Bliley Lorillard
[Questions Regarding CTR Related to Departure of Hartnett]
Abstract
Strategizes about options and issues related to "re-assessment of the 'mission' of CTR [Council for Tobacco Research], with particular reference to whether its function as a grant-making agency is adequate to our needs". Indicates possible replacement of Hartnett with Hockett. Advocates elimination of non-tobacco related funding practices of Scientific Advisory Board (SAB) and suggests contract mechanism may be more appropriate. Argues for policy of "enlightened self-interest" in industry research funding policy and practices.
Fields
- Company
- Council for Tobacco Research
- Type
- LETTER
- Author
- Yeaman, Addison Y. (BW VP & General counsel; CTR Chairman of Board)General counsel for B&W. CTR Chairman/President 1975-1981
- Author (Organization)
- Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation (B&W)Subsidiary of BAT U.S., located in Louisville, KY.
- Named Person
- Hartnett, Timothy V. (B&W exec)Defense
- Severi
- *Leuchtenberger, Cecile & Rudolph (use Individual Names)Defense
- Little, Arthur D. (Arthur Little died in the 1930s. References to Arthur D. Lit)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)
- Hoyt, Willson Thomas (W. Thomas) (CTR, President, Executive Director 1954-1984)Previously with Hill & Knowlton
- Named Organization
- *Council for Tobacco Research-- U.S.A. Inc. CTR (Formerly Tobacco Industry Research Committee (TIRC))Created and funded by the tobacco industry to award grants to study of the link between smoking and disease. Part of a four decade effort to cast doubt on the links between smoking and disease.
- Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation (B&W)Subsidiary of BAT U.S., located in Louisville, KY.
- American Medical Association (physicians group)Professional trade group representing American physicians.
- Mason Research Institute (Evaluated smoking machines for animal inhalation studies)Evaluated smoking machines for animal inhalation studies and did toxicity tests on rodents.
- *Scientific Advisory Board (SAB) (Only use SAB with name of specific org.)
- Thesaurus Term
- research activity
- tobacco industry structure
- public policy
- public relations
- expenditure
- cancer
- tobacco industry policy
- tobacco industry sponsorship
Document Images
- - _ - _ - :1600 ~.~t II--'.2~ Street ~ Lo~&~-i~. -~-~t-~c~, 40201 -
- = ~
- -' ~ - -
- LAn DEPARTMENT
Januaryi2, 1968 - " -= - -
~
- ADDISON YEAMAN. v~¢~ P~ES~ENT-
JAMES N. RAV~
- - DE@AUH BRYANT
. PATRICK M. KELLY -
TH~ CO~CIL FOR ~BACCO RESEARCE~U.S.A.
The necess~y £or £~ad~ng a successor to b~r. Hartnett as Chalrman
of CTR pr~v~es u~ ~i¢h aa opportunity to focus sharply on ques~
¢ions :
~) Re-assessmen~ o~ the "mission" of CTR, with particular
re£erence ~o vhether ~ts function as~a.grant-maktng
~gency ~s adequate to o~r needs~ and
2) Assuming that the f~rst quest~oa is answered tn the
nega¢ive, as ~ndeed it ~s by ~rown & ~'~i~ia~son, how
CTR'~ m~ss~on should be re~ef~aed and CTR reconstituted.
On the quest~oa ~hether CTR as presently cons~¢£uted and operating
!s adequate to ~ur needs, ~ caa only say that:
1) Review of SAB's current grants ~adicates that a very
s~zable aumbe~ of them-are £~r projects tn vhat m~gh¢ be
called "basic research" w~thout specific orientation to
the p~oblem of the re!at~nsb.~p of the use of £obacco to human.
health. Fully recognizing £he need for "basic" research
in attacking the general problem of cancer, it would seem
to =e tha~ the needs of ~he ~obacco ~ndustry are so pressing
~nd so closeZy d~ctated by tts own i~ed~ate problems that
~e shou!d gtve serious consideration ¢o aba~dontng or
phastng out those grants which do not have a spectf!c
orientation to tobacco and aim at the devotion of ava¢lable
CTR funds ~o ~he more aarrow!y de~aed areas related to
tobacco. In defense of that v~ew i would argue, £irst,
that the industry devotes sizab!e amounts through A~IA to
more generalized areas o~ research; and, second~y, that
other tnst~tut~ons are engaged ~n those areas and that
enlightened se!f ~nterest points us toward more narrowly
def~ne~ programs.
