Sukgeon General's Keport

Anne Landman's Collection

Sukgeon General's Keport - Response

Date: 12 Feb 1981
Length: 6 pages
1003658637-1003658642
Jump To Images

http://tobaccodocuments.org/landman/1003658637-8642.html
Derived from: /pm/1003658637-8642.html

snapshot_pm 1003658637-1003658642

Abstract

This "PERSONAL & CONFIDENTIAL" 1981 Philip Morris (PM) internal memo discusses how PM and the tobacco industry should react to the publication of the 1981 U.S. Surgeon General's report entitled The Health Consequences of Smoking: The Changing Cigarette. The memo was written by Robert B. Seligman, Vice President of Research and Development for PM at the time, and was sent to PM's president, another PM Vice President, Assistant General Counsel and several high-level PM scientists. In the memo, Seligman states the need for the tobacco industry to begin supporting and publishing studies that would "reverse the ground swell of public opinion which has emerged as a result of antismoking activity."

Seligman says,

"... It is our opinion that Philip Morris (or the tobacco industry) take a more aggressive posture to counterattack the antismoking movement. We're suggesting funding studies (primarily outside the United States) with the intent to publish data which refutes specific assertions by the antismoking forces...." He also suggests PM study the action of nicotine in the human body and use the findings to enhance their products. As Seligman put it, PM should "Explore and define the action of nicotine in the human, and if possible, optimize products utilizing this knowledge..." Exactly why, in the midst of a memo primarily about battling smoking and health issues, Seligman brought up the need to optimize the effects of nicotine in the human body is not explained.

Seligman suggests that studies should be done to counter the existing studies on smoking and health and that they should be "controlled and sponsored by Philip Morris...to deal with domestic and international problems affecting the Corporation and its products." He further suggests "many of the studies would be directed to overseas laboratories."

Seligman states that the industry's "Response must be global in concept because adverse reports from any country immediately have worldwide impact..."

Several times in the memo Selgiman acknowledges that "despite the fact that there are potential legal risks in directly supporting and publishing [such] studies" that nevertheless the industry "must enter this arena." He refers to the industry's current situation as "trying to do battle without armament."

From this memo it appears that Seligman knew the legal risks of funding and producing studies specifically to counter emerging information about the health dangers of tobacco smoke, but that he felt PM should undertake these risks anyway.

Fields

Quotes

PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL

To: Those Listed Date: February 12, 1981 From: R.B. Seligman Subject: Surgeon General's Report - Response

In a recent memo, Mr. H. Cullman called for action plans to respond to the recent Surgeon General's report. To that end, the technical management of the Research Center generated the following plans and strategies...

The tobacco industry constantly is placed on the defensive and is forced to take a relatively passive stance in responding to questionable (or unfounded) assertions arising out of smoking and health studies. Despite the fact that there are potential legal risks in directly supporting and publishing studies to expose these ill-founded assertions, it is felt that we must enter this arena. In fact, it may be too late already to reverse the ground swell of public opinion which has emerged as a result of antismoking activity.

The Tobacco Institute has hade a valiant attempt to change public opinion, but they have very little published information upon which to rely to support their efforts. Thus, proposed antismoking ordinances have been attacked on peripheral issues rather than by confronting the basic scientific merits of the smoking and health assertions underlying these proposed regulations. It would seem that the extant approach is a delaying tactic at best; -- it is not a strong advocate position.

Frequently, and with increasing regularity, major antismoking campaigns are mounted based on insufficient data. It is, therefore, vital that we take a carefully considered approach to blunt these attacks. It is our opinion that Philip Morris (or the tobacco industry) take a more aggressive posture to counterattack the antismoking movement. We're suggesting funding studies (primarily outside the United States) with the intent to publish data which refutes specific assertions by the antismoking forces....

Response must be global in concept because adverse reports from any country immediately have worldwide impact (viz.; --Hirayama, Froeb/White, etc.). Thus, a major requirement wouid be to establish an international order or priorities because of the aforementioned synergistic and interactive affect of today's rapid communications...

...Some specific research suggestions follow...

1) Studies on human beings...

2) The affect of sidestream smoke on experimental animals on a long-term basis...

3) Repeat suspect or incomplete studies,e.g., Froeb and White. Also, develop experimental approaches for such studies in animals.

4) Explore the positive effects of smoking....

