Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Total Ban On GM Corn in France Follows Popular Opposition [View all]bananas
(27,509 posts)169. BMJ Lobby Watch: The Social Issues Research Centre
"Lobby Watch is a regular column that looks at people and organisations who have an influence on public health and on how health care is delivered. It is put together with the help of the public interest research team at Strathclyde University and those who work on the Spin Profiles website (www.spinprofiles.org)."
http://www.bmj.com/content/340/bmj.c484?ijkey=1anjS6jf2p2ikRP&keytype=ref
Lobby Watch
The Social Issues Research Centre
BMJ 2010; 340 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c484 (Published 3 March 2010)
Cite this as: BMJ 2010;340:c484
David Miller, professor of sociology1,
Marisa De Andrade, doctoral candidate1, visiting affiliate2
Author Affiliations
Correspondence to: D Miller davidmiller@strath.ac.uk
The Social Issues Research Centre (SIRC) is an independent, non-profit organisation1 that says it carries out balanced, calm and thoughtful2 research on lifestyle issues such as drinking, diet, and pharmaceuticals. However, it may be perceived that the company acts more like a public relations agency for the corporations that fund its activities. These include Diageo, Flora, Coca-Cola, GlaxoSmithKline, and Roche, among others.3 Although SIRC does publish this partial list of funders, it is not immediately apparent which company has sponsored which study. And in some instances this information is not included in media reports.4
SIRC has produced guidelines for journalists on the reporting of science and health issues,5 but the guidelines include little on transparency or avoiding conflicts of interest.6 SIRC is not always transparent about its own funding. For example, it was commissioned by HRT Aware to produce a report that concluded that well-informed women taking hormone replacement therapy are benefiting and feeling happier, healthier, and sexier.7 The research received widespread coverage in the broadsheet, tabloid, and broadcast media.8 Neither the press nor SIRC mentioned that HRT Aware was funded by drug companies, including Janssen-Cilag, Wyeth, Solvay, Servier, Organon, and Novo Nordisk.9 SIRC mentioned, on the back cover of the report, only that HRT Aware was industry supported.7
SIRCs science reporting guidelines focus on the exaggeration of risk by the media but have little to say about risks that may be underplayed by the media. SIRC is sceptical that there is such a thing as an obesity epidemic,10 11 which may fit well with the interests of funders such as Coca-Cola, Cadbury Schweppes, Masterfoods, and the Sugar Bureau. It has coined the term riskfactorphobia to suggest that we are too averse to risk,12 which fits the interests of the food companies as well as the raft of alcohol firms for which SIRC works. None of the reports mentioned in the foregoing paragraph contain information about the source of funding, so it is difficult to tell how clients feed into particular activities.
In some cases SIRC does say which corporation has sponsored its reports. Ebay funded a report on the ebay generation13; Tio Pepe, a drinks company, funded one on dinner parties14; the Prudential, an insurance company, one on risk15; and pub chain owner Greene King on the local.16
Although SIRCs publicity material regularly uses the term social scientists to refer to its own staff,2 17 it uses the same personnel and office as a commercial market research company, MCM Research. SIRCs codirectors, Peter Marsh and Kate Fox, work for both organisations.18 The MCM website used to ask: Do your PR initiatives sometimes look too much like PR initiatives? MCM conducts social/psychological research on the positive aspects of your business. The results do not read like PR literature, or like market research data. Our reports are credible, interesting and entertaining in their own right. This is why they capture the imagination of the media and your customers.18
Recently, however, MCM has taken a lower profile. Its website now redirects to the SIRC one, and visitors are informed that the centre has now taken over the task of hosting and publishing reports and materials conducted under the MCM Research name.19
Still, SIRC is taken seriously by some in government. It was recently commissioned to produce two independent reviews for an investigation by the Department for Children, Schools and Families of the commercialisation of childhood. The reports, published in late 2009, oppose a public health approach that is based on population level measures, including the restriction of advertising or marketing. The conclusion that SIRC reached is that the issues involved are very much more complex20a position consistent with that advanced by elements of the food and advertising industries.
Notes
Cite this as: BMJ 2010;340:c484
Footnotes
Lobby Watch is a regular column that looks at people and organisations who have an influence on public health and on how health care is delivered. It is put together with the help of the public interest research team at Strathclyde University and those who work on the Spin Profiles website (www.spinprofiles.org).
The authors have completed the Unified Competing Interest form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf (available on request from the corresponding author) and declare: (1) no financial support for the submitted work from anyone other than their employer; (2) no financial relationships with commercial entities that might have an interest in the submitted work; (3) no spouses, partners, or children with relationships with commercial entities that might have an interest in the submitted work; and (4) MDA edits the Pharma Portal on www.spinprofiles.org, and DM is an (unpaid) director of the non-profit company Public Interest Investigations, which runs spinwatch.org and spinprofiles.org (whose income comes from trusts and donations and not from corporations).
References
?
Social Issues Research Centre (SIRC). Welcome. www.sirc.org/index.html. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
SIRC. About SIRC. www.sirc.org/about/about.html. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
SIRC. SIRCs sources of income. www.sirc.org/about/funding.html. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
SIRC. SIRC in the news. www.sirc.org/news/sirc_in_the_news.html. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
SIRC. Guidelines for scientists on communicating with the media. www.sirc.org/messenger/. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
SIRC. Response to guidelines on science and health communication from the Center for Science in the Public Interest. www.sirc.org/news/cspi_comments.shtml. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
SIRC. Jubilee women: fiftysomething womenlifestyle and attitudes now and fifty years ago. www.sirc.org/publik/jubilee_women.pdf. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
SIRC. SIRC in the news: press coverage from 2002. www.sirc.org/news/sirc_in_the_news_2002.html. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
Clark J. A hot flush for Big Pharma. BMJ2003;327:400.
FREE Full Text
?
Marsh P. An epidemic of confusion. www.sirc.org/obesity/epidemic_of_confusion.shtml. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
SIRC. Obesity and the facts: new study questions true prevalence of childhood obesity. www.sirc.org/obesity/obesity_and_the_facts.shtml. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
SIRC. Scaremongers: the new threat to childrens health. www.sirc.org/articles/scaremongers_bulletin2.html. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
Fox K, SIRC. Coming of age in the eBay generation: life-shopping and the new life skills in the age of eBay. www.sirc.org/publik/Yeppies.pdf. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
SIRC. The Tio Pepe eating-in study. www.sirc.org/publik/Tio_Pepe_Eating-In_Report.pdf. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
SIRC. Risk! www.sirc.org/publik/risk.shtml. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
SIRC. The enduring appeal of the local. www.sirc.org/publik/the_local.shtml. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
SIRC. SIRC guide to flirting. www.sirc.org/publik/flirt.html. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
Ferriman A. An end to health scares? BMJ1999;319 16.
FREE Full Text
?
SIRC. MCM Portal. www.sirc.org/MCM_portal.shtml. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
SIRC. The impact of the commercial world on childrens wellbeing: report of an independent assessment. www.sirc.org/publik/impact_of_the_commercial_world.shtml. Accessed 31 December 2009.
