Tobacco Documents Online

Ton.cco Iavusrnr R=sz:ancu Comur= CONFIDF7~'TIAT. R...i'~ORT_ ~S DoCUKDfT AW ro ~ua 20 , ~ MAOM'WSSEhINIATIDN ORDEq MA99 AnD bg CA3ES, TOBACCO TNDIJSTRY RESFARCH COt:•QT:'s.r i==G OCTOBFR 9, 1956 Attendance Timothy V. Hartnett, Chai•=sn Paul M. Rahn Emery M. Levis Albert Clay Paul D. Goddard John M. Berry W. T. Reed, Jr. Levis Gruber uanuel C. Linton 0. Parker McCor.as Fdvard A. Darr William P. Schweitzer J. B. Hutson 3 "s ~ .y~... ~ The American Tobacco Company, Inc. Brorrn & Willia=son Tobacco Corporatic: Burley Auction Wa.^ehouse Asaociaticn Burley Stabilization Corporation Burley Tobacco Growers Cocperative Assoc. Larus & Brother Coqpany, Inc. P. Iarillard C=2,any, Inc. Ka=yle.nd Tobacco Growers Associaticn • Philip Mor: is, Inc. R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Ccspany Peter J. Schweitzer, Inc. Tobacco Associatea, Inc. George W. Whiteside John Vance Eevitt ?reema.n J. Daniels John W. Bill Richard W. Darrow Carl G. Thompson Chadbourne, Parke, Whiteside, Wol_•_' & Brop*y Conboy, Eevitt, 0'Brien & Board-n Perkins, Daniels & Perkins Bill and Knowlton, Inc.  w n n w w ~ w Dr. Clarence Cook Little, Scientific Director Dr. Robert C. Bockett, Associate Scientific Director' W. T. Eoyt, 4ecutive Secr eta.-y 1. ?'.r. Hbrtnett opened the ueting. Be velcomed Yr . Levis Gruber as a new member of the TIRC representing P. Lorillard Co--pe^.y, and stated that y.-. Gruber had expressed a villi:.gness to accept the post of Treasurer to the Committee which had previously been held by :tr. Hailey of P. Lorillard Conpamy. Mr. Gruber was thntupcn elected Treasurer by unani.nous action of the Co^`ttee. 2. The Chairman advised the TIRC that at a meeting of the Executive Cozrwittee on June 21st, an additional $200,000 had been authorized for grants to aseet the exceptionally heavy monetary.demands in 1956 and 1957 caused by peak renewals of research grants in those two years. This action vas unanir.ous'y approved by the Committee. 3. Attachment il covers in detail Yr. Bartnett'n report on these and other mattera. CTR G27 5 COTOBACCO LITIGATIONTA C ~-F? H tq i7 0

1985 NON•DISSEMINATION ORDER IN ROGERS AND pUKE ChSES, _ 2 k. Mr. Darrov of Hill and Knowlton, Inc. reported on the current status of public relations and the outlook for the future. Attachaent i2 contains details of his presentation. ~. Dr. Hockett, Associate Scientific Director of TIRC, suamarized the progress and status of grants awarded by the TIIRC to date. Be categorized these to cover each of the fields of interest being pursued. Re explained that only three of the grant projects have actually been concluded to date. Any conclusions about grants in process aust remain conjectural; however, up to this point results have been reassuring and talightening. He explained that any interpretations now involve personal fudgaent and are subject to later developments. 6. Dr. Little outlined the philosophy, planning and activities of the Scientific Advisory Board. Be explained that since his Anaual Report vas published only three months ago, there vas a limited arnunt of factual inforr.ation concerning the work of the SAB which he could add at the moment. . Be pointed out that certain of the work being inaugurated by the Board might appear to stray from the most serious allegations against tobacco, but that the Advisory Board felt it iarportant to cover each phase of tobacco's relationship to health, as set forth in the purposes of the T??C. In so doing, rany questions vhich rlght be raised about tobacco use vill have been anticipated. Be referred particularly to the work which had been cocpleted with 2`LRC funds by Dr. Fhilip Cooper on the gnstrointestinal effects of tobacco which had shown, through a study of 120 patients with duodenal ulcer, that no significant difference could be found between haL'' of the patients who sroked and the half who did not. The very fact that this has been published in ZHE 1rEV ENGIAND JOUR2IAL OF ~=ICL`lE (July 5, 1956) helps to tie down a loose end