ArticleEnvironmental health : a global access science source2021
The science of spin: targeted strategies to manufacture doubt with detrimental effects on environmental and public health.
Article in Environmental health : a global access science source, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Quality of information in news media reports about the effects of health interventions: Systematic review and meta-analyses.F1000Research · 2021Pooled it
- Reviewing ecosystems of evidence: synthesising the evidence on the commercial determinants of health from a complex systems perspective.Systematic reviews · 2026Article
- Article
- What do people need to know about endocrine disrupting chemicals and health? A mental models approach using focus groups of community-engaged research teams and a national survey.BMC public health · 2025Article
- The sugar industry's efforts to manipulate research on fluoride effectiveness and toxicity: a ninety-year history.Environmental health : a global access science source · 2025Article
- A large language model-based tool for identifying relationships to industry in research on the carcinogenicity of benzene, cobalt, and aspartame.Environmental health : a global access science source · 2025Article
- Debate: What guidance is needed by academics who collaborate with digital companies to improve youth mental health?Child and adolescent mental health · 2025Article
- Mapping commercial practices of the pesticide industry to shape science and policymaking: a scoping review.Health promotion international · 2025Article
- Reclaiming the narrative: countering harmful commercial discourses.Health promotion international · 2024Article
- Developing structures to support researchers studying health-harming industries.Health promotion international · 2024Article
- The opioid industry's use of scientific evidence to advance claims about prescription opioid safety and effectiveness.Health affairs scholar · 2024Article
- Words Matter: Reflective Science Communication and Tradeoffs in Environmental Health Research.Environmental health perspectives · 2024Article
- An expenditure analysis revealing how Philip Morris advertisements coincide with tobacco policymaking in Switzerland.Tobacco prevention & cessation · 2024Article
- Dynamics of combatting market-driven epidemics: Insights from U.S. reduction of cigarette, sugar, and prescription opioid consumption.PLOS global public health · 2024Review
- Conflicts of Interest in the Assessment of Chemicals, Waste, and Pollution.Environmental science & technology · 2023Review
- The Commercial Determinants of Health and Evidence Synthesis (CODES): methodological guidance for systematic reviews and other evidence syntheses.Systematic reviews · 2023Article
- A science-based agenda for health-protective chemical assessments and decisions: overview and consensus statement.Environmental health : a global access science source · 2023Article
- Addressing systemic problems with exposure assessments to protect the public's health.Environmental health : a global access science source · 2023Review
- Conducting evaluations of evidence that are transparent, timely and can lead to health-protective actions.Environmental health : a global access science source · 2022Article
- Back to our roots or sowing new seeds: thinking anew on the paradigms of health, harm and disease.Journal of public health (Oxford, England) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNumerous groups, such as the tobacco industry, have deliberately altered and misrepresented knowable facts and empirical evidence to promote an agenda, often for monetary benefit, with consequences for environmental and public health. Previous research has explored cases individually, but none have conducted an in-depth comparison between cases. The purpose of this study was to compile a comprehensive list of tactics used by disparate groups and provide a framework for identifying further instances of manufactured doubt.
methodsWe examined scholarly books, peer-reviewed articles, well-researched journalism pieces, and legal evidence related to five disparate industries and organizations selected for their destructive impacts on environmental and public health (tobacco, coal, and sugar industries, manufacturers of the pesticide Atrazine, and the Marshall Institute, an institute focused on climate change research, and other scientists from the era that associated with those in the Institute). These documents provided evidence for a list of tactics used to generate pro-industry spin and manufacture doubt about conferred harm. We then identified trends among sets of strategies that could explain their differential use or efficacy.
resultsWe recognized 28 unique tactics used to manufacture doubt. Five of these tactics were used by all five organizations, suggesting that they are key features of manufactured doubt. The intended audience influences the strategy used to misinform, and logical fallacies contribute to their efficacy.
conclusionsThis list of tactics can be used by others to build a case that an industry or group is deliberately manipulating information associated with their actions or products. Improved scientific and rhetorical literacy could be used to render them less effective, depending on the audience targeted, and ultimately allow for the protection of both environmental health and public health more generally.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.