Lobby Watch
The Social Issues Research Centre
BMJ 2010; 340 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c484 (Published 3 March 2010)
Cite this as: BMJ 2010;340:c484
David Miller, professor of sociology1,
Marisa De Andrade, doctoral candidate1, visiting affiliate2
Author Affiliations
Correspondence to: D Miller davidmiller@strath.ac.uk
The Social Issues Research Centre (SIRC) is an independent, non-profit organisation1 that says it carries out balanced, calm and thoughtful2 research on lifestyle issues such as drinking, diet, and pharmaceuticals. However, it may be perceived that the company acts more like a public relations agency for the corporations that fund its activities. These include Diageo, Flora, Coca-Cola, GlaxoSmithKline, and Roche, among others.3 Although SIRC does publish this partial list of funders, it is not immediately apparent which company has sponsored which study. And in some instances this information is not included in media reports.4
SIRC has produced guidelines for journalists on the reporting of science and health issues,5 but the guidelines include little on transparency or avoiding conflicts of interest.6 SIRC is not always transparent about its own funding. For example, it was commissioned by HRT Aware to produce a report that concluded that well-informed women taking hormone replacement therapy are benefiting and feeling happier, healthier, and sexier.7 The research received widespread coverage in the broadsheet, tabloid, and broadcast media.8 Neither the press nor SIRC mentioned that HRT Aware was funded by drug companies, including Janssen-Cilag, Wyeth, Solvay, Servier, Organon, and Novo Nordisk.9 SIRC mentioned, on the back cover of the report, only that HRT Aware was industry supported.7
SIRCs science reporting guidelines focus on the exaggeration of risk by the media but have little to say about risks that may be underplayed by the media. SIRC is sceptical that there is such a thing as an obesity epidemic,10 11 which may fit well with the interests of funders such as Coca-Cola, Cadbury Schweppes, Masterfoods, and the Sugar Bureau. It has coined the term riskfactorphobia to suggest that we are too averse to risk,12 which fits the interests of the food companies as well as the raft of alcohol firms for which SIRC works. None of the reports mentioned in the foregoing paragraph contain information about the source of funding, so it is difficult to tell how clients feed into particular activities.
In some cases SIRC does say which corporation has sponsored its reports. Ebay funded a report on the ebay generation13; Tio Pepe, a drinks company, funded one on dinner parties14; the Prudential, an insurance company, one on risk15; and pub chain owner Greene King on the local.16
Although SIRCs publicity material regularly uses the term social scientists to refer to its own staff,2 17 it uses the same personnel and office as a commercial market research company, MCM Research. SIRCs codirectors, Peter Marsh and Kate Fox, work for both organisations.18 The MCM website used to ask: Do your PR initiatives sometimes look too much like PR initiatives? MCM conducts social/psychological research on the positive aspects of your business. The results do not read like PR literature, or like market research data. Our reports are credible, interesting and entertaining in their own right. This is why they capture the imagination of the media and your customers.18
Recently, however, MCM has taken a lower profile. Its website now redirects to the SIRC one, and visitors are informed that the centre has now taken over the task of hosting and publishing reports and materials conducted under the MCM Research name.19
Still, SIRC is taken seriously by some in government. It was recently commissioned to produce two independent reviews for an investigation by the Department for Children, Schools and Families of the commercialisation of childhood. The reports, published in late 2009, oppose a public health approach that is based on population level measures, including the restriction of advertising or marketing. The conclusion that SIRC reached is that the issues involved are very much more complex20a position consistent with that advanced by elements of the food and advertising industries.
Notes
Cite this as: BMJ 2010;340:c484
Footnotes
Lobby Watch is a regular column that looks at people and organisations who have an influence on public health and on how health care is delivered. It is put together with the help of the public interest research team at Strathclyde University and those who work on the Spin Profiles website (www.spinprofiles.org).
The authors have completed the Unified Competing Interest form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf (available on request from the corresponding author) and declare: (1) no financial support for the submitted work from anyone other than their employer; (2) no financial relationships with commercial entities that might have an interest in the submitted work; (3) no spouses, partners, or children with relationships with commercial entities that might have an interest in the submitted work; and (4) MDA edits the Pharma Portal on www.spinprofiles.org, and DM is an (unpaid) director of the non-profit company Public Interest Investigations, which runs spinwatch.org and spinprofiles.org (whose income comes from trusts and donations and not from corporations).
References
?
Social Issues Research Centre (SIRC). Welcome. www.sirc.org/index.html. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
SIRC. About SIRC. www.sirc.org/about/about.html. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
SIRC. SIRCs sources of income. www.sirc.org/about/funding.html. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
SIRC. SIRC in the news. www.sirc.org/news/sirc_in_the_news.html. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
SIRC. Guidelines for scientists on communicating with the media. www.sirc.org/messenger/. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
SIRC. Response to guidelines on science and health communication from the Center for Science in the Public Interest. www.sirc.org/news/cspi_comments.shtml. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
SIRC. Jubilee women: fiftysomething womenlifestyle and attitudes now and fifty years ago. www.sirc.org/publik/jubilee_women.pdf. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
SIRC. SIRC in the news: press coverage from 2002. www.sirc.org/news/sirc_in_the_news_2002.html. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
Clark J. A hot flush for Big Pharma. BMJ2003;327:400.
