Nathaniel Wander, PhD and Ruth, E. Malone, RN, PhD. Center for Tobacco Control Research & Education/ Dept of Social & Behavioral Science, University of California, San Francisco, 530 Parnassus Ste 366, Box 1390, San Francisco, CA 94143-1390, 415-514-9343, nwander@itsa.ucsf.edu

Medical and health science schools occupy a prestigious place in U.S. society. When they express a position on tobacco use—either by action or silence—that expression is consequential.

Recognizing this, the tobacco industry has worked to sustain and exploit relationships with academic health sciences institutions. Corporate contributions to medical research are more visible, but institutional investments in tobacco stocks are also crucial to these relationships. The American Medical Association divested (sold) its tobacco holdings in 1986, urging others to do the same. Yet, as late as 2003, at least five of the leading dozen medical schools have not divested, and those which have seem reluctant to publicize their actions.

This study utilizes internal tobacco industry documents and secondary source material to describe and analyze Philip Morris’s response to two cases of threatened academic divestment. In each case, the world’s largest tobacco company succeeded in minimizing the impact of divestment activities—in the first, by muting the consequences of a divestment, and in the second, by convincing university decision-makers to recommend against tobacco stock divestment. In addition to arguing that tobacco divestment would lead to other pressures or be ineffective, the company exploited university concerns about losing corporate research funding as a key element of its anti-divestment strategy.

If academic medical centers regard protection of the public’s health as a primary mission, divestment from tobacco holdings is essential; profiting from tobacco either through investments or research funding undermines this mission. Silent divestment squanders opportunities for ethical leadership and public dialog.

Learning Objectives: At the end of this presentation, attendees will

• Recognize the two principal ways in which the tobacco industry keeps academic medicine in a state of financial dependence;
• Understand the connections between tobacco industry research funding and tobacco stock investment income;
• Be capable of advocating for university divestment from tobacco stocks and for refusal to accept tobacco industry research funding.

Keywords: Tobacco Policy, Research Ethics

Presenting author's disclosure statement:
I do not have any significant financial interest/arrangement or affiliation with any organization/institution whose products or services are being discussed in this session.