynolds" title="R.J. Reynolds" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">R.J. Reynolds</a> to act as a go-between in organising Emory University and the tobacco company for research into Eclipse (the tobacco-less cigarette under development), and approached <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Thomas_J.Borelli" title="Thomas J. Borelli" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Thomas J. Borelli</a>, an executive scientific lobbyist at Philip Morris, to discuss closer cooperation.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-45" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[45]</a>[<h2 style="line-height: normal; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Tobacco industry documents</h2>A brief internal email from Tom Borelli (then Manager of Corporate Scientific Affairs for Philip Morris) relates PM's efforts to influence a scientific meeting about <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Secondhand_smoke" title="Secondhand smoke" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">secondhand smoke</a> (environmental tobacco smoke, or ETS). It reveals the subsequent scorn the company received, and the company's future plans to find ways to influence the group.Borelli arranged for PM to have a presence at a 1989 toxicology forum session on secondhand smoke. He wrote about the meeting afterwards,<blockquote style="line-height: normal; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">My contact at ILSI [International Life Sciences Institute, presumptive organizer of the forum] told me that the person from NCI [National Cancer Institute, a federal government cancer research organization] was not pleased with the TOX forum ETS session. That illustrates what a good job we did.</blockquote>Borelli describes the anger that the NCI attendee had at PM's attendance:<blockquote style="line-height: normal; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Unfortunately, the NCI representative did not stop there but went on to say that if the tox forum allows PM to become a member, the NCI will remove itself from the advisory committee. It was also mentioned that if I want a career in the science/health issues, I should consider who I work for.</blockquote>Borelli discusses how PM could continue to try and influence this group, and proposes funneling sponsorship money through a PM subsidiary as a way to force the group to continue working with PM:<blockquote style="line-height: normal; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Thus if everything remains the same the tox forum is a one shot deal and I get blacklisted. I think it is time to move with the PM Co., Inc strategy for sponsorship of outside groups (remember the proposal I wrote). Of course that would raise the stakes of forcing these groups to accept PM and I guess they could choose to keep us out. But then they go broke. The only other option is to funnel money through KGF [Kraft General Foods, a PM subsidiary] but then we loose [sic] control of the issues...<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Thomas_J.Borelli#cite_note-3" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">[4]</a>] insert</blockquote><h2 style="font-weight: normal; margin: 0px 0px 0.6em; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0.17em; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-color: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Good Work</h2>It is important to appreciate that the ILSI was not, in itself, an organisation totally subservient to its sponsors interests (it wouldn't have been effective if it was), nor were most of its staff compromised by the hidden funding and controls organised at the highest level. The membership included many genuine scientists involved in many genuine committees, working on behalf of many honest food and beverage companies.As with all effective PR operation, the misinformation and lobbying aspects (prohibited under IRS rules) were hidden beneath the camouflage cloak of a genuine scientific organisation with scientist members. The underground work can then be done by only a few people in the top management and policy committees. ILSI is structured in a way which ensures that the funding corporations have majority membership in all its major decision-making committees.Genuine research is also supported and conducted by the ILSI when the problem is shared by a number of companies, although it is by no means certain that negative findings were always published or circulated to the wider public.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-46" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[46]</a><h2 style="font-weight: normal; margin: 0px 0px 0.6em; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0.17em; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-color: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">WHO's NGO status</h2>The ILSI enjoyed non-government organisation (<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/NGO" title="NGO" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">NGO</a>) status within the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/World_Health_Organization" title="World Health Organization" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">World Health Organization</a> (WHO) and a special consultative status with the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=United_Nation&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="United Nation (page does not exist)" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">United Nation</a>'s <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Food_and_Agriculture_Organisation&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Food and Agriculture Organisation (page does not exist)" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Food and Agriculture Organisation</a> (FAO). In addition, the ILSI worked for many years closely with the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Agency_on_Research_into_Cancer&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="International Agency on Research into Cancer (page does not exist)" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">International Agency on Research into Cancer</a> (IARC) and the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Program_on_Chemical_Safety&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="International Program on Chemical Safety (page does not exist)" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">International Program on Chemical Safety</a> (IPCS).These associations and the levels of formal accreditation allowed key members of the ILSI to sit in on, and become involved with, many international conferences on nutrition safety and health; chemical safety; food production; and also on trade issues. The granting of this status was, of course, provided as a position of trust. It was a mechanism designed to allow genuine indigenous, industry and activist organisations to make real contributions to formal UN-accredited discussions of vital importance on global economic and health initiatives.Examination of the tobacco industry documents now show that ILSI was not trustworthy.A British Medical Journal website says "The ILSI has criticised WHO's draft report on nutrition. In its official response, the institute says that no scientific justification for the limitation of sugar intake (<10% of calories) is provided. It is also critical of WHO's focus on diet and has tried to shift the blame for obesity to physical inactivity. [ ] The ILSI is funded by the food industry; its sponsors including Mars, Nestlé, Coca-Cola, and PepsiCo. Despite this, Eileen Kennedy, the ILSI's global executive director, claims that the institute regarded itself as an independent body."<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-47" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[47]</a>Alex Malaspina managed to get seconded on to the Pan-American Health Organisation (an arm of WHO) alongside <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Paul_Dietrich&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Paul Dietrich (page does not exist)" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Paul Dietrich</a>, a long-term tobacco industry lawyer-lobbyist who ran the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Institutute_for_International_Health_and_Development&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Institutute for International Health and Development (page does not exist)" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Institutute for International Health and Development</a>.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-48" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[48]</a>)In July 2000 a group of experts for the WHO reported on the role of ILSI in promoting the tobacco industry.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-49" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[49]</a>The ILSI now gives its key "Future Leader Award of $30,000" in honor of "Dr. Alex Malaspina, ILSI’s founding President, who retired in 2000." However his leadership services are not entirely lost, since he "continues to be involved in ILSI’s work through the ILSI Research Foundation."<h2 style="font-weight: normal; margin: 0px 0px 0.6em; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0.17em; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-color: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">ILSI's status with WHO Downgraded Following Protests</h2>In late January 2006 the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/World_Health_Organization" title="World Health Organization" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">World Health Organization</a> decided that ILSI "can no longer take part in WHO activities setting microbiological or chemical standards for food and water, the U.N. health agency's executive board decided Friday in Geneva, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Switzerland" title="Switzerland" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Switzerland</a>."<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-50" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[50]</a> However, it remains one of the NGOs with accreditation as an observer at WHO meetings.The downgrading of ILSI's status followed a letter protesting ILSI's role in setting standards from the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Natural_Resources_Defense_Council" title="Natural Resources Defense Council" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Natural Resources Defense Council</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Environmental_Working_Group" title="Environmental Working Group" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Environmental Working Group</a>, United Steelworkers of America and a coalition of other groups.<h2 style="font-weight: normal; margin: 0px 0px 0.6em; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0.17em; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-color: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Funding</h2>Approximately sixty percent of the institute's funding originates from its member companies, with the remainder split between foundations, government agencies and sales.<h2 style="font-weight: normal; margin: 0px 0px 0.6em; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0.17em; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-color: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Member companies</h2>The ILSI has over 400 companies as members, but institute's main member companies (those that can influence directions) include:<ul style="line-height: 1.5em; margin: 0.3em 0px 0.5em 1.6em; padding: 0px; list-style-image: url(); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Bayer" title="Bayer" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Bayer AG</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Coca-Cola" title="Coca-Cola" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Coca-Cola</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Dow_Agrosciences" title="Dow Agrosciences" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Dow Agrosciences</a>/<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Dow_Chemical" title="Dow Chemical" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Dow Chemical</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/DuPont" title="DuPont" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">DuPont</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/ExxonMobil" title="ExxonMobil" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">ExxonMobil</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/General_Mills" title="General Mills" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">General Mills</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Hershey_Foods&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Hershey Foods (page does not exist)" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Hershey Foods</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Kellogg" title="Kellogg" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Kellogg</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Kraft" title="Kraft" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Kraft</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/McDonald%27s" title="McDonald's" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">McDonald's</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Merck%26_Co." title="Merck & Co." class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Merck & Co.</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Monsanto" title="Monsanto" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Monsanto</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Nestle" title="Nestle" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Nestle</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Novartis" title="Novartis" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Novartis</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/PepsiCo" title="PepsiCo" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">PepsiCo</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Pfizer" title="Pfizer" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Pfizer</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Procter%26_Gamble" title="Procter & Gamble" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Procter & Gamble</a></li></ul><h2 style="font-weight: normal; margin: 0px 0px 0.6em; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0.17em; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-color: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Contact Details</h2>One Thomas Circle, NW
9th Floor
Washington, DC 20005-5802
USA
Phone: 202-659-0074
Fax: 202-659-3859
Email: ilsi AT ilsi.org
