Regarding bias

Our plain-English summary of Regarding bias, by J.B. Gee (Environmental Health Perspectives, 1994).

The study

• Author: J.B. Gee
• Journal: Environmental Health Perspectives
• Published: 1994;102(5):425-6
• Type of article: Letter
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher · Free full text

In plain English

This item is a short letter to the editor, not a research study, and it reports no new data on asbestos exposure or disease. The author, J. Bernard L. Gee of Yale University School of Medicine, was one of the authors of a 1990 Science paper titled "Asbestos: Scientific Developments and Implications for Public Policy." The letter responded to an editorial comment by David P. Rall. According to the letter, that comment suggested that the "industry association" of some of the Science paper's authors needed to be explored. The author wrote of being saddened by that comment. The letter quoted D'Agostino and Wilson, who cited the late Irving Selikoff as saying that arguments should be judged on their merits and not by the interests of the people who make them. The author agreed and stated that, to the author's knowledge, none of the Science paper's authors had departed from that policy. The author added that the author's own activities were partly in the public domain, were not hidden from editors, and were not the subject for any apology.

We wrote this plain-English summary from the full article with the help of AI, and a second AI model checked each sentence against the article. It is not the authors' wording; the abstract and the article are their own account.

What the study did and found

• Design: letter to the editor (commentary); no study was carried out
• Main results:
  • The letter states that Rall's editorial comment suggested the industry association of some authors of the 1990 Science paper on asbestos and public policy needed to be explored.
  • The letter quotes D'Agostino and Wilson citing Selikoff: arguments should be evaluated on their merits, not by the interests of those who make them.
  • The author stated that the author's own activities are partly in the public domain, are not hidden from editors, and are not the subject for any apology.
• The authors' conclusion: The author agreed that arguments should be judged on their merits and stated that, to the author's knowledge, none of the authors of the Science paper had departed from this policy.

Related studies

• Necessity and approach to integrated nanomaterial legislation and governance — J. Wang, J.D. Gerlach, et al. (2013)
• WTO upholds French ban on chrysotile — L.K. Allen (2001)
• Author's response to: "Letter to the Editor" regarding content of "Mesothelioma from asbestos exposures: Epidemiologic patterns and impact in the United States" by R. A. Lemen, Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part B 2016; 19: 250-265 — (2017)
• The case for a global ban on asbestos — J. LaDou, B. Castleman, et al. (2010)
• Children's health in Latin America: the influence of environmental exposures — A. Laborde, F. Tomasina, et al. (2015)
• Environmental associations and histopathologic patterns of carcinoma of the lung: the challenge and dilemma in epidemiologic studies — J.C. Ives, P.A. Buffler, et al. (1983)

Browse more research in Environmental Health Perspectives, or return to medical research.