Tobacco Documents Online

, i i , Marcfc 27, 196S . ONCr .. SIO1tiAL RECUItD - SENATE tlvely, otore attractlvc. Ironically this aroutd ' ' s stotver qto come at a time when Europe nomle paeo bts been dlminishing U.S. Intxr- ost tn (nvestments thare. Senator t'raxntire is no more optlmistic that a boost would Counter the Inaatlpn- ery forces thnt are making U8. expofta Cesa competitive abroad. In fact, a tax Is a cost that would tend to push prices of Amcrlca's exports still higher. The Senator is probably close to the merk when he estimates that it would tske more than a year for a tss Increase to have any elgntacant antl-lnflauonarq Impact on the dtmustte economy. Even that assumes the Government uroald not use any revenue galn as an excuse for atepped-up spending-a risky assunrptlon at best. In any case, the Covernment almost Cer- talnly cannot wait a year or more for im- proveracnta In the natlon'a payments pqet- tton. Like the rest of the Adminlstratl~nt'a g~iven tde U8e rom time t~ol mamneuvcr irui the time Is more likely to be me,aured In weeks thah In months. Much more quickly eP.ectlve, Senator Prps- mlre wmments, would be dzablc re4u¢tlDns In nondefense Federal spending. Cuts In out- lays, furthermore. wculd be at least as erfec- tive as a tax rise In alerting other nations to the fact that the U.S. had finally avrnkened ti0 Its financial tesponslblktlea. ' Ebr our part we would add that bpend ng Seductions atso would take acaount of c circumstance that the payments crisis as been caused almost entirely by actlons, of tSovOrnment, not the public. Therefore a tax tncreose, In addition to Its other aaas, wonttd be more than somewhat unfair. Even as a booster of Pedcral revenue, a tax rlse could prove to be setl-defeating. In the eurrentuncertalq eeorromic altuatlon the gnt:rease could denate economic ectlvlty to such an ertent that the higher levies would produce not Feorc but less revenue. Flnatly, on a politically pragmatic basls spending cuts look fully as good as a tas tncrooss. There are of course pateat pres- aures fOr maintaining or raising practically all torts of Federal nondofease outlays, no tautter how noncarentl:d or IneBecttve the apending has bsen. Hut Congressmen should not kid themselves I.nto belfeving that the gold odr7s has softened the publtc's an- tipathy to a tax tlse ln this efectian fear. On all eounts, then, the cssr• against a tax Inereaae appeara powerful. Aad. as Senator Proamlre says, t>•a case Is strengthened, not weakencd, by the urgent need to restore a stable dollar. TRAVEL ON, U.S.-FLAO AIRLINES Mr: BAYTi. Mr. President, t have been deeply eoncPt'ned with the historical freedom of travel enjoyed by Americans. If !t Is 11t the public interest for Amer- toans to limit their travel, then I believe that they should be allowed to do so on a voluntary basis. Por this reason It seems to qle that one or litc best wta•s !n a'htch the Oov- ernmen'. nould reduce that part of the batatece-of••nayments dcficit attributable to lnlcl'nnt!ar.ai travel u•otdd be to en- cout'a-se Its citizens to aae U.S. carriers a'henercr t?aSaible. In this way Americans arould still be able to enjoy their tra- dltional freedom of travel, while hetp- Itlg to correct the pt'nlents tlnbalance. The distinSuished senior Senator from Missouri tBlr. Svanmcroa recently calltd Cri h11 Sw-k,,., ia fis U.S.-fise airlines whenever possible. I%s!sil to add nly support to this plea by Sc»ator SvvtvaroN. "TRUTH" ABOUT SMOI{INO 11IVD HFALTH Mr. MAGNUSON. Mr. Presidollt, I know that other Mernbers of the Senate have received Inquiries from their con- Stltttellts, as I hav t, about an article on smoking and health which appeared In the January 1968 Issue of True maga- zine. The article was entitled "To Smoke or Not To Smokc-That Ie Still the Question." " It was written by Stanley Frank and It seems to say that cigarette smoking is probably harmless to health. Large numbers or reprints of this ar- ticle have been sent all over the country. to physicians, lawyers, civic leaders, and other citizens. The note accompanying these reprints gave the Impression that the mailing came from the editors of True magazine. My curiosity waa-aroused by this ar- ticle, and on