Website: <a rel="nofollow" class="external free" href="http://www.ilsi.org/" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">http://www.ilsi.org/</a><h2 style="font-weight: normal; margin: 0px 0px 0.6em; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0.17em; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-color: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Articles and Resources</h2><h3 style="margin: 0px 0px 0.3em; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0.17em; border-bottom-style: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-color: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Sources</h3><ol class="references" style="line-height: 1.5em; margin: 0.3em 0px 0.5em 3.2em; padding: 0px; list-style-image: none; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><li id="cite_note-1" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-1" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> International Life Sciences Institute, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.ilsi.org/AboutILSI/" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"About ILSI"</a>, accessed March 2008.</li><li id="cite_note-2" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-2" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.newint.org/columns/currents/2006/04/01/corporate/" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"Corporate no-no"</a>, Currents, New Internationalist, Issue 388 , April 2006.</li><li id="cite_note-3" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-3" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://204.200.215.84/index.html" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"The Toxicology Forum"</a>, The Toxicology Forum, accessed March 2008.</li><li id="cite_note-4" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-4" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=mhb24e00&fmt=pdf&ref=results" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"The Toxicology Forum"</a>, 1992. Bates No. 2028402242.</li><li id="cite_note-5" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-5" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=fuk21c00&fmt=pdf&ref=results" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"Smoking Committee Chairman Blasts Cancer Advisory Board, Federal Govt for 'Apathy'"</a>, Drug Research Reports, June 27, 1993. Bates No 680230494.</li><li id="cite_note-6" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-6" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=xff46e00&fmt=pdf&ref=results" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"Occupational and Environmental Health Risks: Management and Communication"</a>, October 31, 1994. Bates No. 202476526.</li><li id="cite_note-7" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-7" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=xip91a00&fmt=pdf&ref=results" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"Philippe Shubik"</a>, undated but approx 1970. Bates No 2023102098.</li><li id="cite_note-8" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-8" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> International Life Sciences Institute, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.ilsi.org/NR/rdonlyres/D2E60A78-F0FC-4D83-AEFE-5C4A629DBDE9/0/ILSI2007MembersofILSIlistFINAL.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"Members of ILSI"</a>, January 2007.</li><li id="cite_note-9" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-9" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> Kath Dalmeny (The Food Commission), <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200304/cmselect/cmhealth/23/23we17.htm" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"Supplementary Memorandum by The Food Commission (OB 27A)"</a>, Select Committee on Health (UK), June 14 2004.</li><li id="cite_note-10" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-10" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/3713508.stm" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"The trouble with sugar"</a>, Panorama, BBC, October 4, 2004.</li><li id="cite_note-11" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-11" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> Sarah Boseley, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,940287,00.html" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"Sugar industry threatens to scupper WHO"</a>, The Guardian, April 21 2003.</li><li id="cite_note-Gregory_Gordon-12" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;">↑ <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-Gregory_Gordon_12-0" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up to:12.0</a> <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-Gregory_Gordon_12-1" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">12.1</a> Gregory Gordon, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.dorway.com/upipart1.txt" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"NutraSweet: Questions Swirl"</a>, UPI, 1987.</li><li id="cite_note-13" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-13" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> International Life Sciences Institute, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.ilsi.org/NR/rdonlyres/CF3BD294-3E6F-4ED2-B320-220FA9EB39F1/0/ILSI2006BoardofTrustees.doc" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"ILSI 2006 Board of Trustees"</a>, undated, 2006.</li><li id="cite_note-14" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-14" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> Sarah Boseley, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.commercialalert.org/issues/health/international-public-health/are-fizzy-drinks-doing-this-to-our-children" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"Are Fizzy Drinks Doing This to Our Children?"</a>, Guardian (UK), January 9th, 2003.</li><li id="cite_note-15" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-15" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> International Life Sciences Institute, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://europe.ilsi.org/about/structure/" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"About ILSI"</a>, accessed March 2008.</li><li id="cite_note-16" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-16" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> The Coca-Cola Company, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.thecoca-colacompany.com/ourcompany/hal_partners.html" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"Our Partners"</a>, December 31, 2006.</li><li id="cite_note-17" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-17" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> International Life Sciences Institute, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.ilsi.org/" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"About ILSI"</a>, accessed March 2008.</li><li id="cite_note-18" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-18" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> Alfred E. Goosens, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=qwy75d00&fmt=pdf&ref=results" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"Report of the B.E.S.T. - I.L.S.I. Liaison Committee"</a>, undated but approx 1984. Bates No. 503843512.</li><li id="cite_note-19" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-19" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> Steve Parrish, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=pwl27a00&fmt=pdf&ref=results" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"Steve Parrish Briefing to the Board, Sea Island"</a>, April 29, 1995, page 24.</li><li id="cite_note-20" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-20" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> Tom Borelli, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=sqi85e00&fmt=pdf&ref=results" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"ETS Issues"</a>, Philip Morris, November 27, 1989.