in the criticisms against tobacco. Be explained that a second grant of a similar nature is nearing completion and is expected to confirm the work of Dr. Cooper. Se emphasized the importance of the tissue culture vork which is being inaugurated by the Board. Be explained that this could only have been gotten undervay by the maaner in vhich the Advisory Board vorks ar.d plans through its sub-committees. Be also outlined for the ZZRC the conscientiousness, sincerity and frugality of the Board - of its efforts to make every dollar available to it do meaningful work. Dr. Little reviewed his trip to Europe. Be expressed gratification over the foraation of the Tobacco Ma.aufacturers' Standing Comaittee (TMSC) in Fngl.and. He voiced both his and the Advisory Board's gratitude for the fine tsanner in which public relations have been conducted by Hill and Knowlton, Inc. GTR 6 `}") r CONFFIDENTIAL: MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION ~`, -I~ ~,~ 1"'~ ~ 0 ~ '-~'`~ •~~ T.

THIS DOCUMENT SUOJECT TO /.'.';. ;:., 1985 NON•DISSEMINATION ORur.H lN OGERS AND UKE CASES. He concluded by aaauring the T7RC that there is still no proof of a connection betveen smoking and lung cancer. Z. The Executive Secretary gave a review of the grants of the Committee (Attachment #3). He reported that total grants in the amount of $1,4070625.14 had been arrarded by the Board since its inception. Of this amount, $811,812.60 has been forr.ally approved by the leav.ng $595,812.54 to be acted upon. Upon the request of the Chair^..an, approva= of the grants vas unanirously voted by the Ccr_-ittee. 8. The Fscecutive Secretary also esented a cash s`.ateWent, forecast ar= recapitulation (Attachment #47. S. The Chni.r-..,an proposed the budget for 1957 (AttdchWent #5) in the s=unt of $96$,000. This budget vas aoved and u:.an:.rous'_y approved hy the Coamittee. atts. (5) C T R (; 2 "/'7 3 CONFIDENTIAL: MINNESOTA TOaACCO LITIGATION CTR HN 003672

. TOsacco Ixausrnr ItESE..ncu CounurrxE THIS DOCUMENT SUBJECT T0 AUG. 20, 1985 NON•DISSEMINATION ORDER IN ROGERS AND DUKE CASES. CO:~'IDEtTIAL ATTACF~';: ~, STATEMr."'ZT BY T8E CEAI?yA'I October 9, 1956 1. Nev Member and Treasurer I vould like to velcome Mr. Levis Gruber who is with us today a.s the nev member nf the Tobacco Industry Research Comr<ittee representing the P. Lorillard C=pany. You are all aware that X_r. Gruber has succeeded Mr. Halley as president of that Company. Mr. Gruber has graciously consented to se.we as Treasurer of T'-rRC, vhich office had been held by his predecessor, Ha11ey. I vil]l entertain a motion for his election. 2. Executive Co=?ttee Meeting Your Chai:~n, Executive Secretary, Dr. Little and Messrs. Bill and Daxrov of Hill and Knowlton, Inc., zet with the Executive Committee on June 21st, in the absence of a formal meeting of the TIRC. We discussed the problem of meeting the exceptionally heavy monetary dealsnds in 1956 a_Zd 19;7 caused by renewals of research grants which are at a peak in those two yeev:s. As a result, a supplementary appropriation of $200,000, to be applied agajnst grants during these tvo.years, was voted. These funds will be derived by 'payment of an extra one-eighth of a cent per thousand cigerettes for the second six months of 1956. This was the only action taken at the Executive Coamittee meeti:~. Other informatior.al matters taken up at that time will be covered during today's meeting. A motion is in order giving full Comaittee apYroval to this supple- mentary appropriation. 3. Approval of Grants Since the last Committee meeting, the Scientific Advisory Board has approved a nus.ber of new and renewed research projects. Forral Co=ittee approval should be voted for appropriating funds for these grants. I vill ask the Executive Secretary to tell us the.asounts involved, and then ask for a motion to formalize these grants. cTR c9- ~rs CONFIDENTIAL: MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION CTR HN C1O36,P13

