Tobacco Documents Online

l. BIO-RESEARCH CONSULTANTS, II,:c. F. XOMe'URGER, M. D.. DorK/o. P. 9ERNEEID, Ph. D.,Dfrscioroi~Rexerch ---.CON5~UlTAT'dON~. __ R.ESE~ARCM DE;YEIIiPMENT=_ - 9 COMMERCIALi AVENVE CA+1&RIDGE, MASS.ACNU5ETT6,0.2I11 (617) 66<-8735 February 20, 1974 z t William U. Gardner, Ph. D. Scientific Director The Council for Tobacco Research - U.S.A., Inc. 110 East' 59th Street ` New York, New York 10022 Dear Bill; Receipt of your letter of February 13, 1974, prompts me to rectify certain of your statements expressed therein, in particular, in regard' to alleged "mi'stakes and distortions"' in my recent letter to you, of which I sent copies to some of the tobacco companies. Since you~ sent copies of your letter of February 13th toAhese companies, I now am compelled to point out to them the inaccuracies of your letter. Our complete report to you was not supplemented with photographs since this would have unduly increased the costs of that report and since you and your associates had seen lantern slides: of most of the induced laryngeal lesions, and were thus well aware of their morphology. You have known of the availability of this material for a long time, and Dr. Sornmers had a chance to examine in detaiU several of' the original microscopic slides. I am glad to hear that'~ you now desire to "expedite our definitive publi'cation". This is in contrast' to your past attitude when we' were told by' the Council's staff that more details were needed every time we suggested to prepare a manuscript. Your implication that I would make a"fragmentary or imprecise publication" is incorrect, to say the least, and without foundation, for which I demand an apology. You know very well that these results have been "in process of definitive publication" for a long time. Everything, that will be publishe& is contained in our final report sent to you~ September 24, 1973. S

` William U'. Gardner, Ph. D. -2- February 20, 1974 I agree that the hamster does not respond to smoke inhalation with f'ormation-of lung cancer. However, the unexpected finding of a high incidence of laryngeal cancer in smoke-exposed Syrian harnsters of certain inbred strains (higher than obtained under comparable conditions in~ randbrn-bred hamsters by Dontenwill)~ presents a lead, the active pursuit of which The Councili for Tobacco Researah, owes to the general public. In, view of the substantial money spent by CTR at our institution to foster capability of smoke inhalation technology, and in view of our discovery of a new technology directed to a smoke-associated'respiratory carcinoma, your decision not to continue this work with us seems indefensible and wasteful from the point of' view of the cigarette industry; it seems irrespon- sibl6 from the point of view of the general public. It could be inferred that you wish to suppress,, rather than to encourage, scientific investigation directed at the second most important smoke-associated respiratory carcinoma of man. YourVirteerely, Freddy Hombu ger, M. D. President an Director 1