Tobacco Documents Online

, 0 0 CONFIDENTIAL 0 SKCitI:i:. i.tiD r.u.a.. a MG.`t1TYCANCL 0i :'SL RZPWtT 0! TEI NltGLCN Gt:RML'3 CCMM=TtL /-f0 nSlLip Lt0RRI3 IMCJR.POMTlD CTR HN 026023

CONFIDENTIAL I 4.r•s.~•~f -:•- } 1C ~,i/~ir.vay„'-" •!- II_.a. 4L 1.T"..•"s ~r ti w^ . i(j~f{y y'k.~.. : c' :r d-'7• `~,jist~i~ 6 'w f` "~.~(N,~ .- '.~) 1:.7Y . .+`y~~7::.. 1 ,.Ir~ f ~~ a`1t.K(r.-f~i ~•.~.~, Y'1, •(. ~' oa~a'4- L "_'+~9L' i,~..r .~ar.. J;~ /:~ •tie I~a~•..'-:y~:•L v- Q •~ y.~r.~•.~'-i`f lOryth( ~~'~.;.;•"~.:'~~ •... f'µ..~ara '.r.1 /s- Y ~' 7C ~, [ jV.G '~ ~-4• J'ts~ wi:;'v ;~Y ..~{j f ,'gZ•'.. t"*--nz,. 11 CTR HN 026024

0 f CONFIDENTIAL Februar7 18, 1984 . SMOffiNG AND HEALTH SiGNIFICANCE OF THE REPORT OF TFE SGR.GEON GENERAL'S COMMITTEE TO PHILIP MORRIS INCORPORATED Distribution: Mr. Huqh Cullmaa (10) Mr. H. A. Atkias Mr. A. C. Britton Mr. J. E. Lincoln Mr. G. W. Macon, Jr. Dr. H. '1Vakeham (5) .. 4b CTR VIN 026025 1S

0 567 SMOKIN47 A2tD HEALT:! , CONFIDENTIAL (Significance of the Report of the Surgeon General's Advisorq Committee to Philip Morris Incorporated) LVTRODVCTZON APID SUMMARY The Research Center has made an initial examination of the report of the Surgeon General's Advisory Committee on Smokir.g and Health with the view to its proper influence on Resear:h Center program and formulation of technical advice to'Philip Morrif management. This statement summarizes those preliminary views. The onus of proof has been moved by the report from its usual position with the industry's accusers to the tobacco in- dustry itself. Meeting this challenge affords Philip Morris a splendid opportunity to gain a competitive edge through effective technical activity. Positive programs to cure ills cited in this report, whether real or alleged, are recommended, as little basis for disputing the findings at this time has appeared. Among those programs which deserve increased corporate support are: r 1. Expansion of Research Clnter knowledge through intelli- • gence effort in epidemiology, bioassaq, lung cancer research, eto., and liaison with a medical school. 2. Increased laboratory study of: a. gas phase adsorption and selective filtration b. chemical carcinogenesis of smoke c. cigar and pipe smoke chemistry d. pulmonary clearance mechanisms e. other physiological effects of smoke, particularly on respiration characteristics and heart load. 3. Development by year end of a superior filter cigarette with acceptable taste having high gas-phase absorption and very low TPM - to be based on Series T microfiber polyethylene tow and adsorbents of surpassing adsorptive qualities. The hoped-for result of these efforts will be cigarettes with distinguishing new product properties which are biologically approved on all major health questions. Such products should be advertised vigorously on the basis of studies so conducted. . 19 0 CT~~, HN 012,602C

, CONFIDEN7IAL , SZGNLZCA:rC£ OF RrPORTIS FZ:JDZ:rGS TO .-'rCHar-C/%L aC:Z'11".7 The raising of so many bogey-man issues over the centuries concerning the allegedly unhealthful effects of tobacco has no doubt jaded the user's appetite for such rations. Consequently, the tobacco interests have successfully put their accusers in the position of proving their point, and as the latter faiied, so the issue died. Now the findings of the ten man panel of impartial Jcientists seem to have been taken rather as a verdict against cigarette smoking. Adoption of the Smoking and Health Report as "policy" of the U. S. Public Health Service, press treatment of the news, various proposed legislation, quick follow-up by the Federal Trade Commission and National Association of Broadcasters, and the beginning of negative actions in the Defense Department, all suggest a shift in the onus of proof from the accusers to the tobacco industry. The professional approach of the Advisory Ccmmittee furthermore may serve to force future arguments to a more scientific basis. The proposed FTC Rule 2 calling for more specific advertising claims backed up by "substantial and reliable evidence to prove the accun cy and significance (to health) of the claim" is in this vein. ;r O These early retctions to the Smoking and Health Report under- OC score the increased importance of timely and effective R & D Q U activity, unfettered by non-technical restrictions to its inqulrq, ~ to expand knowledge, upgrade present products, and introduce ' pertinent new ones. Health impact will surely be an important, perhaps the most important, basis for competition in the industry i.z the next few years. Competitive pressures suggest a break up of -2- F-~ G'~ '~=' C~`' ~-~~~ C~~80:2

