A paper examining “business bias” in workplace studies, concludes “in spite of claiming primary prevention as their aim, studies of potential occupational and environmental health hazards that are funded either directly or indirectly by industry are likely to have negative results.” The authors say “studies of workers in oil refineries conducted with total economic independence have identified possible environmental and health risks associated with exposures to more than 50 substances classified as toxic, mutagenic, and carcinogenic, such as asbestos, arsenic, benzene, chromium, nickel, polycyclic hydrocarbons, and silica. The IARC has therefore evaluated exposures in oil refineries as probably carcinogenic to humans. By contrast, other studies undertaken with the same areas of industrial production, supported by industry and of doubtful independence, do not report the existence of any risks.”

Gennaro V and Tomatis L. Business bias: How epidemiologic studies may underestimate or fail to detect increased risks of cancer and other diseases, International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health, volume II, number 4, pages 356-359, October-December 2005 [pdf].Related editorial: Egilman DS, Rankin Bohme S. Over a barrel: Corporate corruption of science and its effects on workers and the environment, International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health, volume II, number 4, pages 331-337, October-December 2005 [pdf]