Regents Forestall Decision on Tobacco Funds

SAN FRANCISCO—Citing concerns about infringement on academic freedom, the UC Board of Regents elected to postpone a vote on prohibiting faculty members from accepting research funds from tobacco companies.

While being urged by some professors to abolish the funding, the regents chose to delay a vote until the May meeting due to fears of setting a precedent that some said could prevent faculty from having control over their research.

“I think academic freedom and how much you believe in your faculty is more important than anything,” said Regent Sherry Lansing. “I really believe we should not be involved in anything that violates academic freedom and I think this does. I believe the faculty can do research without being corrupted.”

Since 1995, UC researchers have received 108 awards totalling $37 million for tobacco research. Currently researchers at the Berkeley, Davis, San Diego and Los Angeles campuses have a total of 19 research contracts with Philip Morris, Inc.

Proponents of the ban, like UCSF Professor of Medicine Stanton Glantz, pointed to an eight-year federal lawsuit that ruled in August 2006 that tobacco companies like Philip Morris USA, Inc. were guilty of fraudulent practices, including funding research at UC.

Glantz pointed to UCLA professor James Enstrom as what he said was an example of how tobacco funds could tarnish the integrity of the university.

Enstrom was revealed to have long misled colleagues by not disclosing a tobacco company as his funding source and ignoring problems with his data, according to John Seffrin, CEO of the American Cancer Society.

“The university’s mission is about truth, light and enlightenment,” Glantz said. “The tobacco companies fund universities to confuse things and slow down the transmission of knowledge. There is no question that they have been very successful. The reason the regents should not be engaged is because (the companies) use universities against the university’s fundamental mission.”

Many academic and nonprofit institutions across the country, including Harvard University, have already prohibited the use of tobacco funds for research. The UC regents voted in 2001 to withdraw all of the university’s investments in tobacco companies.

California Lieutenant Governor John Garamendi suggested delegating the decision to individual campus units, but historically this has proved unsuccessful, according to faculty representatives.

When seven academic units at four campuses, including UC Berkeley’s School of Public Health, chose to prohibit tobacco research funds in 2004, the UC Office of the President ruled that they did not have the authority to outlaw such fund use.

John Oakley, chair of the systemwide faculty Academic Council, said faculty were divided on the issue because while many supported the policy, others felt regulation by the university of research donors could violate academic freedom policies.

While the faculty body had turned to the board of regents to make the ultimate decision on the divisive topic, several regents were uncomfortable ruling without further consideration on an issue that they said could potentially send the wrong message to faculty.

“I believe a yes vote would set a dangerous precedent that threatens our culture,” said Jefferson Coombs, president of the Alumni Associations of the UC. “It would send the message that we do not trust our world-class academics.”

Tags: