Tobacco Documents Online

T%{K 0'''CL"4ENT SUBJECT TQ CONFIDENTiALITY AGREEPAENT. Memo from Leon:rd S. 2thn March 25, 1971 Dr. S.C. So=ers NeW York Chnrlie-- Just received copy of NK's letter. Ferhaps this e:-ple'_ns vhy your letter was not puLlished.' Sincerely, i eo~,a7I ahn ~te 9t••Ta~a couMu~ aneAuoe~cce.~Ina P. 0. •OX 523 • 13 LUNCOLN ROI10 • OR(,AT NECK N.Y. 11021 •(212) t9S7tIS 223 CTR HN 014944

. I , 4 STAR LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Letters to the Editcr Tobacco Institute Replies SIR: Recently you publist.ed a lenpthy letter from three officials. inclvding the -)restdent, of the >ttedi•al Society of the Dotrtct of Columbia. attacking a receat report by Columnist James J. bilpatrick oc the ta" rious "smoking d^;" research of 1970. Mr. Kilpatrick can han'le hits own affr t-s, of cc::,:, Eut Me canno: permit your readers to hc misguided :r: the assertions of the tluee doctors aboie letter yw published. Certain of their assertiots cannot be qurslionei. fncluding their statement th• t ur.'1 the "ttmoktng dog;" report Kas pubfiihed a year age. "it had long becn sLspcc:cd tr.xt srnokina did have a ruauonship :o lur.; cancer," bv: ••no proof had hetrto'ore exi3ted." lt :ppears, hoac cr. that in set:ral respetd.t the three docto: s ha' e been seriously misled by thei: aource-i of informatton. The cF.ronolcp• o: the "smokir.g dogs" episode I.- tigni'tcar.t. For more than tao y'ears, usirg somt thre~quarters of a rnillior, dollars furtushcd :r the American Cancer So;ie:}• anj the 1'etera: s Admiriistra- tivr., rescarchers had a gr•oup of beaae dogs "tmol-io`" t;i=ar^ttes th:oLgh holc3 cut in their ti4roAts. Reyortcd Their Findin¢s On Februa-y 5. 19' 0. tho scientists in ;xtson reported lheir f,ndcnEs to an American Cancer Society meettns, ard then to the p~t!cc a: a large neas conterencc in the n'alclnrt-Astnrca hotel in Nc•.c 1'orl:. Then tlr. "•\eK Lr.gland Journal of MeAicine" re• fusrd to p.tilich their fi:,dtr.; becauso. tl.ey had delivered them ftrs: to the net:•s me:ia. 7ten• in Jur,c. the rescarchers delivereet tust• ver- eions of their report to the AMA com'ention in Chicatro. Ther. the "Jvurnrl of th^. Amcricaa Associa• lion" rejected their reporu for publication. Then the authors fu~mi:'.ed nea• reports to "Ar• chires of En.•ironmsr.tsl Het:th'' on shose editorial bottrd, u+ \1r. Kilra:rick oo:ntcd out. ore nf the tr"hc-• Rc•ves The e iitoro' that j^urna! crrven:d a July with the authors and a veterinary pathologist employed by a Philadclphia drug company at the firm's heatiquarters, to work out cnniph char.Res trr the maatl- scrips to make them suitable for publicatton. The final versions of the papers appeared in print in Dc;r:abc-. Contrary to the statetnent by the threc doctors that "there was no change in the scientific eoontent of the paf,ert which would h_s•e dJfered in ar.y Rayfrom the i:c;::a! veriion, there were, in fact, nutxterot:a and major char.:cs. One of these was deletion, in the Dectntber version, of a stated purpose of the experiment in the February version-"to a.ccrtain Khctiur amoksng ci;arettes for two ••ears or lonter Nill prcduce lur:; cancer in dog~." Contrary to tnc statement by the three doators. the pathoto,tiets who rcvic«ed this rescttrch before last Fcb:varr did no: all cor:ur in the finc!iras. Con:rary to the by the trrc: dxto-a. ihe patho:•1.is: v.h;,m ti:c• bce..it' resear.!tcri in•.r.cd irom the C'o::.cil iro Tr`...cco lt.,carc~: t•m; p•,nid by the rigarCttc indus'rY#tu cc%:.:. tileir a•urw. at a ame e-t an he nas in Xca• ~:•~land, ccd not ipore tnc opportunil,. He pircr: this repl;: . 3-17-71 Page A18 "Am iniorme(l of your Invitation for me to revte•.c ~our ... bcafle experimental material. Believe desira• bk also to permit other tadependent experts to see tF: sliries and protocol since as research director CTR the review by me alone might be r,)nsidered biased. On return . . would appreciate further oppvrtunity for dtacusaloa." Never Respeeded , The researchers net er responded to him. Tbe thr.e doctors say the authors "requested per. mitaion to retract the paper" from the Journal o.' U.c American 7.ledical Associauon, so they could nublish it elseAhere. This is certainly incorrect. 71,e fact lt 'hat the authors went to another publicat:on Mith their mant.• tt,cripts, refusing to accept and deal with the fundamen- tal criticism made by 17 of the 11 scientific experu to whom JAW, bad submitted the papers for revtea•. The three doctors siated correctly that the ?ohacco tnstitute does not accept this experiment, as reported. a, any prod I.W ciFarette stnoktng cavies p%pje tu h:• coote Al. As most experts in tbe field are apare, :cientists have been attempting to produce illaess in animals for three decades or more with inhalation of ci jarette tmoke, and have failed. At this momont, the National Cancer Institute's Tobacco Workina Grcup is focusing corsiderable funds and talents in the search for ar.imal experimentatioo methods which can yield rel,a- ble answera to questions raised about smo'.•i-p. Fl'tully, the three doctors have expressed their be. Nef that smoking is associated "Rith other de5iltt:an; diseases;" and they specify smoking as "probably tL= single t;rectest cause for emph}•soma." With due respect to the gentlemen's professional tnosrledge, we must point out that this expression pu:s them at variancc with the Aauonal Institutes of :leil:;,, sfiich tttates In a current news release about empay se- ma: "We don't know t.he causi~." Despite years of effort to establisb scientific facts about amoki,tt= and health. the controversy still foundcr•. In a Ssand of stitistical m~•stcries. Oddly enoua:i. those 11c, opfx+s+ smokJns have linked !t convenientlr with the causer of three of the largest voluntary fur4 raising associtttotts ir the country, in the areas of cancer, heart trouble anil re•pirrmn' discacs. The tot.acco ir.dustry itself remains tbe largest single cootributor to iniependcrtt scientific research ih smo.:- int and bealth-an cxpcadituse by tbe Industry which xill exceed $+0 million by the end of this year. The Industry will continue to set this example of iavest~aa- tion, not condemnation. in this si fttifcant area where its "selfisb" iaterest, and the public interest, wholly cota- cidc. William Kleepfer. .1r., Vice President, Public Relations. The Americ.aa Tobacco Inttitute, Inc. pIN 225 E,1 Ti°". E_11N 014945