FREE Full Text
?
Marsh P. An epidemic of confusion. www.sirc.org/obesity/epidemic_of_confusion.shtml. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
SIRC. Obesity and the facts: new study questions true prevalence of childhood obesity. www.sirc.org/obesity/obesity_and_the_facts.shtml. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
SIRC. Scaremongers: the new threat to childrens health. www.sirc.org/articles/scaremongers_bulletin2.html. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
Fox K, SIRC. Coming of age in the eBay generation: life-shopping and the new life skills in the age of eBay. www.sirc.org/publik/Yeppies.pdf. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
SIRC. The Tio Pepe eating-in study. www.sirc.org/publik/Tio_Pepe_Eating-In_Report.pdf. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
SIRC. Risk! www.sirc.org/publik/risk.shtml. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
SIRC. The enduring appeal of the local. www.sirc.org/publik/the_local.shtml. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
SIRC. SIRC guide to flirting. www.sirc.org/publik/flirt.html. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
Ferriman A. An end to health scares? BMJ1999;319 16.
FREE Full Text
?
SIRC. MCM Portal. www.sirc.org/MCM_portal.shtml. Accessed 17 December 2009.
?
SIRC. The impact of the commercial world on childrens wellbeing: report of an independent assessment. www.sirc.org/publik/impact_of_the_commercial_world.shtml. Accessed 31 December 2009.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
177 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Shit happens in France because politicians FEAR people. In the U.S.A., they LAUGH.
Auggie
May 2014
#5
what's "all over the internet" is anti-science, anti-intellectual fear mongering...
mike_c
May 2014
#153
Do you have a credible link or are we just going to go with unsubstantiated conspiracy theories? nt
Gore1FL
May 2014
#66
Of course the FDA agrees with Monsanto, they appointed most of the FDA commissioners! Sheesh!
DeSwiss
May 2014
#55
PRESS RELEASE > Environmental Chemicals Harm Reproductive Health: Ob-Gyns Advocate for Policy Change
proverbialwisdom
May 2014
#131
Don't like ENSSER as source? Gone. PLEASE FOCUS ON THE INTERSECTION OF HUMAN HEALTH & BIOTECH FOOD.
proverbialwisdom
May 2014
#132
I deleted all matters ENSSR from the post you are criticizing and added post #140. Please review. nt
proverbialwisdom
May 2014
#141
How's this grab you? MOST soy is GMO, maybe this isn't, wouldn't u like more testing on soy formula?
proverbialwisdom
May 2014
#140
So what happens when someone produces a GM corn that meets all the standards?
C_eh_N_eh_D_eh
May 2014
#10
NOBODY said "science is scary". A shitload of scientists said MONSANTO is scary.
loudsue
May 2014
#13
People say science is scary all the time, and it's not the scientists I'm worried about.
C_eh_N_eh_D_eh
May 2014
#18
That is the meme of Monsanto and other large pesticide/herbicide companies ...
MindMover
May 2014
#80
Again I will state that you are parroting Monsantos meme .... which is ridiculous ... nt
MindMover
May 2014
#82
It's quite astonishing, watching you fight the good fight against know-nothings here
FarrenH
May 2014
#116
Hasn't shown a negative impact on humans or rats? Not true, check it out.
proverbialwisdom
May 2014
#109
I do not know more about the status of this ban in France. Do you know about this?
proverbialwisdom
May 2014
#90
My response to your post was in error. It's fixed, why are you repeating yourself?
proverbialwisdom
May 2014
#110
That web site is anything but creepy. It is focused on getting the science right.
HuckleB
May 2014
#177
Statement by the AAAS Board of Directors On Labeling of Genetically Modified Foods
HuckleB
May 2014
#165