President's Column

This issue of the Newsletter includes SRNT's new Policy on Disclosure of Competing Interests. In the U.S., issues of scientific and financial conflicts of interest have achieved high visibility. Every professional group to which I belong has found itself confronting conflict of interest issues in the past few years. Each journal I read, including our own Nicotine & Tobacco Research, has dealt with it, usually by requiring full disclosure of potential conflicts of interest when an article is submitted and published. The institution that employs me requires all faculty to disclose annually all sources of funding from industrial sources. The Research Office of my hospital requires me to complete a special conflict of interest form before they let me submit any grant or subcontract. Against this background, it is no surprise that the conflict of interest issue that was stirring in SRNT for some time, came to a head last year, prompting Harry Lando, SRNT's President, to ask an Ad hoc committee to address it. The committee wrestled with the issues for several months. Ultimately, we produced a draft, solicited comments from SRNT members by posting it on the Listserv and presented it to the SRNT Board of Directors at the 2003 Annual Meeting. The Board approved the policy, which is printed in this issue and can be found on the SRNT website.

Those unfamiliar with these issues may wonder, why the fuss? The policy states this clearly, "The presence of undeclared sources of support and financial interests has the possibility of undermining the reputation, influence, and actions of SRNT.... The issue of credibility is especially salient because nicotine and tobacco research is conducted in a charged political environment."

SRNT's policy distinguishes between a competing interest and a conflict of interest. For our purposes, a competing interest exists "when a member's financial relationship with an organization has the potential to bias actions taken on behalf of SRNT." The key word is potential. The mere existence of a competing interest does not imply a conflict of interest, but it means that such a situation is possible. Furthermore, the individual disclosing the relationship is not in a position to judge its impact. As the policy states, "the potential for conflict of interest can exist whether or not an individual believes that the relationship affects his or her scientific judgment or his or her decisions made on behalf of SRNT."

Finally, the policy provides an operational definition for competing interest. SRNT policy requires that "all officers of the Society, candidates for office in the Society, and all current and prospective committee members of the Society must disclose all relationships that could be viewed as potential competing interests." Individuals are required to disclose, "to the best of their recollection, all financial support for the past 3 years and

any pending proposals for funding from the tobacco industry, the pharmaceutical industry or other industry, government agencies, private foundations, any other source of funding that represents a potential competing interest." With these choices, SRNT has taken a conservative position, assuming that disclosure is the path to take whenever there is a question and broadly defining a competing interest.

Having taken this step, SRNT is now implementing the policy. We created a form for reporting and pilot tested it with the Executive Committee. By mid-August, the competing interest forms will be on the SRNT Website, along with the blank form and the policy statement. What do these forms reveal? In my opinion, no big surprise. None of us has accepted tobacco industry funding. Overall, we report funding from government agencies, private foundations, and pharmaceutical companies, the mix varying by person. If you want the details, take a look for yourself.

With these actions, SRNT has taken an important first step toward addressing thorny issues. I don't delude myself that this document is the last word on the subject. You will notice, for example, that our policy is silent on what is to do with the "competing interest" information disclosed. Who should decide whether a conflict of interest exists? If it exists, what happens? Is there any category of competing interest preclude an individual from holding office, serving on a committee, or otherwise representing the Society?

The Ad hoc committee that produced the policy wrestled with these thorny issues internally at length. We saw merit on both sides of the issue. After much discussion, the Ad hoc committee decided not to take a position at this time. We decided that requiring disclosure by officers and committee members was itself an important step toward making the Society's action more transparent to all members and other parties. The committee realized that not all members would agree with our position, and fully expect further discussion in the coming years - maybe even right away.

Over the next months, I will ask all SRNT committee and council chairs, and then all committee members, to complete the competing interest form. In the meantime, as chair of the Ad hoc committee, I owe a large debt to the colleagues who donated many hours to the task: David Balfour, Harry Lando, Ann McNeill, Ken Perkins, and Judy Wilkenfeld. I think SRNT has made a good start. The process so far and the policy that was adopted represent, to my mind, further signs of SRNT's maturation as a professional society.

As always, comments are always welcome - through the Listserv or to me.