April 20, 2001

Ms. Katherine Roberts
New York Times
National News Editor
229 West 43rd Street
New York, NY 10036

Re: NYT news articles with no disclosure of conflicts of interest

Dear Ms. Roberts:

We write to you about some articles that have appeared in the Times, some recently, some a few years ago. Our concern pertains to the need for the news media routinely to disclose conflicts of interest of those whom they quote. The following examples, by no means comprehensive, illustrate the problem.

— Earlier this year (NYT, January 9, 2001, Sect. F, p. 1) Abigail Zuger wrote a story (“With Dietary Salt, What ‘Everyone Knows’ is in Dispute”) in which she quoted two apparently disinterested professors to the effect that “salt makes little difference in blood pressure control when people eat balanced diets” and that there is no “basis whatsoever for a public health recommendation for eating any particular sodium content diet.” Respectively, the professors quoted were “Dr. David McCarron, a professor of medicine at Oregon State Health Science University” and “Dr. Michael Alderman, a professor of medicine at Albert Einstein College of Medicine and past president of the American Society of Hypertension.” As to Dr. McCarron, the story revealed that he “serves as a paid medical consultant for both the dairy industry and the Salt Institute, a trade group of salt manufacturers.” What was unrevealed, however, was that Dr. Alderman — who was presented as an impartial commentator — had “submit[ted a] petition on behalf of the Salt Institute” to the F.D.A. calling on it to “revoke the regulation approving a health claim for sodium” and to “revoke the nutrient disclosure levels for sodium.” (Source: September 19, 1996 petition to the F.D.A, available at: http://www.saltinstitute.org/pubstat/petition.html)

— Jane E. Brody wrote a story (“Gene Altered Foods,” NYT, December 5, 2000, sect. D, p. 8) in which she referred to “Dr. Alan McHughen, a biotechnologist at the University of Saskatchewan.” It was not disclosed, however, that Dr. McHughen has received research funding from Rhone-Poulenc, DuPont, AgrEvo, and the Western Grains Research Foundation. (Source: http://www.usask.ca/agriculture/plantsci/mchughen.html)

— William K. Stevens wrote a story (“Global Warming: The Contrarian View,” NYT, February 29, 2000, Sect. F, p. 1) in which he quoted “Dr. S. Fred Singer, an independent atmospheric scientist . . . .” Not mentioned was that Dr. Singer has served as a consultant to Exxon, Shell, Unocal, Sun Oil, and ARCO. (Source: www.sepp.org/bios/singer/cvsfs.html)

The Stevens story also quoted “Dr. Robert Balling, a climatologist at Arizona State University.” It was not disclosed that Dr. Balling has received funding from the Kuwaiti government, foreign coal and mining corporations, and from the Cyprus Minerals Company. (Source: Ross Gelbspan, The Heat Is On (Perseus Books, 1998), pp. 44-45)

It is noteworthy that in an April 26, 1998, NYT article (“Industrial Group Plans to Battle Climate Treaty,” Sect. 1, p. 1), John H. Cushman, Jr. wrote at length about “a campaign to recruit a cadre of scientists who share the industry’s views of climate science and to train them in public relations so they can help convince journalists, politicians, and the public that the risk of global warming is too uncertain to justify controls on greenhouse gases . . . .” One of the scientists noted in the Cushman story was Fred Singer — the same Dr. Singer quoted in the Stevens story mentioned above.

— In a November 10, 1994 article (“Economic Scene, Putting a Price Tag on Life . . . .”, Sect. D, p. 2), Peter Passell quoted John Graham of the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis (HCRA) about the purported dangers of health and safety regulations. Undisclosed is the fact that the HCRA has long been funded heavily by the chemical, agricultural, petroleum, mining, and pharmaceutical industries — the very companies subject to health and safety regulations. (See Douglas Jehl, “Regulation Czar Prefers New Path,” NYT, March 25, 2001, p. 1 (noting HCRA’s extensive ties to industry); see also Eric Pianin, “Dioxin Report by EPA on Hold,” Wash. Post, April 12, 2001, p. 1 (referring to HCRA as “industry-backed”))

We do not mean to suggest that the Times always fails to disclose such conflicts. Thus, for example, in a February 18, 2001 story (“Death Spurs Laws Against Drivers of Cell Phones,” Sect. 1, p. 1), Francis X. Clines noted that a study done by the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis was funded by AT&T. Similarly, Lawrence K. Altman wrote a story (“Drug Slashes Breast Cancer Risk, Study Shows,” Sect. A, p. 27, June 16, 1999) in which he pointed out that “Lilly financed the study” in question. The problem, of course, is that such disclosure seems random. Sometimes financial ties are disclosed in one story and left undisclosed in another story — even as to the very same person or entity.

Your readers are entitled to know about such conflicts in order to make more informed judgments about the conclusions offered by the scientists quoted. Otherwise, the impression is that such experts are “neutral” scientists with no vested interest in the matters upon which they offer opinions. The point is not that such financial ties categorically discredit or disqualify any expert, but rather that such information is useful to the public to consider. In that general regard, last year a study in the New England Journal of Medicine (vol. 342, #22) found that “News-media stories about medications may include inadequate or incomplete information about the benefits, risks, and costs of the drugs as well as the financial ties between the study groups or experts and pharmaceutical manufacturers.” (See abstract accompanying this letter.)

The problem of conflicts of interest in science is more and more in the news. Given that fact, the public interest would be well served by the news media regularly disclosing such facts about the sources they quote.

Accordingly, we respectfully urge the Times to direct (or remind, as the case may be) your reporters routinely to ask sources about possible conflicts of interest and to report that information to your readers.

Thank you for your consideration. I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely Yours,
 

Ronald Collins
Director, Integrity in Science Project
(202) 332-9110, #322
e-mail: ronc@cspinet.org

encl.

cc: Joseph Lelyveld (Executive Editor), Cornelia Dean (Science & Health editor)