Anne Landman's Collection
'why People Smoke'
Abstract
In this 1983 confidential Philip Morris (PM) memo, James Charles (Vice President of Research at PM) writes to Thomas Osdene (Director of Extramural Research at PM) to discuss how PM could attack a Public Health Service report called "Why People Smoke." The PHS report affirmed the view that tobacco use is a substance addiction disorder. *(See "Notes," below) Charles warns that the company cannot defend against claims of addictiveness based tolerance, saying tolerance to nicotine is a "well established fact",
"There is one caution that should be considered before attacking the document. This third edition of the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders defines substance dependance as...'requires physiological dependence, evidenced by either tolerance or withdrawal.' The key word is either. We can successfully defend the absence of withdrawal under controlled experiments, but we cannot defend tolerance. Tolerance to nicotine is a well established fact."
Fields
- Notes
--------------------------------------- Notes
* In 1980, the American Psychiatric Association, in its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, listed tobacco dependence as a substance abuse disorder, and classified tobacco withdrawal as an organic mental disorder. In 1982, the Director of U.S. National Institutes on Drug Abuse (NIDA) testified to Congress that it was the position of NIDA that nicotine was a dependence-producing drug. In its 1983 publication, "Why People Smoke Cigarettes," the U.S. Public Health Service supported the position of NIDA regarding tobacco and nicotine.
-- This document was used as a Trial Exhibit in Texas and Minnesota. ---------------------------------------------------
- Quotes
Please find attached Dr. Vic DeNoble's critique of the PHS [Public Health Service] document "Why People Smoke." The key fallacy of this paper is the assumption that nicotine is a drug which produces dependence. If you accept this statement as fact then all other arguments follow naturally. However, if you can show that the basic assumption of dependence is not true, then the remainder the arguments are also not true...
There is one caution which should be considered before attacking the document. The third edition of the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental DisordersI defines substance dependence as "...requires physiological dependence, evidenced by either tolerance or withdrawal." The key word is either. We can successfully defend the absence of withdrawal under controlled experiments, but we cannot defend tolerance. Tolerance to nicotine is a well established, fact. Recent experiments in Vic's project have shown that there is a behavioral component to tolerance (a learned phenomenon), but this work has not been published. So, we should be careful to not get trapped by "tolerance" if we decide to attack the document...
- Company
- Philip Morris
- Author
- Charles, James L., Ph.D. (PM, R&D VP, Pharmacologist, Industry Expert)Vice President of Research and a scientist for Philip Morris, Inc. Vice President of Research for Philip Morris, Inc. in 1986 and then again from 1992 to 1993.
- Recipient
- Osdene, Thomas Stefan, Ph.D. (Director of Science and Technology, Philip Morris [1986])Ph.D. in Organic Chemistry. Ten years of research when he started with PM in 1965. Worked in Chemical Research Division of PM 1965-66; Chemical and Biological Research Division 1966-69; Director of Research 1969-1984, also assumed independent position as Director of Research and Extramural Studies during these years; became Director of Science and Technology in 1984, reporting directly to Philip Morris USA Executive VP Mark Serrano. Involved with Center for Indoor Air Research (CIAR) 1988. Attended PM's Operation Downunder Conference in June, 1987. Retired 1993.
Document Images
