Richard Doll’s links with industry are disconcerting but hardly scandalous. And they don’t make him a villain, says Philip Ball.

Few things will polarize opinion like the dressing down of a recently deceased and revered figure. That’s clear enough in the debate that has followed the recent media splash on accusations that Sir Richard Doll, the British epidemiologist credited with identifying the link between smoking and lung cancer in the 1950s, compromised the integrity of his research by receiving consultancy payments from the chemicals industry.

Read the column here.

Richard Doll’s links with industry are disconcerting but hardly scandalous. And they don’t make him a villain, says Philip Ball.

Few things will polarize opinion like the dressing down of a recently deceased and revered figure. That’s clear enough in the debate that has followed the recent media splash on accusations that Sir Richard Doll, the British epidemiologist credited with identifying the link between smoking and lung cancer in the 1950s, compromised the integrity of his research by receiving consultancy payments from the chemicals industry.

Read the column here.