Bliley Lorillard
Re: Louis A. Soloff, M.D.
Abstract
Reviews and critiques Soloff's hypothesis regarding smoking and atherosclerosis and points out his past failure to submit progress reports to the Scientific Advisory Board (SAB) for project entitled: "Hemodynamic lipoprotein and enzymatic findings in atherosclerosis and their modification by smoking". Approves "increasing financial support to Doctor Soloff" based on particular conditions, including submission of progress reports and advance review of experimental plans. Includes notes in marginalia.
Fields
- Company
- Lorillard
- Type
- MEMORANDUM
- Author
- Spears, Alexander White, III (LOR President & CEO)Associated with CTR, used as an expert in the Mississippi case.
- Author (Organization)
- Lorillard Tobacco Co. (American cigarette manufacturer)American cigarette manufacturer; makes Kent, MaxSatin, Newport, Old Gold, Style, and True cigarettes.
- Recipient
- Gastman, M.I. Mr.
- Recipient (Organization)
- Lorillard Tobacco Co. (American cigarette manufacturer)American cigarette manufacturer; makes Kent, MaxSatin, Newport, Old Gold, Style, and True cigarettes.
- Copied
- Stevens, Arthur Joseph (LOR Sr. VP '89-95 and TI Communications)Served on Lorillard Board of Directors 1985-92, was Senior Vice President from 1989 to 1995, served as General Counsel for Lorillard '93-95. Served on Tobacco Institute Communications Committee.
- Named Person
- Soloff, Louis Alexander, M.D. (Cardiologist, Temple U Health Science Ctr., Industry Expert)Defense
- Hockett, Robert Casad, Ph.D. (CTR Scientific Director)
Scientific Director of the Council for Tobacco Research from 1972-1974 (WSJ 2/11/93; Allman complaint). Bio-Research Institute BRI conducted a study for the CTR. When Syrian hamsters were exposed to smoke twice a day for 59 to 80 weeks, 40% of those of a cancer-susceptible strain and 4% of a resistant strain developed malignant tumors (WSJ 2/11/93). Before publishing the study in 1974, BRI's founder, Frederic Homberger, sent a manuscript to Robert Hockett, then scientific director of the CTR. Dr. Homberger says he had to do so because halfway through his study, the CTR had changed it from a grant to a contract so they could control publication. They were quite open about that (WSJ 2/11/94. Soon thereafter, Hockett and CTR lawyer Edwin Jacob went to Dr. Homburger's summer house in Maine. Hockett and Jacob did not want BRI to call anything cancer, they wanted it to be "pseudo-epitheliomatous hyperplasis," a euphemism for lesions preceding cancer (WSJ 2/11/93). Dr. Homberger said no, this is not right, it is cancer. Jacob told Dr. Homberger that BRI would never get a penny more if the paper was published without the changes. At the last minute, Dr. Homberger changed the final proofs to read "microinvasive" cancer, a microscopic malignancy. Nevertheless, BRI was never funded by the CTR again (WSJ 2/11/96) Hochett made a statement, as scientific director of the CTR circa February 1972 that neither tobacco and health research in general, nor that of the Council for Tobacco Research has established that tobacco use or cigarette smoking in particular is a major health hazard (Allman complaint, pp. 41-42). Robert C. Hockett was Scientific Director, Vice President and Research Director of CTR. See Bio-Research Institute, TTLA Almanac - Names. (N.M.'s CTR Who's Who)- Shinn, William W. (TI Communications; Shook, Hardy, CTR Attorney)
TI Communications Committee and was also a lawyer for CTR. William W. Shinn worked for Shook, Hardy & Bacon. - Hockett, Robert Casad, Ph.D. (CTR Scientific Director)
- Named Organization
- *Scientific Advisory Board (SAB) (Only use SAB with name of specific org.)
- Council for Tobacco Research - USA (CTR) (Formerly Tobacco Industry Research Committee (TIRC))
Originally organized as the Tobacco Industry Research Committe(TIRC) in 1954, and renamed Council for Tobacco Research - USA, Inc. (CTR) in 1964. - Council for Tobacco Research - USA (CTR) (Formerly Tobacco Industry Research Committee (TIRC))
- Keyword
- Cholesterol
- Lipoproteins
- Thesaurus Term
- cardiovascular disease
- tobacco industry sponsorship
- tobacco industry structure
- gene or genome
- expenditure
- tobacco industry sponsorship
Document Images
MEMORANDUM
September 7, 1971
TO: Mr. M~chael I. Gastman
FROM: A. W. Spears
Louis A. Soloff, M.D.
According to my information, obtained: at past SAB
me~tings, Doctor Soloff is a productive researcher. The
title of his current grant with CTR is "Hemodynamic
Lipoprotein and Enzymatic Findings in Atherosclerosis
and their Modification by Smoking." You will note in
the second year renewal application (attached) that
Doctor Soloff comments on the first year findings which,
he believes s~ow a relationship between smoking: andl a
decrease in lipoproteins. To substantiate these results,
he intends to begin fractionation of lipoproteins. You
will also note in Doctor Hockett's letter to the review
committee of the SAB that (i) Doctor Soloff does not
submit formal progress reports, and (2) an enzyme chemist
is required to fractionate lipoproteins and/or ~solate
enzymes referred to in Mr. Shinn's letter.
It is not~~U~ that Doctor Soloff has a sub-
stantiated flndlng, or in my opinion even a hypothesis
that there may be an inborn ability of the body to cope
with excessive cholesterol (as stated by Mr. Shinn).
He more likely is nourishinq the hypothesis that
enzymes control the egress of free cholesterol from the
arterial wall, and that smoking and possibly heriditary genetics
influence the quantitative nature of the free cholesterol egress.
All of this writing is to emphasize the points that
I have made before:
Does Doctor Soloff have qualified personnel
to carry out the pro.posed: investigation (the
enzyme chemist)?
Any three-year grant should be made contingent
on review of progress toward the stated goals
(yearly). Changes in objectives over the three
years should require application for transfer
Mr. Michael I~ ~astman
- 2 -
Se~ tuber 7, 1971
Most hypotheses, such as that reported
by Mr. Shinn, presented in a fashion which
appears to. be appealing to a particular
position, are not a basis of supporting
investigations. Restated (as I did) makes
it considerably less appealing to the
same position.
In summary, I have no scientific objection to increasing
financial support to Doctor Soloff if my point number one is
clarified.; support for 1972'-1973 and 1973-1974 should be
contingent upon a review of progress reports, a research
budg~et being~ available and the planned experimentation set
forth on a year to year basis.
I do not approve of an open-ended guaranteed grant
of $1131,000.
Vice President, Research and Development
AWS:rcb
Xc: Mr. Arthur J. Stevens
Attachments
---
