Statement regarding litigation filed by Dr. Eunice Neeley

December 7, 2017

Stanton A. Glantz, PhD

As reported in Buzzfeed and elsewhere, Dr. Eunice Neeley has filed a lawsuit against me alleging sexual harassment and discriminatory behavior. 
I have read the Buzzfeed article and deny every claim reported to be included in this lawsuit. 
These allegations were made formally to the University of California in March 2017 and the University has been conducting an extensive investigation that has not yet been completed.  I have been cooperating in every way with the investigation, including sitting for several interviews, each several hours long, as well as providing extensive written records.  These records provide specific contemporaneous documentation that demonstrates that the related allegations, as reported by Buzfeed, are not supported by the documentary record.
I have also heard that another woman who has been collaborating with Dr. Neeley will be filing a lawsuit in the near future.  She also filed a complaint with the University which is being investigated by the same and other offices.   Based on the complaint filed last March I deny the claims made at that time.
Under University of California policy I am not supposed to discuss this investigation until it has been concluded and I have and will continue to respect that policy.
I want to thank former students and colleagues around the world for your kind words.
This is the only statement that I am making on this matter.
Stanton A. Glantz, PhD
Professor of Medicine
Truth Initiative Distinguished Professor in Tobacco Control
Director, Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education
University of California, San Francisco
December 7, 2017
This posting reflects my personal views and should not be construed as an official statement by the University.  Here is the University of California’s official statement on this case: “UCSF takes any allegations of a hostile work environment seriously. An internal investigation is being conducted under applicable UC policies. We cannot comment on pending litigation or active investigations, however, it is important that all parties’ rights be respected per the terms of UC policies.”



If there is a silver lining in this process it is all the supportive emails and phone calls people -- mostly women I have worked with over the years -- have sent me in response to my statement on the Neeley allegations.

Thank you again.


The Buzzfeed article reported that I “stole credit for her work.”  As explained in detail in a June  21, 2017 letter to the journal from the UCSF Associate Vice Chancellor and Research Integrity Officer, Chairman of the Department of Medicine, and Director of the Cardiovascular Research Institute, “the reason that Dr. Glantz did not include Dr. Neeley as an author when he initially submitted the manuscript on May 26, 2017 was that, despite repeated requests, Dr. Neeley had refused to grant Dr. Glantz permission to include her as an author on the paper.”    The full letter is available here.  

Note:  The journal to which the paper was originally submitted, Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers and Prevention,” sent the paper out to review.  While the reviews saw the science as sound, the journal rejected the paper on priority as not being of sufficient interest to their specific audience.  This is not unusual for high impact journals; the paper is now under review at another journal

Add new comment

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
6 + 13 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.