Hi Tarek,
You have clearly outlined the ethical conflict Abi faces, and I appreciate how you tied it to professional standards, such as the ASA guidelines. I agree that selectively emphasising favourable outcomes, even with accurate data, risks misrepresentation, especially when public health is involved.
Your suggestion that Abi could consider independent publication or ethical review is a strong one. It places accountability beyond technical correctness and into real-world consequences. I’d also add that even if Abi’s role is seen as advisory, staying silent might still make him complicit, particularly if the manufacturer uses the positive data in misleading ways.
I also found your mention of legal frameworks helpful. In contexts like Nigeria or the UK, consumer protection laws make it clear that omissions can be just as harmful as false claims (GOV.UK, 2008; Bello et al., 2012). Abi should also include a clear disclaimer in his report outlining the scope, limitations, and risks of selective interpretation. That way, he documents his ethical responsibility and transparency.
Thanks for a well-argued post. It brings attention to the idea that ethical reporting depends not only on what is included in the analysis, but also on what is left out.
References
Bello, K.B., Suleiman, J.B.A. and Danjuma, I. (2012) ‘Perspectives on Consumerism and Consumer Protection Act in Nigeria’, Perspectives, 4(10).
GOV.UK (2008) GUIDANCE on the UK Regulations (May 2008) implementing the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a74d389e5274a3cb28677f4/oft1008.pdf.