March 19, 1968, I asked the Surgeon General to have it reviewed for me. This review has now been made. It brings tnt,o the most serious questlon the article's accuracy, )mpartlality and Integrity. I was not alone in my curiosity. On March 2l', the Wall Street Journal pub- lished an article entitled "Prccnoking Articles Aren't Necessarily All That They Seenl To Be; " written by Ronald Kessler. The article reveals that articles which were sent out to opinion leaders-600,000 copies ir. all-were sent not by True magazine but by Tiderock Corp., a public relations firm hired by the Tobacco In- stitute; and that this same Mr. Ftank, now an employee of Hill lh Knowlton. public relations counsel, later rea'rote his original article under the pseudonym of Charles riolden, and that this has now appeared In still another publica- tlon, the National Inqttirer, under the headline "Most Medical 8xperts Say Cigarette-Cancer Link Is Bunk." I agree with ttie Wall Street Journal that these articles, sent broadside throw•.hout the ehuntry, are not ts'hat they seem to be. And I agree,a'ith Dr. Stewart that this questionable exetr.ise in high-powered public relations may, If it achieves !ts apparent objective, add to the disease and death In our population caused by smwking. I ask unanimous con- sent that the Wall Street Journal article, my correspondence with the Surgeon l7eneral, and a contnle»t trom the Amer- lcan Cancer Society be printed In the $ECoaa. There being no objection, the Items n'ere ordered to be prletted In the Rt:coab, as follows: (tYom the Wall Street Journal, Mar. 21, IaCSl paortowrvo Ar.'nctes Aa+a'r Necrssear.r Att TnAT TetEV S6S%l To BE--S6YASea ALwNusoa+ Astcs Is.'outr.v inro Stoav sv POSCta itet,.rrona tvalrrn-TOSAeco Mstr Sov Rt:pxrxrs (By Ronald Kesalcr) httiv Yassc=Yt eeemed like a aindfall for tbe tobaeco industry. "To Smoke or 1:ot to Smoktil'nai Is Still the Question" a•as the ntte of an articlo In the January Issue of True magazine. There was littte question which aide of the issue the art•etc tco[. Dismtsshtg atntlstleat evidence of cancer haca:ds In antoktng dted by the U.S. Surseon tlrue:al, the ertlctc coucluded, "At the mo- ment, all we can say for sure Is that the N~~lF•4r~~~0 s 3415 cause o. cancer Isn't known and that there Is absolutcty ao proof that amokAng causes human cancer." The story was wtdely promoted In adver• tlsements, end reprints were matlcd to about 600.000 "oplnlon makers" around the natlon. Not surprlsingly, five of the six major tobacco companies mslled reprints to their eotployes and shareholdors. • The artlcle couldn't have presented the to- baceo lr.dustryb case better It It had been wrltten by the Industas. And though there's no proof t7,e Industry did that, the elrcum- stancea surrounding Its publication are ln- teresting. °HtrNK," aaTH A TABLOm 7ve author. Stanley Frank. fs an employe of n/al & titnotrtton Inc., lorg-time public relatlons representative for the Industry's Tobacco Institute Inc. The reprints and ads, ostensibly a True promotion, actually were paid for and handled by Tiderock Corp" a eecond public relations arm hired by the Tobacco Institute last October. More recently, the March 8lssue of a sensa-' tional tablold, the National Enqulrer, carried . a story under the headline °Cigaret Cancer Ludc ls Hunk " The byline read "Charles Qolden," but Nat Chrun, editor of the 8n- qulror. says the author was Mr. Frank. "Charles Golden doesn't exist," Mr. Chrsan says, '7t's all perfecny legal." Mr. Frank at first satly denied authorshlp of the Enquirer story; a week later he eon- eeded that be had written It. "You*ve got me on that one," be sald. As to the True ertlcle, Mr. Frank says he submitted It last April, while ho was a free-lance wrlter, whereas be dldn't join the public retatlons agency untll October.l7ue and Htil & Knowlton give a like account of the chronotogy, although the public relations director of a major tobacco company says he understands that Mr. Frank was working on the 7ltte story last faLL • Congressional stt urces say the tobacco In- dustry ta mounting an aggreratve new earr.