</li><li id="cite_note-21" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-21" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> Sarah Boseley, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,871228,00.html" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"WHO 'infiltrated by food industry'</a>", Guardian (UK), January 9 2003.</li><li id="cite_note-22" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-22" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=dkz88e00&fmt=pdf&ref=results" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"Science"</a>, undated but approx 1992/1993. Bates No 2025498651.</li><li id="cite_note-23" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-23" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> International Life Sciences Institute, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=npm73d00&fmt=pdf&ref=results" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"Joint Meeting of the ILSO and ILSI North America Assembly of Members"</a>, ILSI, Minutes, January 24, 1993.</li><li id="cite_note-24" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-24" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> Dr. Paul Bruns, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=mah25d00&fmt=pdf&ref=results" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"Minutes - Stratggic Issues Committee - Meeting of November 24, 1986"</a>, December 3, 1986.</li><li id="cite_note-25" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-25" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=kag64d00&fmt=pdf&ref=results" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"Subject: Weekly Highlights - Scientific Affairs For Week of July 20, 1987"</a>, July 29, 1987.</li><li id="cite_note-26" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-26" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=pyu56a00&fmt=pdf&ref=results" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"Joint Meeting of the ILSI and ALSI-NF Board of Members: Minutes"</a>, January 21, 1989, page 4.</li><li id="cite_note-27" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-27" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> Scott R. Baker, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=xfb03e00&fmt=pdf&ref=results" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"Health Risks to Airliner Occupants: Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke and Other Pollutants"</a>, Sponsored by ILSI Risk Science Institute, Brookings Institution and Society for Risk Analysis, June 14, 1990.</li><li id="cite_note-28" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-28" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> Alex Malaspina, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=ixr63d00&fmt=pdf&ref=results" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"Memorandum"</a>, International Life Sciences Institute-Nutrition Foundation, July 10, 1987.</li><li id="cite_note-29" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-29" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> Richard C. Paddock, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=iym90c00&fmt=pdf&ref=results" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"Groundwork laid for Prop. 65 Warnings on Secondhand Smoke"</a>, Los Angeles Times, January 19, 1988, Part 1, page 3.</li><li id="cite_note-30" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-30" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> W.G. Champion Mitchell, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=cvf53a00&fmt=pdf&ref=results" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Prop 65. - California and Beyond"</a>, R.J. Reynolds, April 7, 1986.</li><li id="cite_note-31" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-31" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> California Environmental Protection Agency, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.calepa.ca.gov/About/History01/oehha.htm" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"The History of the California Environmental Protection Agency: The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment"</a>, January 19, 2006.</li><li id="cite_note-32" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-32" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://books.nap.edu/html/drinkingwater/" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"Setting Priorities for Drinking Water Contaminants"</a>, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C. 1999.</li><li id="cite_note-Food_regulation-33" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;">↑ <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-Food_regulation_33-0" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up to:33.0</a> <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-Food_regulation_33-1" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">33.1</a> Roger D. Middlekauff and Philippe Shubik (eds), <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=zeh42c00&fmt=pdf&ref=results" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"International Food Regulation Handbook"</a>, Covington & Burling, 1989. Bates No 2072675955.</li><li id="cite_note-34" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-34" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> Alex Malaspina, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=rnc33e00&fmt=pdf&ref=results" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Letter to Dr. Thomas J. Borelli (Philip Morris)</a>, April 20, 1989. Bates No. 2021595961.</li><li id="cite_note-Meeting_on_Prop_65-35" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;">↑ <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-Meeting_on_Prop_65_35-0" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up to:35.0</a> <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-Meeting_on_Prop_65_35-1" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">35.1</a> International Life Sciences Institute, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=lrr63d00&fmt=pdf&ref=results" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"Meeting of ILSI-NF Members on California's Proposition 65: Agenda"</a>, September 18, 1987. Bates No. 509908625.</li><li id="cite_note-36" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-36" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> Roger D Middlekauff, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=yxd83e00&fmt=pdf&ref=results" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">To: Members of Toxicology Forum"</a>, May 22, 1987. Bates No 2029060456.</li><li id="cite_note-37" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-37" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.ilsi.org/AboutILSI/ifbic.htm" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">'ILSI International Food Biotechnology Committee (IFBiC)"</a>, accessed March 2008.</li><li id="cite_note-38" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-38" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> Bernadene Magnuson, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://extoxnet.orst.edu/faqs/biotec/ifbc.htm" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"International Food Biotechnology Council"</a>, Summer 1997.</li><li id="cite_note-39" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-39" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> Chemical Sources Association, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.chemicalsources.org/members.htm" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"Members 2005-2006"</a>, accessed March 2008.