Open Science, Transparency, and Disclosure of Data is What the Society for Research on Nicotine & Tobacco Should be About

The recent editorial from some members of the Health Equity Network nicely reviews past grievances against the cigarette industry but in our view does not adequately address the complexity of today’s increasingly diverse array of tobacco and nicotine products and technologies. The commentary’s authors did not explicitly account for the scientific opportunity costs that might be lost in their approach. These include having less rather than more open science in a world with a rapidly evolving marketplace.1 We agree with the authors of the editorial that there are important issues related to conflicts of interest that are ever present and need to be considered. But we believe that is a manageable concern consistent with Society for Research on Nicotine & Tobacco (SRNT) endorsing the principles of open science, transparency, and disclosure of data and we would welcome a discussion with the authors on how best to do that. The controversial publication of the paper from Juul Labs in Nicotine & Tobacco Research (NTR) which appears to have stimulated the editorial by Rose and colleagues, seems to be the result of a misunderstanding about how SRNT policy applies to NTR. Even if readers need to remain skeptical in their interpretation of the article’s findings given the source of funding, the article still has scientific merit.2 As will always be the case, independent replication will determine the robustness of the findings. If things were not disclosed properly as alluded to in the editorial, the editors of NTR should correct the record.1 However, on principle the NTR editors should be free to decide which papers get published after peer review, how errors are reported, and when retraction is necessary. That said, we should all be concerned about efforts to limit NTR editorial independence when papers selected for publication do not fit with the views of SRNT committees or board members.3 The same principle of editorial independence should apply to the SRNT program committee that sets the agenda for the annual meeting where the focus should be on the scientific merit of the research selected for presentation.