...Continue developing products which are of low biological potential...Initiate sidestream smoke investigations, to identify and control components. This is particularly germane because of the general public's antagonism toward smoking caused by the nonsmoker issue. Room aroma/odor are part of these investigations...Develop a product with low ignition propensity and develop methodology to evaluate such products...Explore and define the action of nicotine in the human, and if possible, optimize products utilizing this knowledge...

...In conclusion, let us say that we are mindful of the potential risks inherent in conducting the proposed extramural studies. Perhaps, as scientists, our view of risk/benefit has been distorted by tryingto do battle without armament. We feel, however, that the thrust of our antagonists' position has been refocused to the non- smoker. Perhaps we should reassess our own risk/reward posture in this light.

Company

Philip Morris

Author

Seligman, Robert B. (PM VP of R&D c. 1976-82)

Vice President of Research and Development at Philip Morris Richmond, VA 1976-1982. Reported to Senior Vice President of Operations. In 1982 transferred to tobacco technology group. Wanted to share ammonia and other tobacco technology with PM International companies.

Recipient

Holtzman, Alexander (PM Asst General Counsel. 1975-85.)

McDowell, W. Wallace (PM Operations Exec. VP, c. 1981)

Executive Vice President of Operations at Philip Morris, c. 1981.

Pollack, Shepard P. "Shep" (PM President c. 1979-80)

Served on PM Board of Directors 1980-83, also served as PM chief of operations (circa 1980-82) and president of PM circa 1979-80. Served as CTR Treasurer.

Wakeham, Helmut R. R., Ph.D. (PM R&D VP)

Vice President and Director of Research & Development, Philip Morris

Region

United States

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.

Tobacco Advisory Council (TAC) (International industry advisory council)

Tobacco Advisory Council

Tobacco Institute (Industry Trade Association)

The purpose of the Institute was to defeat legislation unfavorable to the industry, put a positive spin on the tobacco industry, bolster the industry's credibility with legislators and the public, and help maintain the controversy over "the primary issue" (the health issue).

Verband der Cigaretten Industry (Trade organization for the German tobacco industry)

NMA (National Manufacturers Organization) for Germany

World Health Organization (Concerned with global public health)

International organization concered with public health worldwide

Litigation

Stmn/Produced

Named Person

#24887 (Hirayama)

Surgeon General

White

Froeb

Cullman, Howard S. "Hugh" (PM Inc., President 1957-67, CEO '67-78)

Howard "Hugh" Cullman was the brother of Joseph Cullman Jr. He was president of Philip Morris, Inc. from 1957-67, Chairman of Board and CEO of PM 1967-78, Chairman of Executive Committee of the Board 1978.

Type

MEMO, MEMORANDUM

OUTL, OUTLINE

Subject

Corporate strategy

research activity

industry response

industry sponsored research

industry strategy

Document Images

Page 1: jyt53e00

PH I LJ P N1ORR I S I MICORPORATED INTE.R-OFFIiCE 00RRESP0NDE'N6E Seligman Surgeon Genera'1''s Report - Response Iin a recent memo, Mr. IIi. Culiman called for RI CHMONID, V IiR'61 N I A ~ ~ IiSOM1. & CONFIR171 II1L PE . Those Listed -: Date: February 12, 1981 and intramural activities. strategies'. These approaches divide into exttr'amural Research Center generated the fol!lowing plans and report. To th'at end, the technical management of the __ action plans to respond to the recent Surgeon General's EXTRAMURAL assertions arising, out of smoking and' healthistudi;es . Despite the fact that there are potential legal risks inidirectly supporting and publishing,studie's to expose these ill-foundedassertions,.it is felt that we must enter this arena. In fact, it may be too late al"ready to reverse the ground swell of'public opinion which has emerged as a result of'antismoking activity. The Tobacc Institute has made a valiant attempt to change public opinion, but they.have very little published informationlupon which to rely to support their efforts. Thus, proposedantismoking ordinances have been attacked on the basis of'peripheral issues rather than by confronting the basic scientific meritss of the smoking and healthiassertions underlying these proposed regulations. It would seem that the extant approach is a delaying,tactic at best; - it is not a strong advocate position. - The tobacco industry constantly is placed on the defensive and is forcedito take a relativelypassive stance in responding to que'stionable (or unfounde4) -

