One could argue that this effect is negligible compared to the other influences at hand And "one" would be kind of engaging in "what-about-ism". You certainly

One could argue that this effect is negligible compared to the other influences at hand And "one" would be kind of engaging in "what-about-ism". You certainly have some corporations indeed attempting to twist results in areas like climate science or tobacco smoke. The main limit here is that companies spend based on semi-objective cost benefits so most companies want to look better hire public relations agencies rather than paying for science but see notable except above. Sure, I don't which different kinds of science distortion worst but it's certainly remarkable the different arguments which phenomena like Epstein's efforts aren't really a problem.