- palgn to ionnter medical evidence that cig- aret smoking Is damaging to health. The Surgeon Oeacral has been asked by Sen. Warren O. btagnuson, chairman of the Sen. ate Commerce Cotnrnntee, to Investigate the Rtue article and the tegalety of the reprints. orsrers ovsn a soorc A similar dlsputt arose early last year orr publlwtton of the book. It Is Safe To Smoke by Hawtharn Books Inc.. New York. The book coactuded that It was "safer" to emoke elgareta having charcoal atreta, aurh as Ltg- gett & Myers Tobacco Co.'s Lark brand. Sev- eral IndugJxy sources. In fact, say the book amounts almost to a commercial for Lark. Ltggett & Meyers denles, hoarerer, that It aubsidlted the book. ilaa-thorn's chalnnan ' and presldent, W. Clement Stone, says. "There are a lot of things that happened wlth that book that 1 didn't approve ot:' Me won't elaborate. Hawthorn agreed Isat April to discontinue sales of the book atter the deeeptlee practices division of the P'cd. eral Rtade Commission began Int•estigatfng the advertising. A well-known Washington Journallat re- porta t•'rat she ans approached last year by a.' tobacco Industry representattve and aaked ll she would put her nanse on an article attacking the Surgeon Ceneral'a report on smoking and health. The article already had bcen oTltten; the plan was to submtt at,to a national magatine for which the a'rltea frc- quently. 17te journalist, a'ho asks not to be h1:•ntlaed, refused. Several aspects of the True episode are In dlsptrte. Chorles li. Sarnsrd, True erc•cuth•e edttor, denies that tlno nragar!ne produced the rcpriuto. fiV°'tt'fr, tlley b"•e a nota tipned '-The Sdito;a" with no other attrlbu• tlcn, and a True production OMein1 eays they were printed on the'aYue preases. . I

~nN f i The production olOClal says Tlderock, the public relations agency, ordered 607.000 copies. In addltlon, Ave tobacco companies eay they bought a total of 449.000 eoptes from 77ue. btt. Harnard denfes, hoxerer, that True got. payments from any Industry sources. The promotional ads for the 1Yue article were paid for by lndividual lobeeco aoat- pr.nfcs throufb Tiderock, according to Reg- (neld H. \letts, esccuth•e Tlce president of the agency. Mr. Wells eays Ttderack !s ax- ptoryag varlous ways "to get the tobacco In- dustry's side before the publlc ^ The tobacco Industry reported record sales and protts l:st year. but per caplta con. awuptlon of clgarets declined for the ttnt year since the Surgeon General's report was lssued In 1964. • IDcraBrr4 cHr or HrAtrH, Eovra7tora, WSIo Wairsax, Pusuo REa.TSt SmveCa• Bethesda, ydQ., March 22. t968. Hon. Wasas,v O. IMAa*4uson. Chairman. Committee on Commerce,, D.S. Senate. Washington. D.C. • Draa IUR. Cwamatan: Thls respan,s to your letter asking for comment on an article crit- lcal or the evidence littking cigarette smok- • 1ng to health hazard. I am pleased to send you here our t:omments on the article by Stanley Prank which appeared In the January 19881ssue of True magazine. As you will see. we believe the,artlcle pre• sents much lnformavon not consistent with the known facts. Our main crltlctsm of the article 1s thet !t presents a biased picture of what Is actually cont'dned In tL'e 1964 Report to the Surgeon General. Further, It ts atls- leadtng in aeaming to make the Surgeon Oen- eral and the Public Health Sendce the au- thors of this R.eport tvhen In tact it tras terlt- ten entirely by a panel of distinguished non- govermttent scientists whtMe selection tvae approved In advance by the cigarette tn• d I~. important thst Information on medi- cal matlers be presented In as accurate and unbtased a manner as possrole and when controversy exists that tt be thoroughly and Impartlagy a(red. This is espocialiy te•ue In an article on amoking and health. Thya article . falled to do so and tce fear that it may -en- ccurage peorle to cent!uue smoklrtg who might othcraL•e quit. ..e encourage people to begin smoking wha mlght ytherwlse have rtot started. To the :kxtcnt It does so yt (ncreases the risk of dyse+lse and death In out• popu- Mtlot6 Sincerely abttn. Wn,tteat ti. Srawsar, Surgeon Qencrai, Poettc ytFat.TSt SeAVtcs Rtrom' oU Teus MaoAthis Aa79eLe ox SatoxLWO ANoHEALTtt Massive distribution has been made of an article whleh appeared 1n the Janua.y 1969 lssue of True Magazine attacking the sclen- tl6o