</li><li id="cite_note-40" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-40" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=jsp71e00&fmt=pdf&ref=results" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"Flavor Firms warmed Not to be Lulled By TSCA Exemption"</a>, Pesticide & Toxic Chemical News, May 11, 1977, page 5.</li><li id="cite_note-41" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-41" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> Roger D Middlekauff, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=gcs01c00&fmt=pdf&ref=results" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">Letter to Ms. Carol Lincoln, Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp"</a>, International Technical Caramel Association, November 25, 1987.</li><li id="cite_note-42" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-42" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> Dr. F.J.C. Roe, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=qzw68e00&fmt=pdf&ref=results" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"XIII International Congress of Nutrition, Brighton, U.K.: 18-23 August 1985 : Brief report on proceedings on 19 and 20 August"</a>, August 21, 1985. Bates No 2001219827.</li><li id="cite_note-43" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-43" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> Dr. Francis J. C. Roe, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=pkx68e00&fmt=pdf&ref=results" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"Letter to Prof. Dr. Ulrich Mohr: ILSI, International Symposium on,Design, Conduct and Interpretation of International Studies March 23-27, 1987"</a>, November 15, 1985. Bates No 2001219985.</li><li id="cite_note-44" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-44" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> R.A. Pages, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/tav78e00" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"Comment on Letter from John Graham"</a>, October 21, 1991. Bates No. 2023545707.</li><li id="cite_note-45" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-45" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> Tom Borelli, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/qnc33e00" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"Independent Research Institutes"</a>, May 2, 1989. Bates No. 2021595960.</li><li id="cite_note-46" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-46" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> P.L. Kraft, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=rhq61d00&fmt=pdf&ref=results" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">To Saccharin Technical Committee: Memo to Research Proposal on the Effects of Saccharin on the Neonate"</a>, Pepsico, June 26, 1984. Bares No 504200790.</li><li id="cite_note-47" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-47" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> Vittal Katikireddi, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.studentbmj.com/issues/03/03/life/74.php" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"Food scam"</a>, Student BMJ, March 2003.</li><li id="cite_note-48" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-48" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> World Health Organization, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.who.int/genevahearings/inquiry/ilsi.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcaqaaaanowc2aaaatkleqvr4xmxkqqqamawf0x="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAQAAAAnOwc2AAAATklEQVR4XmXKQQqAMAwF0X" xssz9cskiyiifrfcjmmihmigbb5fqdcaqj4j46pzyluwe="XsSz9CSKiyIIFRFcjMmihmiGbB5fqDCaQJ4j46pzYLUWe" cxz6ovbhts0sry2njp="cXZ6OVBhTS0srY2Njp" xxxxzolu6euwaopx1vnwtbe6qqaaaaaelftksuqmcc="XxXXZOLu6EUWAOPX1vnwTBe6qQAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"Public Hearings on the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control"</a>, October 12-13, 200.</li><li id="cite_note-49" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-49" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> Tobacco Free Initiative, World Health Organization, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://repositories.cdlib.org/context/tc/article/1102/type/pdf/viewcontent/" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">The Tobacco Industry and Scientific Groups ILSI: A Case Study"</a>, Tobacco Control, 2001.</li><li id="cite_note-50" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_ref-50" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style="top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> John Heilperin, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2006/01/27/national/w150409S47.DTL" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">"WHO to Rely Less on U.S. Research"</a>, Associated Press, January 27, 2006.</li></ol><h3 style="margin: 0px 0px 0.3em; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0.17em; border-bottom-style: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-color: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Related SourceWatch Articles</h3><h3 style="margin: 0px 0px 0.3em; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0.17em; border-bottom-style: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-color: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">External links</h3><ul style="line-height: 1.5em; margin: 0.3em 0px 0.5em 1.6em; padding: 0px; list-style-image: url(); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;">WHO report on ILSI's links to tobacco <a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://repositories.cdlib.org/context/tc/article/1102/type/pdf/viewcontent/" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">[1]</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;">RJ Reynolds plans to involve itself with ILSI (and other) activities <a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=ems58d00&fmt=pdf&ref=results" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">[2]</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;">1993 Discussion about Risk Assessment (EPA and ILSI) <a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=kyx83e00&fmt=pdf&ref=results" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">[3]</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;">ILSI Bermuda meeting <a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=npm73d00&fmt=pdf&ref=results" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">[4]</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;">Proposition 65 <a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.calepa.ca.gov/About/History01/oehha.htm" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">[5]</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;">Prop 65 and second-hand smoke <a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=iym90c00&fmt=pdf&ref=results" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">[6]</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;">ILSI meeting notes re Prop 65 <a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=ixr63d00&fmt=pdf&ref=results" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">[7]</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;">Consumer alert article <a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.commercialalert.org/issues/health/international-public-health/are-fizzy-drinks-doing-this-to-our-children" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">[8]</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;">WHO ban <a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.newint.org/columns/currents/2006/04/01/corporate/" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">[9]</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;">The Guardian "WHO infiltrated" article <a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,871228,00.html" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">[10]</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;">The Ecologist Sugar article <a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.theecologist.org/archive_detail.asp?content_id=341" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">[11]</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;">John Helperin, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/27/AR2006012701302.html" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaaoaaaakcayaaacnms="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAAoAAAAKCAYAAACNMs" aaaaveleqvr42n3pgqkaiaheuxdqj3dqj3e6iotpusqcgj4eq5iluile0jil3pecxhchgbhz8kg4hwxau3mzecgeyfnaxp4hqnqpnt7ql0nadpd6whcclvnakksq8iiaaaaaaelftksuqmcc="AAAAVElEQVR42n3PgQkAIAhEUXdqJ3dqJ3e6IoTPUSQcgj4EQ5IlUiLE0Jil3PECXhcHGBhZ8kg4hwxAu3MZeCGeyFnAXp4hqNQPnt7QL0nADpD6wHccLvnAKksq8iiaAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">WHO to Rely Less on U.S. Research</a>", Washington Post, January 27, 2006. (This is an Associated Press story).</li></ul><div class="tobaccoFormArea" style="border: 1px solid rgb(123, 160, 109); padding: 12px; background-color: rgb(217, 247, 212);"><table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"><tbody><tr><td colspan="4" class="tobaccoFormHead" style="text-transform: uppercase; font-weight: bold;">SEARCH THE DOCUMENTS ARCHIVES OF THE TOBACCO INDUSTRY</td></tr><tr><td width="20" /><td valign="baseline" class="tobaccoFormItem" style="padding-top: 10px; text-align: right;">Legacy Tobacco Documents Library:</td><td width="10" /><td valign="baseline" /></tr></tbody></table></div></div><div id="catlinks" class="catlinks" style="border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 5px; margin-top: 1em; clear: both; line-height: 19.2000007629395px; background-color: rgb(249, 249, 249);"><div id="mw-normal-catlinks" class="mw-normal-catlinks"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Special:Categories" title="Special:Categories" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Categories</a>: <ul style="line-height: 1.5em; list-style: none none; margin: 0px 0px 0.5em; padding: 0px; display: inline;"><li style="margin: 0.125em 0px; display: inline-block; line-height: 1.25em; border-left-style: none; padding: 0px 0.5em 0px 0.25em; zoom: 1;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Category:Tobaccowiki" title="Category:Tobaccowiki" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Tobaccowiki</a></li><li style="margin: 0.125em 0px; display: inline-block; line-height: 1.25em; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid; border-left-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0px 0.5em; zoom: 1;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Category:Food" title="Category:Food" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Food</a></li><li style="margin: 0.125em 0px; display: inline-block; line-height: 1.25em; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid; border-left-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0px 0.5em; zoom: 1;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Category:Industry_lobby_groups" title="Category:Industry lobby groups" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Industry lobby groups</a></li><li style="margin: 0.125em 0px; display: inline-block; line-height: 1.25em; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid; border-left-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0px 0.5em; zoom: 1;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Category:Tobacco_documents_organizations" title="Category:Tobacco documents organizations" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Tobacco documents organizations</a></li><li style="margin: 0.125em 0px; display: inline-block; line-height: 1.25em; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid; border-left-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0px 0.5em; zoom: 1;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Category:International" title="Category:International" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">International</a></li><li style="margin: 0.125em 0px; display: inline-block; line-height: 1.25em; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid; border-left-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0px 0.5em; zoom: 1;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Category:Genetic_engineering" title="Category:Genetic engineering" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Genetic engineering</a></li></ul></div></div></div><div></div><div>2z</div><div>
</div><div>=
<div>ilsi: This imbalance led, eventually, to the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/World_Health_Organization" title="World Health Organization" style="line-height: 19.2px; text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">World Health Organization</a> banning the organisation from direct involvement in WHO (and related agencies) activities.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-2" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">[2]</a></div>The ILSI certainly has sponsored genuine research, run real educational workshops around the world, and held many genuine conferences. It has done this both under its own name, and also under the auspices of the seemingly-independent <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Toxicology_Forum&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Toxicology Forum (page does not exist)" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Toxicology Forum</a> which it runs (or perhaps 'guides') in parallel … using the same staff and venues … yet without any obvious connections.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-3" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[3]</a> The Toxicology Forum also seems to have extremely close ties to the Society of Toxicology (they share a fax number) and both the International Association of Environmental Mutagenesis and Genomics Societies (IAEMGS) and the American College of Toxicology (ACT), with which it shares an address in Reston VA.The Toxicology Forum is three years older than the ILSI (established in 1975) and wider in that it draws its membership from petroleum industries as well as from the ILSI's traditional sources in food, chemical, and drug companies.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-4" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[4]</a> It's President until recently has been Phillippe Schubik<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-5" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[5]</a> <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-6" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[6]</a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-7" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[7]</a> of the Eppley Institute at the University of Nebraska, and its Administrative Vice President is ILSI President/Coca-Cola VP Alex Malaspina.<div>=</div><div>