1985 h3N•DISSEtvIINATION ORDER 1N ROGERS AND UKE CASE$, Att. #1 ~ -2- 4. Dr. Little's Retire=ent f-on Jackson Me=orial Laborato:ry As I aa sure you all know, Dr. Little has been elected Director Bmeritus of Roscoe B. Jackson Mencrial Laboratory. Although retiring frc= the presidency and from active direction of Laboratory activities, he will continue to have certain responsibilities in cor.nection with Jackson Laboratory. However, Dr. Little tells me that in the near future he will be able to spend an increasir.g arount of t:•Le in his of:::es here. ILr.a;, say that Dr. Little has always been available whenever we needed hin, but ve are looking forward to having hin closer at hand =re frequently for his advice and consultation. ~. Dr. Cattell's New Association Dr. McKeen Cattell, who is a valued me=!-er of the Scienti_*ic Advisory Board and who is af.iliated with the Ccrnell University Medical College, has taken a year's leave of absence to serve as the Administrator of Grants for Fellovsr.ips and Developaent of Scienti_*ic Personnel at the American Cancer Society. When Dr. Cattell originally considered this post there ve.a some question of his remainiag as a=e,cer of the Board. This was discussed vith the authorities at the A=erican Canc s Society an3 with your Ctsir-_an, the Scientific Director and Executive Secreta_-y. 1he ccne=:u =on was that Dr. Cattell vc;t'_d continue to serve as a mesber of the Scientific Advis;,ry Board, an! the additior.al liaiscn vhich will r esul: from this new respor.si- bility should be nutuall.y vort.hwhile. 6. Joint S':jav Gr,)•w on Tobacco and Health A Joint Study Group dealing with tobacco and health has been fcr:ed by the Aurican Cancer Society, the American FieErt Associa*.ion and the National Cancer Institute. A meeting was held on August 11-12 at Woods • Bole, Massachusetts. T'ae basic membars of this grcup are: R. J. Bing, Kasbingtcn University Dean Davies, Aaerican Cancer Society R. Eugene Dyer, :mo.ry University Alvin I. Kosak, Post-:,raduate Medical School, Peti York University Abe Liliezteld, University of Psf:alo, Rosvell Park Memorial Inst. Norton Nelson, New York University-Bellevue Medical Center Michael Shinkin, Nations.l Institutes of Health Fraak Strong, University of Wisconsin George Wright, Univer.ity of Toronto At formal meetings of this Group various otwer scientists will be invited to discuss specific su5jects. At the August 11-12 meeting, for ir.star.ce, Dr. X. B. Raag of the Me3ical College of Virginia an3 Dr. r-ni_ippe Shubik of Chicago Medical Pchool were present. C T R G2'7J CONFIDENTIAL: ININN6SOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION CTR HN 003187A

1985 MON•DISSEMINATION ORDER IN RJGERS AND DUKE CASES. Att. $1 _3- The purpose of this Group is reported to be to investigate work undervayy dealing with tobacco and health, and to aake reco=endations for work to be done in that field. It is presumed to be a long-term program to take several years. The meeting at Woods Role vas a harmonious one and virtually no attacks were made on tobacco as such. Another meeting of this Group,vas held for October 6-7 to discuss the heart and gastrointestinal phases of tobacco use. Doctors Cattell and Co--oe of the Scientific Advisory Board attended this meeting. It is expected that another meeting will be held on the pathological aspects, to which Dr. Reia.2nn is to be invited, as vell as Drs. tiiynder and Bueper. These are not public meetings s.nd it is not the practice of this Group to give out publicity concerning the meetings, although it is always possible that something might leak out from individuals in attendance. 7. Research Results ?eir.a Published I would like to point out that the resea.-ch under the Tobacco Industry Resear^.h Co=:tittee's sponsorship is nov prcg•:-essing rapidly and some paters are being published. While these early papers appear to have no maZor i^act, they are considered impo:-tant in the scientific world. The publication, for example, of the study of Drs. Cooper and Knight in the New England Journal c` Medicine concerning their research on the effects of tobacco smoking on cas :c secretions of ulcer patients shed new lig.