evldenee indicting cigarette smoking as a health bazard. The attlcle, "To Smoke or Not to Smoke- That Is StUt the Question," is by Stanley Prank, who ctamrs to have found contradtc• ttons and Inconelatettcies In the evidence and concludes that the "hazards of cigarette smokyng may not be so real as we have been lea to bellova." Reprints of the article hnve been sent to ph: alelans, lah•yers, school teachers attd other opinion Iendera throughout the country. At• tached to the reprint, redesigned from the orlCinal article to Include additional lllus- traUons. Ia a note frotn the tnasaglne edltors stating. "As a leader In your professlon and eommtnNty, you w911 be Interested In readtng this story. ... about one of loday's most eon- troverslnt Issuett." The President of the Amerlean Tobacco Company has also sent reprints of the a-tlcle to stockholders of the company with an no- CONGRESSIONAL ItECOItD-SL•NATE ntt:rcle $7, 19p8 companying letlor 1n which he says, "DCspite hot the creation or the Surgeon General. , the many years of Irttenslve medical and Whea htr. Frank retera to °coactutlons biological research In America ond elseahere, reacbed by Dr. Terry" ar.d p~. Terry's the allegaLons of the antltobacco critics re• abrupt dtsmlrsal of other pornble csrau of rnatn s,ietttl0cally unproved' • lung cancer." as he does later In the aruck. The prlnclpal target of the magartue ar- be d:storta the rele of the Suraeon Generai tlclc's attack Is the 1964 Report of the Ad• 1n the preparation of this study. visory Committee on Smoking and Health The Report was the work of an Advlst:ry to the titea Surgeon General of the U.S. Committee of ten men, drawn from a list IPubllc Heatth Senlce, Dr. Luther I. Terry, of 150 scientists and p7tyalclans repreeenttng ' Attacks on ttte Report are not a new phe- a0 tlte pertlnent sclenttfie disdpllnes. Tae nomenon. Many of them, as Dr.'ferry said tobacco (ndustry, among other groups aad three years ago, "arc repetitious and cleverly oreanlrattons, nas given full opportunlty to manipulated !n a continuing program to veto any mf the names on the list, oo reasons sirake public confidence in ttse Repors." being required. ' i7te True art.cl¢ conforms to this pattern. After more than a year of careful study It is the effort of a layman to dlscredlt the nnd erafuntlcn of the eatlre body of aaf.d validity of a scientific report and to question data on smcsing and health, or,d after re- the integrity and the Impartlallty of scyrn- viewing evidence fram many u•Itnesses, pro tlsts and physicians who spent more than a and con, including those trom the tobaeeo year ret•letiing all available evidence. industr,v, and after consulting experts on Tbe artlcle ignores a review of more thaa e~ery• t:icet of the prdbletit; 'the 6dt•Irop ~' 2.000 additlonal reaa arch studies accumulated Committee concluded that cigarette smoking since the 1964 Report and presented fn a n•as a health hazard of aulildent Intportance second Report sent to Congress 1n June 1967. to warrant appropriate remedta( actloA It Th1s Report, "The Health Conaequenees of Is emphasized that the 9na1 Report mb• _ "' Smoking: ' eongrms and strengthens the con- mltted to the Surgeon peneral by these men cluslons of the earlier Report. represented their independent and beat-ron- The 1Yue artlmle's subtitle bogins with scrl- aldered cohecuve judgment. ous mfast.itements. yt says: One member of the Commlttek Dr. John "Are cigarettes really 'harardous to your g• Hlckem, was cited In the True article n heoltt}' like the package saysP Nobody knows. having some reservauons about the ReporR In any case. Americans ata smoking more 8ut we are not told that Dr. yflekam, aware than ever and, curlouslt, worrying lem:.