Honestly, Who Else Would Fund Such Research? Reflections of a Non-Smoking Scholar
Many public-health researchers are quick to raise charges of bias to explain away the few studies that reach politically incorrect conclusions. Claims of bias are often thrown at researchers who are funded by the industries targeted for aggressive intervention. This paper discusses whether it makes sense that bias is a relevant issue only when researchers have connections to private industry or find fault with government intervention. I focus on the issue of whether smoking bans harm any restaurant or bar owners. This area of research has experienced a large number of claims of bias and deception, leveled against research that does not enthusiastically support expanded intervention. This paper diagnoses the groupthink and deep biases of the structures and cultures within which pro-ban research comes into being. It also shows how intimidation is used to silence dissent and enforce taboos. It shows why it is important that we address the question: Who else would fund research that might come to politically incorrect conclusions on such issues?
Volume (Year): 5 (2008)
Issue (Month): 2 (May)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Enterprise Hall, Room 354, 4400 University Drive, 3G4 Fairfax, VA 22030|
Phone: (703) 993-1151
Web page: https://econjwatch.org/
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Boyes, William J & Marlow, Michael L, 1996. "The Public Demand for Smoking Bans," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 88(1-2), pages 57-67, July.
- Rajeev K. Goel & Michael A. Nelson, 2006. "The Effectiveness of Anti-Smoking Legislation: A Review," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 325-355, July.
- Benjamin C. Alamar & Stanton A. Glantz, 2007. "Smoking in Restaurants: A Reply to David Henderson," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 4(3), pages 292-295, September.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ejw:journl:v:5:y:2008:i:2:p:240-268. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Jason Briggeman)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.