~:t on the sigr.ificance of smoking i.^n relation to gastric ulcers. 1'.:ey fou.^.d no si_rnificant difference in the gas:r:c secretions between sr.okers and non-smokers. The only other paper published to date acknovledgi:.g TIRC suYrort concerned tes ts for cancer-causing substances on mice. (Bock and tAan.a1 of Rosvell Park Me=rial Institute, Buffalo, in the Journal of L^.vestisative Der-:ology. ) 8. Visits to flurope During the spring and susmer, our liaison with the significant investi- gations being carried on in England were greatly strengthened through visits by Drs. Little a.ad Cattell. These visits, I can assure you, have been hel='_'Ll not only in the development of our own work. They have also been appreciate_ by members of the British tobacco industry who are interested in our mutual problem and are under more constant attack. You are doubtless aware of the pressures which have been brought on the British Minister of Health to under- take a can-paign against smoking, as vds reported in one of the recent press summaries sent to you. C T R G2;0 CONFIDENTIAL: MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION ~y~ C T R H N 0 0 316,

1985 NON•DISSEMINATION ORDER IN_itR% RS ~j~ID DUKE CASE~S- V ~y. Q. Tobacco Yanufacturers' Standl::: Co-ittee Although getting little attention in this country, on August 2nd, our British colleagues announced the forsstion of'a Tobacco i'anufacturers' Standing Coaittee vith scientific advisors and purposes. This action is simtlar in many respects to that which we took late in 1953. Sir Alexander Maxvell vill act as Chairman of the Co==ittee. Campbell-„'ohnson, Ltd., Bill and Knowlton's affiliate in rgland, has been appointed public relations counsel to the Coaittee, and G. F. Todd of the Imperial Tcbacco CoWpas:y, Ltd., 1s acting as Secretary pending the appointment o= a per--A-nent Secretary. We are meeting with representatives of the DSC at the end of October in order to effect the a.eY±-^= cooperation possible be:+een our groups. 10. General Situation In our own situation, the past several months have shown the value of the cooperative and coordinated efforts of the TIl;C organization for dee+- ing vitb the proble= of public attacks as vell as with develop-...er.ts in scientific research. As you all know, it is i=erative that each decision be based on the soundest Jud6,..ent. I vould like to en-phasize that our acavities are t: e result of sit;u:l planning and consideration by the T-_RC a•'. `..•-! strative staff, scientific advisors, public relations counsel an.-:, frequently, r.embers cf t:e Dcecutive Co=-ittee. The period since our last =eetir.g in February has seen several major problers, including a couple of sensationa1 attacks re=,.:nisce.^.t of the eLrly days of the Co=maittee. The outlook for-the futu-e also is not without danger signs, soWe of which we are anticipating and v:i: be discussed, and some of vhich we ca:.ro., of course, foresee at this ti.me. There have been at least a half-dozen occasions when we felt direct co- ent on nevspaper stories vas necessary and public stateaen:s were issue_. 11. World-Telegram Story on Ha =ond-Horn Study The most recent occasion for co=.ent and action was the sensational story featured Friday, September 28, by the Scripps-Tiova.rd newspapers, including the World ieleLrram arw Sun i:i Nev York. '_'his cop;vrlgrted story purported to outline in advance of publication the final findings of the Ea=ond-Horn statistical study being sponsored by the American Cancer Soc=ety. The fact is that this story contained no real news but was prina..+-ily a repeat of previous reports concerning this study. This is borne out by the fact that science editors of the major newspapers and wire services showed indifference to the story after they exar.ined it, and it dld not even appee..^ in The Nev York :'imes or Herald :`: ibune. cTR c9-si CONFID4NT/AL: MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION C `'R (~~~ C~C~36*i~"6

