Bravo, Pedro (2025) Grouping approaches to PFAS and industry funding: a case study on the findings of a recent panel of experts. Principia: an international journal of epistemology, 29 (1). pp. 1-20. ISSN 1414-4247
This is the latest version of this item.
![[img]](https://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/style/images/fileicons/text.png) |
Text
p291-1 (1).pdf Download (240kB) |
|
Text
Manuscrito Prêmio SBFA (versão aceita pre print) - cópia.pdf Download (356kB) |
Abstract
Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are a large class of chemicals, whose carbonfluorine bonds allow a wide range of industrial applications but also make them highly persistent. Since there is evidence about only a few of them and their properties may vary, one of the pressing issues regarding PFAS is how to group them for different purposes. In this paper, I aim to show how a recent panel of experts about grouping PFAS was co-opted in a way that favor the fluorine industry. The panel consisted of eleven experts, including authors renowned for views in conflict with fluorine industry regulatory approaches, answering questions through an online application. Its main results along with the experts’ answers were published in 2022 in the journal Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology. Through a detailed analysis of all the material published and in dialogue with the literature about industry-funded research, I will present how choices in the design of the panel (e.g., which kind of consensus the exercise could capture, the ways questions were framed or even changed), in textual analysis (e.g., criteria for assembling opinions) and in the communication of the findings (e.g., what gets included or excluded) were made in an industry friendly way affecting two specific grouping approaches. I conclude with some lessons about this kind of influence of industry funding.
| Export/Citation: | EndNote | BibTeX | Dublin Core | ASCII/Text Citation (Chicago) | HTML Citation | OpenURL |
| Social Networking: |
| Item Type: | Published Article or Volume | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Creators: |
|
||||||
| Keywords: | General Philosophy of Science. Values in Science. Industry Funding. Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances. | ||||||
| Subjects: | General Issues > Science and Society General Issues > Values In Science |
||||||
| Depositing User: | Dr. Pedro Bravo | ||||||
| Date Deposited: | 24 Mar 2025 13:35 | ||||||
| Last Modified: | 24 Mar 2025 13:35 | ||||||
| Item ID: | 24935 | ||||||
| Journal or Publication Title: | Principia: an international journal of epistemology | ||||||
| Official URL: | https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principia/art... | ||||||
| DOI or Unique Handle: | https://doi.org/10.5007/1808-1711.2025.e103113 | ||||||
| Subjects: | General Issues > Science and Society General Issues > Values In Science |
||||||
| Date: | 20 March 2025 | ||||||
| Page Range: | pp. 1-20 | ||||||
| Volume: | 29 | ||||||
| Number: | 1 | ||||||
| ISSN: | 1414-4247 | ||||||
| URI: | https://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/id/eprint/24935 |
Available Versions of this Item
-
Grouping approaches to PFAS and industry funding: a case study on the findings of a recent
panel of experts. (deposited 30 Sep 2024 13:52)
- Grouping approaches to PFAS and industry funding: a case study on the findings of a recent panel of experts. (deposited 24 Mar 2025 13:35) [Currently Displayed]
Monthly Views for the past 3 years
Monthly Downloads for the past 3 years
Plum Analytics
Altmetric.com
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |
![[feed]](http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/style/images/feed-icon-32x32.png){kind=icon}