Page 2: jyt53e00

t . February 12',, 1981 . Frequently, and with increasing'regularity, major opinion that Philip Morris (or the-tobacco industry) take considered approachi-to blunt these attacks. It is our ' antismoking campaigns are mounted -based on insufficient. data. It is, therefore, vital that we take.a carefully which refutes specific assertions by the antismoking forces. a more ag,gressive posture to counterattack the antismoking movement. We"re suggesting funding studies.(primarily ~ outside the United States) with the intent to publish data Assuming this is an acceptable precept, we can contemplate various levels of involvement: _ ` 1)' Company Level --Controlled' a,nd' sponsoredby Philip Morris Incorporated. . Studies" would.be conducted to deal with domestic ' and international problems affecting thd ^ Corporation andits products. In all probability, the studies would deal with relatively short-term problems. A lower level of funding is anticipated compared to the other scenarios. Little pro bono inidustry work would be done but strategy.would be dictated by intelligent corporate self-interest and priorities. Z) Industry Level.- Confined to the domestic ' industry"s problems but recognizing,the affect ofadverse publications worldnvide. At present, attempts to fulfill this function rests with the Council for Tobacco Research and the Tobacco.Irnstitute but results have had relatively:lit'tle impact. These extant systems seem to lack a mechanism for establishing pertinent priorities and rapid response times..

Page 3: jyt53e00

Our proposed program would establish a deoision.-making body to'circumvent these deficiencies. Also, many of the s studlies would be directed to overseas laboratories. International Industry Level - Attempts .in individual .countries,.e.g., CTR, TAC,, and the Verband unfortunately have tended to respond to issues nationally rather -than internationally. This becomes increasingly ineffective when many of the attacks now are coming from inter- national bodies like WHO,, etc. Response must be global in concept becaus adverse reports from any ~ .country immediately have worldwide impact (viz. ;, - Hirayama, Froeb/White,- etc.). .Thus,, a major requirement would be to establisha an international order or priorities because of the aforementioned synergistic anidinter-. active affect of' today's rapid' communications. ., This level of involvement would be the most difficult to implement due to the diverse aims of' the large mainufacturers who would have to lead this endeavor. This is the most expensive alternate in which one could envision establishing a laboratory to deal with supranational problems. Some specific research suggestions follow. Implementation would vary depending on the authority level noted above. l) Studies on human beings (see addendum for details).

Page 4: jyt53e00

The affect of sidestream smoke on experimental animals on a long-term. basis. (See addendum for details.) Repeat suspect or incomplete studies, e.g., Froeb and White. Also, develop experimental approaches for such studies in animals. Explore the positive effects off smoking. In the United States, establish aa dialogue with the Surgeon General .to determine a reasoned approach to the question of additives. This may be of particular importance in the far distant future when we may contemplate the use of'other nicotinoids or no,n-nicotinoids as flavorants, etc. INTRAMURAL There are a number of programs which are in progress at the Research Center which address issues mentioned'by the Surgeon General.* These are delineated below along with several new, proposals: 1) Continue developing products which are of low biological potential. Lowering tar levels for all existing brands and producing, new brands in the ultra low_ tar category. Complete major CO-reduction programs for all existing brands, plus research into CO control via chemical, thermal, and microbial manipulation of the tobacco.

Page 5: jyt53e00

Those IListed J -5- February 12, 1981 Continued research to control .gas phase smoke (i.e., denitrification of` tobacco to control NO in mainstream 'smoke x Initiate sidestream smoke investigations to id'entify and control components. This is particularly germane because of'the general public's antagonism toward smoking caused!by the nonsmoker issue. '' Room aroma/odor are part of'f these investigations. 2) Develop a product with low ignition propensity aind' develop methodology to evaluate suchiproducts. Explore and define the action of nicotine in the humani, and if possible, optimize products utilizing,this knowledge. . Develop an effective screening system for all new additives and prepare documentation to support this. Conduct selective experiments on specific problems and be willing to publish these results in order to counter adverse external research. (Atmospheric monitoring, of gases, wYiichison-going, is an exampleofthis .). In conclusion, let us say that we are mindful of the potential risks inherent in conducting the proposed extramural studies. Perhaps, as scientists, our view of risk/benefit has been distorted by trying to do battle without armament. We feel, however, that tbe thrust of our antagonists' position has been refocused to the non- smoker. Perhaps we should reassess our own rislt/reward posture in this light. - D 0

Page 6: jyt53e00

February 12, 1981 Mr. W. W. McDowell Mr. S. P. Pollack Dr. H. Wa,kebam Mr. A. Holtzmann cc : Dr. W. A. 'Farone Dr. W. F. Gannon Mr. L. 'F. Meyer Dr. T. S. Osdene Mr. R. N. Thomson

Tobacco Documents Online

Anne Landman's Collection