2) I am far frtm c~nv¢~ced that Special Projects ge~ the staff
superv~s~oa necessary. The ~la~on Lahoratory-Leuchteabergers=
Sever~ s~tua~n mtght be cited as aa example.
: It iis strongly;urged: that as par:t:of the re'orientation-of CTR
• sponsored rese~rch~the most: searahing~and careful ~evi:ew~ at the
earliest pOSsible £i~e,~ of_ £he: State:~of; knowledge: and~ ~-f: ~he: :
curre6~ research in respect:of lhe:rela£Jon~of_tob~cco-t0 heaiZh
"
: - be accomplished~:_under-:~e:!eaders~ip~of a new Chairman 0f
by a group embracing, every relevant discipl~ne at the highest level
of competence and prestige to the end that a ciear~y ~nd precisely
.e.m~a.e~ w.o~r~m o:f :tobacco oriented research Could be proposed.
~£%: having been-done~ ~he SAB might thdn have ~he re~ponSisil&ty
for seeking out persons or a~encies_ competeni to pursue :the:
:necessar~" pro~eats on~ ~f necessary, a contract basis: :Thi~:wou!d
no~. in our view, preclude continuance of conside~4A~ A~
unsolicited - ~ "~+"
spp~z~o_~s f~ gr~nts and ~he making of grants in
research areas thus defined.-
: I) Rerorien~ation~ of :CTR~s research po~!icy t0: direct ~ts = .
2) To program that research along clearly delfne~ted lines.
3) searca w~th all oth r:~es~arch p~ograms
t~:~h~ch:~e<have:zcuesS~ notaSly A~,~, etch: ~
I£ seems perfectly obvious that, if~ the recommendations herein made
are agreed and implemented, the mOSt careful study-should be made
of the personnel_ requirements .of the Council. That ~tudy should
be one of the early "chores" of the new
It migh~ be in ~.rder at this point to pay tribute to the competence
of the existing staff and in particular tO the truly impressive
"contribution made by Dr. Little, to the deep satisfaction fei~ in
respect of Dr. Hocke~t, and a thorough awareness of the complete
dedication and skill ~ith ~hich Mr. Hoyt discharges his duties.
No suggestion here made, :either directly :or by-i~!ication, fails
to :recognize the value of the contribution these men have made and
are making. _ ~ _
Mr. Hartnett's devotion and services to the tobacco industry are,
in my opinion, ugequaled by anyone whose concern and indeed
lievelihood is in the tobacco industry and is unparalleled, again
in my opinion, in any other indastry. We have indeed imposed on
his time, his health:and perhaps his own best interests. That h~
feels he must re~ire from his Chairmanship of th~ CTR is thoroughly
understandable a~d not to accede to that necessity would be grossly
selfish~ . -
It is Our View that the CTR,~ ~e@e it to take on the character
these suggestions entail; would be ~aced with the necessity of
finding in ~fr. Hattne~t's successor ~ man of scientific attainment
and= prestige ~and possessed of'very ~90nsiderabl9 executive Erasp
and aompetence. He,should be capable of participating=in policy
Sheet No. ~ To Re: Dato I-i2--E8 o
making w'ith counsel, czo~,bie of providing leadership and direcZion
~'ith counsel, -znd-capv.ble of seein~ thnt policy is,c-arried out by
~ne s~ o~
HockerS) eminently qunlif~ed s.s ~ scientisZ, is not qua!~fied_as
~n ex~cu~{ve) &n~ ~r, Hoaris'not q~ifie~ ~s % scientist.--
~e conclude~ ~herefore
i~hmediate searcli for the sort ~ "~ ~" ~ '~ ~ ~ " + " -
o~ ,~o. , %v~ ha~ po~tala.ed.
=