IHIJ UUUUI,iLhi ouuJLUI iv n,u. c, 1985 NON•DISSEMINATION ORDER IN ROGERS AND DUKE CASES. Att. i1 -5_ S/e have been assured by Scripps-Hor+ard executives that the emphasis given this story does not represent any eZitorial policy of attack against the tobacco industry, but that it was considered by the writer and his editor as a legitimate news "beat." That there could be disagreement over the ne.e value of the story is conceded to be a r..atter of opinion. This illustrates the constant danger present when writers vho are unfasailiar with the complexities of the cancer problem and cancer research attempt to write a story about the subject. From stveral reliable sources we are told that the reporter got his story from an almost accidental conversation with Cuyler &a- ond which occurred during the writer's visit to the Cancer Society's offices in search of a different story altogether. We are told officials of the Society did not sanction the story and regretted the manner in vhich it was presented. We have, of course, known all along that we could expect fu.-ther nndesirable publicity when the final fi-n- ond-Eorn results were published, s.nd ve are fully aware that this recent publicity to the Cancer Society study vill not be the last. 12. Life and Reader's Direst Meetinrs Publication in two national rar,azines of attacks on cigarettes gave occasion to useful conferences with the chief editorie.l personnel of those publications. Following the appea.-ance in the June 11 issue of Life Magazine of arn article based largely on Dr. Auerbach's study of h•ar8n lung tissues t.aken from autopsies, we had a meeting with Henry Luce, Editor-in-Chief of the Time-Life publications, as vell as several of his associates. Dr. Little, John Hill and Richa--d Darrov of Hill and Knowlton, Inc., and I had a very satisfactory conference. This was followed a couple of weeks later by a luncheon-=eeting with sowe of Iife's top editorial staff to discuss the scientific approach of the Cosrittee still further. An article in the July Reader's Digest entitled "Why an Airline Pilot 'Quit Smoking" prompted a coaplete analysis of the contents of this article. Following this, ve had a meeting vith DeWitt Wallace, editor of The Reader's Di est, and his top medical writers. Dr. Little explained the scientific approach of the Tobacco Industry Research Cosc.mittee, and Mr. Darrov and I discussed other aspects of interest. There have been follow-up contacts resulting from these sessions ar.d fs..*•:her conferences with the staffs of these magatines are plaaned. Certainly there is nov a better understas:ding of our position and our problec, and I believe that we will have the opportunity at least to be consulted in the future on articles dealir.g vith our field of interest. CTR G28 ? CONFIDENTIAL~ MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION CTR HN 0032'177"

. 1985 NON•DISSEWNAiION ~-•(H.&QgLRS AND QUKE CASES. Att. #1 -6- 13. Con'erences with Dr. 2diddleton and Dr. Dorn Because we have all been concerned vit*h the direction of the so-ca:leA"Veterans Study of Lung Cancer," both Dr. Hockett and I ma•de a special v:s:t to Dr. Middleton, Chief Medical Director of the Veterans Adainistration to discuss the veterans study with him. Dr. Midd?eton was fully aware of the Tobacco Industry Research Co=mittee's activities and spoke highly of then. He assured us of whatever cooperation he could extend, al+,.hough he pointed* out that the major work in the veterans study is being carried out by the Public Institutes of Health. As a result of this, Dr. Eockett vYsited Dr. Harold F. Dorn of the Kational Institutes of Health and has established a frier:d.ly vorking relationship with Dr. Dorn, who has assured us that there is nothing i=_.inent in the way of a final report of this study. Hovever, a prelir!na_-y of their findings is expected to get underway this fall and we will watch this vith greatest interest. lk. American Cancer Society On October 8, Drs. Cattell and