</div><div><h2 style="line-height: 19.2000007629395px; font-weight: normal; margin: 0px 0px 0.6em; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0.17em; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Dealing with Tobacco</h2>In 1989 the ILSI created a Division of Environmental Sciences which "provided a mechanism for companies from the chemical and pharmaceutical industries to become members of the ILSI while preserving ILSI-NF's concentration on issues of importance to the food industry."The <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Tobacco_industry" title="Tobacco industry" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">tobacco industry</a>'s interest in the ILSI had been boosted in 1985 when, after attending the Brighton UK, International Congress on Nutrition, a long-term tobacco consultant Dr. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Francis_J.C.Roe" title="Francis J. C. Roe" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Francis J. C. Roe</a> reported to <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Philip_Morris" title="Philip Morris" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Philip Morris</a> that "Many of the audience were surprised at the scale and breadth of ILSI activities" following a 35 minute promotional speech by Coca-Cola's Malaspina.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-42" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">[42]</a>At about this time, the tobacco industry must have established some links to ILSI (probably via Kraft), because the following year Roe was asked to help organise an ILSI symposium on 'Inhalation Studies' (eg. the problems of second-hand tobacco smoke in everything but name) to be held in <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Germany" title="Germany" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Germany</a> during March 1987.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-43" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">[43]</a>Roe suggested to the organiser (Dr Mohr from ILSI Germany) that they eliminate clinical or epidemiological studies from the discussion, thus removing anything related to humans. He wanted the symposium to focus entirely on toxicology, which is almost entirely studies on animals. This is much safer territory for tobacco science, since claim can always then be made that 'mice aren't men'.Between 1983 and 1998 the ILSI provided assistance to the tobacco industry in its attempts to subvert many attempts at legislative control over the industry's activities. It was effective, because it represented itself as an independent and unbiased scientific body, with international (including <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/World_Health_Organization" title="World Health Organization" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">World Health Organization</a>) credentials. It was only interested in maintaining scientific standards in the debate over questions of smoking and health, it claimed.In fact, by various surreptitious means, it was being financed liberally by the tobacco industry, and it was linked through various administrative channels to tobacco companies and PR organisations.Moreover, the tobacco industry was ruthless in using their food company subsidiaries, when required, to further tobacco company influence. For instance, when <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/John_D.Graham" title="John D. Graham" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">John D. Graham</a> of the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Harvard_Center_for_Risk_Analysis" title="Harvard Center for Risk Analysis" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Harvard Center for Risk Analysis</a> organised a $20,000 'grant' from Philip Morris<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-44" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">[44]</a>, and then discovered that such payments were against Harvard University rules against tobacco industry involvement (a token of academic ethics half-heartedly promoted by the university), the Philip Morris check was returned, and an acceptable new one issued by Kraft.Between 1987 and 1989 <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Alex_Malaspina&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Alex Malaspina (page does not exist)" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Alex Malaspina</a> assiduously cultivated the links he had built with the tobacco industry. He signed a personal contract with <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/R.J.Reynolds" title="R.J. Reynolds" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">R.J. Reynolds</a> to act as a go-between in organising Emory University and the tobacco company for research into Eclipse (the tobacco-less cigarette under development), and approached <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Thomas_J.Borelli" title="Thomas J. Borelli" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Thomas J. Borelli</a>, an executive scientific lobbyist at Philip Morris, to discuss closer cooperation.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Life_Sciences_Institute#cite_note-45" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">[45]</a>[<h2>Tobacco industry documents</h2>A brief internal email from Tom Borelli (then Manager of Corporate Scientific Affairs for Philip Morris) relates PM's efforts to influence a scientific meeting about <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Secondhand_smoke" title="Secondhand smoke" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">secondhand smoke</a> (environmental tobacco smoke, or ETS). It reveals the subsequent scorn the company received, and the company's future plans to find ways to influence the group.Borelli arranged for PM to have a presence at a 1989 toxicology forum session on secondhand smoke. He wrote about the meeting afterwards,<blockquote>My contact at ILSI [International Life Sciences Institute, presumptive organizer of the forum] told me that the person from NCI [National Cancer Institute, a federal government cancer research organization] was not pleased with the TOX forum ETS session. That illustrates what a good job we did.</blockquote>Borelli describes the anger that the NCI attendee had at PM's attendance:<blockquote>Unfortunately, the NCI representative did not stop there but went on to say that if the tox forum allows PM to become a member, the NCI will remove itself from the advisory committee. It was also mentioned that if I want a career in the science/health issues, I should consider who I work for.</blockquote>Borelli discusses how PM could continue to try and influence this group, and proposes funneling sponsorship money through a PM subsidiary as a way to force the group to continue working with PM:<blockquote>Thus if everything remains the same the tox forum is a one shot deal and I get blacklisted. I think it is time to move with the PM Co., Inc strategy for sponsorship of outside groups (remember the proposal I wrote). Of course that would raise the stakes of forcing these groups to accept PM and I guess they could choose to keep us out. But then they go broke. The only other option is to funnel money through KGF [Kraft General Foods, a PM subsidiary] but then we loose [sic] control of the issues...<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Thomas_J.Borelli#cite_note-3" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">[4]</a>] insert</blockquote></div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>=</div></div><div>=The Tobacco Industry and Scientific Groups
ILSI: A Case StudyThe Tobacco Free Initiative, WHOFebruary 2001
Executive Summary:
