Pressure mounts on Economist publisher over tobacco ties

Pressure is mounting on the publisher of The Economist over its commercial ties to the world’s three largest tobacco companies. It comes after scores of leading NHS and international health experts pulled out of two more Economist Impact health conferences, following a Guardian investigation into its links to the big tobacco companies.

Last week, The Guardian reported that Economist Impact, part of the Economist Group which organised 136 events in the past financial year, had been forced to cancel a major international cancer conference in Brussels at the last minute after negative reactions from speakers and attendees.

The research found that Economist Impact has close ties to Philip Morris International (PMI), Japan Tobacco International (JTI) and British American Tobacco (BAT).

Now the future of two conferences taking place in London is also uncertain. Future of Health Europe would have over 100 speakers and over 550 attendees, while the Top conference AI in healthcare There were approximately 60 speakers and over 300 attendees.

Seventeen leading UK health officials were due to speak at the two conferences. They included the Chief Scientific Officer for England, the Chief Medical Officer of the Scottish Government and the National Clinical Director for Infection Control and Antimicrobial Resistance at NHS England, as well as senior executives at a number of NHS trusts, the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (Nice).

But more than a dozen leading health experts have withdrawn from the conference this week following the Guardian revelations, including Sue Hill, the chief scientific officer for England, and Matt Inada-Kim, NHS England’s national clinical director for infection control and antimicrobial resistance, as well as speakers from Nice, the UKHSA, the Greater Manchester Integrated Care Board, Imperial Healthcare Partners and Guy’s & St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust.

Prof Sir Michael Marmot, director of the Institute of Health Equity at University College London and a global authority on health inequalities, said: “I was unaware that Economist Impact was backed by major tobacco companies when I accepted the invitation to speak at this event. I now know that I will no longer be appearing at the conference. I have never worked with the tobacco industry and never would, and I am disappointed that these details were not disclosed in advance.

“Like my Marmot Review for the Industry showed, I think it is vital that companies play a role in advancing health equity. However, this type of sponsorship is not helpful and sends mixed messages.”

Dr Raghib Ali, CEO of Our Future Health, said: “I had no idea that the Economist Impact programme was in any way connected to the tobacco industry when I originally agreed to speak at their event. I have now withdrawn from the event. As a doctor who has worked in the emergency department for many years, I have seen the devastating impact that tobacco has on people’s health and the burden it places on our NHS.”

International health experts have also pulled out of the conference. A spokesperson for the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) confirmed that Francesca Colombo, the head of its health department, would no longer be speaking and that the OECD “would no longer be represented at the Future of Health Europe event”.

Andrea Feigl, the director of the US Health Finance Institute, which aims to improve access to and financing of health care, has also withdrawn.

Cary Adams, executive director of the Union for International Cancer Control, said: “Promoting health literacy while maintaining ties to the tobacco industry creates a real conflict of interest that goes far beyond cancer. As a membership organisation, we have been educating our community about the links we have discovered, and it is clear from the responses that others share our view.”

The three tobacco companies, which own some of the world’s most popular cigarette brands including Marlboro, Benson & Hedges, Dunhill and Pall Mall, have multi-million dollar contracts with Economist Impact, which consist of editorial coverage, which typically has a pro-tobacco slant, and event sponsorships.

One online piece positions PMI in a sympathetic manner as comparable to a car manufacturer from polluting combustion engines to cleaner alternatives for consumers. Another piece, from JTI, argues that governments should stop raising taxes on cigarettes to keep them affordable and increase excise duties to help “reduce budget deficits.”

And BAT is a top-level platinum sponsor of Economist Impact’s Sustainability Week Conference in March in London.

An Economist Group spokesperson said: “We are in active dialogue with our health partners to determine how we can continue to deliver events that have proven valuable to the world’s leading health organisations and experts.

“At Economist Impact, our work with sponsors is governed by guidelines that ensure the independence, quality and integrity of our events. We accept sponsorship from companies, provided the work is carried out independently of their influence. We have a long-standing policy of not accepting sponsorship from tobacco companies for Economist Impact’s work or events in the healthcare space, including the Future of Health and the AI ​​Health Summit.”