Bockett, Mr. Mefford R. Runyon, bcecutive Vice Pres.dent of the American Cancer Society, ard I had lunc}ecn. The purpose was to become better acquainted and to effect a better =atuz! understanding. I have every reason to believe this was acco--plished. Mr. Runyon confirmed the fact that the World-Telecran repcr t of the Es-ond-Horn study was not in any sense an official release o' the Amer ica-: Cancer Society. In response to a direct question, A`x. Runyon indicated that the Society as such has taken no official stand on tobacco use. It is its intention to limit itself to releasing scientific findin6s and observat:ons from which the public t,ay draw its own conclusions. The forthcoming ACS pamphlet on smoking and cancer vill be of this character. It vill definitely be Mr. Runyon's policy to show the sanuscr=:', to TIRC's public relations counsel in advance of publication. Mr. Runyon indicated his corplete willingness to be consulted directly by T?RC on any problem, and accepted the invitation to feel equally free to call us. Both parties are understood to be at liberty to state the fact frankly if any question arises which cannot be fully ansvered. Mr. Runyon also expressed approval of the full exchange of information about grants and projects. Regarding the Hamaond-Horn statistical study, no further follow-up on the 186,000 men being surveyed Is intended and the s•„atisticians are now at work corpletinr, their tabulations and interpretation of the data. Forr.°: publication of the final report is not intended ur.til sometime in 1957. The annual meeting of the Society here in New York at the end of this month will doubtless result in r.ore infor...ation-•...at ion ation concerning the Cancer Society's activities about lung cancer. C1R CONFIDBNTIAL: IA(NNESOTA -~TOaACCO LITIGATION CTR HN 003'8f 6

IU hUV. LU, 1985 NON•DISSEM,INATION ORDER IN ROGERS AND DUKE CASESAtt. i1 -7- 15• General Outlook In both the scientific ard lay press, we see increasing signs of broadening recognition that the problea of lt3ng cancer goes far beyond any statistical relatior.ship to cigarette s=kir.g. 'o'hile tobacco is still under close scientific scrstiny in relation not only to 1•usg cancer, but also in the cardiovasculax field, there is a groving disposition to concede that the finger of suspicion cannot be pointed to cigarettes alone. This has both its good'and bad aspects. On the bad side, it still tends to ir:plica*_e cigarettes and there is an unfortunate tendency to accept vithout•'critical analysis the conclusio::s of such men• as &a- ond ar.d Eorn and Dr. Wyn:er. Also, ther e is increased coament concerning tobacco as a possible co-suspect xhich, in combination rr.th other factors, aay be suspected of helping to induce certain ailments. On the other hand, it has resulted in less sensational treatment of the aore emotional attacks a:ainst tobacco and has encouraged the lay F-:ess to present more balanced stories where tobacco is involved. On the scientific side, this broadened attitude has meant greater freedoa for investigators to analyze critically the accusations against tobacco and to continue or initiate sound reseexch into acce of the basic questions which still rerain unresolved. This co=es back, then, to the fact that the real backbone of ou.- progre_.= has been and aust continue to be • our scientific research pro6ra--, so ably developed by Dr. Little and his colleagues. Certainly the ir.Zustry has gained real stature as a result o° its willingness to put the problem in the hands of the scientists. While it is not alvays easy to take the er.otional, and often unscientific, attacks of the Industry's detractcrs, 1 personally feel certain that our method of dealing with these attacks has proved to be sou^.d and, on the whole, extre=ely beneficial not orly to our industry but to the scientists who have so unsel_*ish.ly given of their time and wisdom to help us get at the real facts. CTR 6284 CONFIDENTIAL: MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION CTR HN 0036-9