A July 2000 report of an independent committee of experts outlined a number of ways inwhich the tobacco industry had attempted to undermine WHO tobacco control efforts inrecent decades. One such method of subverting tobacco control involved the industry’sfunding of and involvement in seemingly unbiased scientific groups to manipulatepolitical and scientific debate concerning tobacco and health. This paper presents a briefchronology of the industry’s relations with one such group, the International LifeSciences Institute (ILSI), between 1983 and 1998. Findings indicate that ILSI was usedby certain tobacco companies to thwart tobacco control policies. Senior office bearers inILSI were directly involved in these actions.Introduction:In July, 2000, an independent committee of experts issued a report addressing the effortsof the tobacco industry to undermine tobacco control initiatives of the World HealthOrganization (WHO).1 Information in the report, based upon thousands of industrydocuments released as a condition of United States tobacco lawsuit settlements, revealedthat tobacco companies had engaged in deliberate subversion of WHO tobacco controlobjectives through, inter alia, using outside organizations, such as tobacco-companycreated front-groups, as well as legitimately established scientific groups, to influenceWHO decision-making and to manipulate scientific debate surrounding the health effectsof tobacco.2
 Control of such groups played a crucial role in the industry’s strategy toprevent tobacco control from taking priority on the WHO agenda.The International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) is a key scientific group which thetobacco industry sought to control during the public and scientific debate concerningolderNTERNATIONAL LIFE SCIENCES INSTITUTE   Founded "in 1978 to work toward a safer, healthier world. ILSI is a worldwide foundation that is making a difference in public health by advancing the understanding of scientific issues related to nutrition, food safety, toxicology, and the environment. ILSI is governed by an Assembly of Members, which includes one representative from each of its more than 400 member companies, and an elected Board of Trustees of renowned scientists from academia and industry, all of whom volunteer their time and expertise. ILSI members represent the world's leading manufacturers of food and food ingredients, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, and other consumer products." (<a target="cspi" href="http://www.ilsi.org/about/" style="outline: none; text-decoration: none; line-height: normal; white-space: normal; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">http://www.ilsi.org/about/</a>; September 22, 2000) ILSI has branches in about a dozen other countries/regions.   ILSI funders have included: Ajinomoto USA, Anheuser-Busch, ARCO Chemical Co., Dannon, Domino Sugar Corp., Eastman Chemical Co., Kraft Foods, Monsanto, Nabisco, Procter & Gamble, Wm. Wrigley Jr. Co. [ILSI document] ("Members of ILSI," received 7/2/96).   ILSI's fall, 1996, N.Y. Academy of Science conference on fat substitutes was funded in part by P&G (Mother Jones, May/June, 1997, p.14).   1998 ILSI Board of Trustees<ul type="disc" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><li>Dr. G. Harvey Anderson, University of Toronto</li><li>Dr. James R. Behnke</li><li>Dr. Roger M. Bektash</li><li>Dr. Joseph F. Borzelleca, Medical College of Virginia</li><li>Dr. Fergus Clydesdale, University of Massachusetts, Amherst</li><li>Dr. G. Coccodrilli, Kraft Foods, Inc.</li><li>Dr. Oscar Cuper</li><li>Dr. Peter B. Dews, Harvard Medical School</li><li>Dr. Victor L. Fugoni III, Kellogg Company</li><li>Dr. Larry M. Games</li><li>Dr. Bernard D. Goldstein, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School</li><li>Dr. Yuzo Hayashi, National Institute of Hygienic Sciences, Japan</li><li>Dr. Marc Horisberger, Nestle Ltd., Switzerland</li><li>Dr. Shuichi Kimura, Showa Women's University, Japan</li><li>Dr. Curtis D. Klaassen</li><li>Dr. Frank N. Kotsonis, Monsanto Company</li><li>Dr. Louis Lasagna, Tufts University</li><li>Dr. Gordon Loewengart, Hoechst Celanese Corporation</li><li>Dr. Alex Malaspina, The Coca-Cola Company</li><li>Dr. R. Michael McClain, Hoffmann-La Roche Inc.</li><li>Prof. Dr. Ulrich Mohr, Hannover Medical School, Germany</li><li>Dr. Keiichi Morimoto</li><li>Dr. Efren Parada-Arias</li><li>Prof. Marcel Roberfroid, Catholic University of Louvain, Belgium</li><li>Dr. Hugh A. Sampson, Johns Hopkins University</li><li>Dr. Barbara O. Schneeman, University of California at Davis</li><li>Dr. Yukio Sogo, Snow Brand Milk Products Co., Ltd., Japan</li><li>Dr. James W. Stanley, PepsiCo, Inc.</li><li>Prof. Dr. Vichai Tanphaichitr, Mahidol University, Thailand</li><li>Michael R. Taylor, Esq.</li><li>Mr. Alfred W. Wishart, Jr., The Pittsburgh Foundation</li><li>Dr. Yasushi Yamamoto, Kirin Brewery Company, Ltd., Japan.</li></ul>Members of ILSI North America (as of July 1996):<ul type="disc" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><li>Ajinomoto U.S.A., Inc.</li><li>American Maize-Products Company</li><li>Anheuser-Busch Companies, Inc.</li><li>Archer Daniels Midland Company</li><li>ARCO Chemical Company</li><li>Bristol-Myers Products, Cadbury Beverages Inc.</li><li>Campbell Soup Company</li><li>Cargill, Incorporated</li><li>The Coca-Cola Company</li><li>CPC International Inc.</li><li>Cumberland Packing Corporation</li><li>The Dannon Company, Inc.</li><li>Domino Sugar Corporation</li><li>E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company</li><li>Eastman Chemical Company</li><li>Firmenich Incorporated</li><li>Florasynth, Inc.</li><li>General Mills, Inc.</li><li>Gerber Products Company</li><li>Givaudan-Roure Corporation</li><li>Griffith Laboratories North America</li><li>Haarmann & Reimer Corporation</li><li>H.J. Heinz Company</li><li>Hershey Foods Corporation</li><li>Hoechst Food Ingredients</li><li>International Flavors & Fragrances Inc.</li><li>Kellogg Company</li><li>Kraft Foods, Inc., Thomas J. Lipton Company</li><li>M&M/Mars</li><li>McNeil Specialty Products Company</li><li>Mead Johnson Nutritional Group</li><li>Monsanto Company</li><li>Nabisco, Inc.</li><li>Nestle USA, Inc.</li><li>Ocean Spray Cranberries, Inc., PepsiCo, Inc.</li><li>Pfizer Inc.</li><li>The Pillsbury Company</li><li>The Procter & Gamble Company</li><li>Quest International</li><li>Roche Vitamins & Fine Chemicals</li><li>Roquette America, Inc.</li><li>Ross Products Division/Abbott Laboratories</li><li>Royal Crown Company, Inc.</li><li>Sethness Products Company</li><li>A.E. Staley Manufacturing Company</li><li>Stepan Company</li><li>Takasago International Corporation (U.S.A.)</li><li>UOP</li><li>Van den Bergh Foods Company</li><li>Virginia Dare Extract Co., Inc.</li><li>Warner-Lambert Company</li><li>Whitehall-Robins Healthcare</li><li>D.D. Williamson & Co. Inc.</li><li>Wm. Wrigley Jr. Company</li></ul>INTERNATIONAL SERVICE FOR THE ACQUISITION OF AGRI-BIOTECH APPLICATIONS (ISAAA)   The mission of the ISAAA is to "contribute to poverty alleviation by increasing crop productivity and income generation, particularly for resource-poor farmers, and to bring about a safer environment and more sustainable agricultural development." It is funded by a donor support group consisting of public and private sector institutions. Some of its supporters include AgrEvo, Monsanto Co., Novartis Seeds, Cargill Seeds, Dow AgroSciences, Schering AG, and Gemeinschaft fur technische Zusammenarbeit. (<a target="cspi" href="http://www.isaaa.org/inbrief.htm" style="outline: none; text-decoration: none; line-height: normal; white-space: normal; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">http://www.isaaa.org/inbrief.htm</a> accessed 4/30/02) <div>
</div></div><div></div></div></div></div>