CONFIDENTIAL C ` the common front approach of the industry through TI ar.d :ZRC. While R. J. Reynolds continues to advocate a joint front, si;, status quo approach (it has the most to lose from any char.ge in status quo), others like American and Liggett and Myers, sanguine for improved competitive positions, show signs of bolting and have capitalized with their new products on early reactions to the report. The greater the longer term market impact of the report, the more intense will there be health competition, which is to say technical competition, among major tobacco companies. A special area of scientific activity receiving growing attention in the recent past and accorded emphasis in the report is that of pulmonarq cleansing mechanisms, particularly cilia function. This, together with respiratorq effects of smokirg in general, is due for increased scientific inquiry in the futu,-e. EXCEPTZONS TAKEN TO ZHE REPCRT'S PINDZNGS A careful review of the report has so far disclosed no nicotine deliveries up to one-half of their former values. The claim that people haven't been smoking comments, however, that are constructive: 1. No epidemiological or other evidence directly conce.:.ir.g the possible ameliorating effect of filters on the association of health and smoking was available for consideration. This is an important omission, in vir:ue of the fact that modern filters cut cigarette tar and vitiating errors of commission. There are the following exceptions/ ` filters long enough to observe effects seem perfunctory treatment of a major industry effort to meet ob4ections V UP HN 0:2602.6

CONFIDENTIAL C . i to i:a products. An un.°ortunate impression at the ccmmittea's press conference that ofilters do no good" was at least subsequently rectified by Senator Cooper. 2. The report states (p. 143) that no evider.de exists to indicate a smoking threshold, at rates below which no harmful effects occur. This conclusion is ia the same situation as that relating to filters. Evidence does not prove the converse either, and, more importantly, the public at large has been left with the impression that it must eliminate, not moderate. It a threshold exists, the effect of filters must be cut by more than one-halt •- (possiblq eliminate) any harmttil effects that may obtain in the long term future. Actually Tables 8 and 10 of Chapter 10 do not give great encouragement for a threshold. However, these total mortality data are dominated by deaths due to cardiovascular disease which may mask any threshold effect on•lung cancer mortality. k tabulation of lung cancer mortality ratio versus smoking exposure would be more pertinent. 3. The report gives inadequate recognition (p. 61) to the selective adsorption of certain gas phase components from smoke which affect pulmonary cleansing mechanisms (viz., -Q.. O mucus flow, cilia activity). The statement that carbon O filters previously employed do not have specific power W to scrub the gas phase ignores pioneer work at American ~T Tobacco reported in Tobacco Science, Vol. ~ L pp. 52-Sb. x .` 1959. -4_ g2 C I - R' t I N 0 2- 8 02. 9

CONFiDENTIAL REC0MtsE2tDATI0t1S FOR COMPAIJ7 POLICY Any important new situation in an industrq presents a fresh opportunity for the smaller companies to compete with the leaders on a new basis. Since the issue has been joined, Philip Morris should embrace the health area as such an opportunity with the same agressiveness that it has shown in packaging innovation. At the same time severely reduced reliance on TIRC and TI seems indicated by the impact of the report in spite of those activi- ties. To promulgate this shift, and for other purposes, the following recommendations are offered to Philip Morris management: 1. Adopt as internal policy for technical purposes the view that greater benefit will accrue from accepting the report's findings on face value and proceeding to the cure of ills, real and alleged as they may be, than from engaging in disputation and refutation of these claims. Research effort should include very little of the latter. 2. Recognize the accelerated technical competition developing in the industry through increased support of Research Center programs (details next section). 3. Follow the prompt offering of a new dual carbon filter product (Philip Morris Multifilter - 2) by leap-frogging the competition with a better engineered one (see below) _ to be developed by Research Center before year end. 4. Move promptly and effectively toward establishment of suitable biological approval specifications for all new smoking products. It may be expected that in time the -s- 43 cl_R 1~N 01-6030

CONFIDENTIAL Government will lor:e the adcption of such speai::caticr.s, in which case Philip Morris would be able to influence the setting of the "uniform and reliable testing proceduse" (proposed FTC Rule 3) consistent with our own methodology. Apart from possible legal requirements, such a policy would enhance advertising opportunities. 5. Provide a substantive basis for vigorous health adver- tisirg by publication of suitable articles in the technical literature. ViPACT ON RES'"ARCH CENTL'T::R PROGRAM Consideration of the report's findings has resulted in the- following influences on the Research Center program, to be acted on promptly: 1. A broad review of bioassay techniques, through both literature search and personal contact of recognized contributors, will be undertaken to define optimum criteria for use in physiological studies, both at the Center and elsewhere. These criteria will include specifically a quick test for chemical carcinogenicity and best measures of pulmonary cleansing effectiveness (e.g. ciliastasis, mucus flow, phagocytosis, etc.), in addition to identification of appropriate respiratory parameters already under study. 2. A strong effort will be mounted to develop by year end a filter cigarette markedly better than any anticipated from the competition. This will combine very low TPM delivery (less than 10 mg./cigt.), adequate gas phase scrubbing to permit satisfactory functionir.g of pu:mor.ar-1 -6- 8q CIR VIN 02-60,1

CONFIDENTIaL. r cleansing mechanisms, and tlayor sut:icient to attract a reasonable market. The development will be based on Series T (new microtiber polyethylene tow) fiZter and adtorbents having qualities surpassing those now on the market. Technical participation of tRanufacturi.^.q Depart- ment is important to success of this venture if we are to manufacture by year end. 3. The chemistry of cigar and pipe smoke will be elucidated, and deliveries to smokers determined. Clues will be sought as to possible differences which might help explain the much lower mortality ratios of these smokers versus cigarette smokers. Pipe smokers, even those smoking (inhaling) more than 10 pipetuls per day for over 30 years,' appear to have mortality ratios insignificantly different from non-smokers. 4. Present programs studying gas phase adsorption and tar fraction carcinogenicitq will be emphasized, to improve competitive posture in these technical areas. 5. Scientists will be assigned to expand the Center's knowledge of developments in epidemiology, cancer studies (clinical as well as animal), etc., by current interpretive review or literature and personal visits to centers of such knowledge, as an aid to research planning and competitiie (technical) analysis. 6. Liaison-w-ith a first class medical school should be established as a further expansion of sources of knoxled3e. $s C# R!IN 02260,322