° of rumors to this eftect, told a Congressional That smoking Is a bazard to health is COMmlttoe In Aprl( 1960: known by practically everybody who has "I wlsh to respectfully requsat that It be ' studied the subject. In this country, L.t over- made part of the record of the committee whelming majority of physicians, the Amcrl- can Medical Assoelatlon, numerous other pro- fesstonaf organlsattons, and the Congress of Ure United States have accepted the evidence that amoking Is a health hazard. To our knotvledge, no medical or sclentl9a body !n the world baa taken •the position that yt is not. Are Americans atnohing more' Alth ~::oh to- tal ctgaretGe oonaumptlon Inireases as popu- latlon lnereases, the rate of growth of the report has been seriously c•utalled since the evidence on the effects of smoking was first brought to the Public's attention in 1959. If the average annual rate of lnetrcase !n per capita consumption of cigarettes that existed from 1947 to 1955 bad eontlnued through 1966, the total tfs. consumption of cigarettes would have been over 700 billion In 1966. fnst.ead, the Department of bgrleutture re- ported an actual figure of 541 billion ior that year, a red'~ctlon of nearly one-fourth over what might have been expected. yn the 11 years fravs I9SS to 1906, the number of adult elgarette smokers Increased by one-slxth, from about 49 nt1111on to about 49 mt111on, During this rame time, the number of sue- eeasful ex-amokers more than doubled, from less than S million to about 19 million. Afore• ever, Amerlc.tm continue to give up smoking clgarettes at the trate of about one million Commlttee was e:rare that the mere estab• hearings that I agree complelety tyith the re• port of the Surgeon General's comnolttee at the time It was Issued end that I eontlnue to agree completely with the findings ot the report." htr. Frank's assnrtlon that the Report did not cause smoking to dccllne overlooks the dra•aatlc decline In cl8arette t:onsump.tton In 7964, a drop of more than 12 blltloa cigarettes during the year the Report tras Issued. A!- though overall eonaumptlon agaln Inueaaed In 1906 and 1966, per eaplta consumption de- cllned In 1967 and stlyl rcmalns below the all time high of 1968. The burden of the charges In the True arttcie appears to center on there polets: 1. The evidence against cigarettes Is etatts• tlaat, and cause and effect association caunot be proved by statistics aione• 2. The eau.e of cancer ts unknown. 9'here 1s no proof that cagarettes eause lung cancer. 8. M¢d(cal opinion is divided " the rels- tlonshlp of smoking to bcalqr. Flrst, ns to stattstlaf. The article says on this subject: • . "StaUatlcs alone link dgarettea q•tth lung eancer, a correlation that Is not accepted as sclentdfic proof of the cause and effect. Thts w'as admitted In the oponing of the rerort by the Surgeon Gencral's Commltteee 'The-• a year. Rshment of a statlstler 1 correlation between ~ Are Americans w•orrying 1ess4 The fact that the use of tobaeco and a disease, Is not filter elgarettos account for about SO percent enough. The cnsual (ale) slgnlfirsnce of•the - of all cigarettes now sold in the Unlted Statea, use of tobacco In relation to the dlsease , eompared to approximately 9 percent told In (s the etucln( questlon:" 1954, suggests tttat smokers who are ttnable' This tontenee ts out of context and omlts or unwilling to give up smoking are using the Important sentencea adjoining 1:. The filtera In the espectatlon that they are paragraph from nttlch AtY. yTank excerpted thereby rcdueing their exposure to the h.trm- the sentence (the omitted eentcneca are ful Ingredients In tobacco satoke, 1ta11clred for emptraala) reads !n full: _ The author of the True article states !n "Soch of thr5c ttncs of elYdenes (anftnal +' lho opening psragraph: ' erpertmarets clinical and autopsy atadtea and tVhen the Surgeon General of the United popu(atfon studtes) was et•ahtatcd and thea Stntea leaued hle report In Jannary 1964 In- ronsiderrd Icycthcr ht dratctnp eotctustons• dleung cigarettes as ttte chief cause of lung Tte Committee was anare tttat the ntere ca' cattecr. It figured that smoking would de• tabllsltmettt of a s.atlstlcal assoclatlon be• ctlne, tobacco prlcea would drop and cigarette tween the use of tobacco and t dlsease Is not contpnny atocka would do poorly on the ex- enou fh. The causal significance of the use o( chattges " tobaeCo ltt rolatlon to dlsnaso Is the crucial Ne tlteh obsewcs that aono of this oo- queatlon. For Sach Judgmenta all taree tines ettrrM• ' of eetdcnre are rernltal as dtacuaacd tn more Ftrst, It should be made clenr-senee the detatl on pages 2g-2P oJ this Chapter and m attlele does not do so--that the Report was Chapter