Tobacco Documents Online

DRAFT SUGGESTION FOR C. T. R', ROLE In a: previous note we suggested that the CTR program might be framed within three basic objectives. These were: 1. To define biologically the effects of smoke on the human system. 2. To define the motivational mechanisms of smoking, using laboratory animal models, as welli as human populat'ions, 3. To conceptualize and', explore other hypotheses relative to the Smoking and! Health question by epidemiologicaU and other appropriate studies. . These three objectives,, though simplistic inidefinition, appear to enco.rpass the areas which are, of conc..rn to thc tobacco industry. Recently, the industry has become intereste& in sponsoring research in the Channing; Laboratories, Harvard University, and to some considerable extent their program may overlap the program being carried out; under the auspices of CTR grants. Consequently, in evaluating what' might'be the future responsibilities ofl CTR, iti is imperative that unprofitable overlap be avoided. As far as we are aware, Channing proposes to study tlhe effect of smoke on the lung, having specific reference to emphysema, bronchitis and, later,, lung cancer. Secondly, they are suggesting that their program then be expanded to include heart and vascular diseases, T 14,

- 2 - C If our interpretation of the Channing program is correct, then there would'm seem to be l'ittle justification in CTR continuing to broaden its present program under Objective (1). Indeed, there is a case for reevaluating the present commitments so that any dupllicationi is remove& as soon as conveniently possible. CTR is also coxmmiitted t'o a number of projects which are etiologically oriented and it is suggested that these should only be continued if they are of direct and', positive interest to us. This approach seems eminently suitable, bearing im mind the scope of t'he National Cancer Plan. Objective (2) is, we thi'nk,, of tremendous importance to the industry and should represent ai very important and expanding area of research for the CTR. Objective (3) is again part of the Channing, proposal, as well as being funded through various studies under the CTR and Ad Hoc committee granting, programs. It can be argued, however, that most of these studies suffer from a lack of suffiicient'ly advanced scientific tools in respect of the possible role tobacco smoke plays. Therefore, until such time as hetter tools are available it! is suggested'.t'hat Objective (3)~be restricted to what we are committed to now (including Channing). Broadly speaking, therefore, a redefined CTR program could be expressed as fol'lows:. C CJ (a) The pursual of those biological and etiological studies which are ~ supportive of the Chann2ng program. Future studies might be ~ (._ 11:

. - 3 - C structured so as to provide future input into the Channing research program. (b) Expanded program, on motivational and behavioral studies to provide better understanding of the benefits of! smoking.. Continuation of those epidemiological studies which (1)' supplement the Channing program, and (ii) , cover areas not' studied by Channing and which assist the industry. Given a broadly based program as stated above, the Scientific Director of CTR', working,with his staff and consultants, would be expected to define the major "gaps in knowledge" in each of the three areas to which its efforts are to be directed and to propose specific research projects intend'ed, so~far as possible, to fill those gaps. It seems to us that the pursuit of such a CTR program will require some reorientation, and to achieve this it is imperative thatl the Scientific Director take the role of'a strong, aggressive scientist and leader. We guess he would need assistance in the following areas: Medical' researchi granting ` Supportive of and cornplementary Biological research contracis tothe Channing program ~ Behaviorali studies contracts Epidemiological studies contracts

r C -4- IC To avoid confusion with respect to communicat'ions, jurisdictional boundaries~ and responsibilities, it would seem essential to, have liaison (not control) between CTR and Channing - this should be the function of the Scientific Directors of Channing and CTR'. Possible Structure of CTR Working Group 1 Scientific Director <------- ' Consultants ~ Assistant(s) for i i i Assistant(s) for Medical and Biological ;J Behavior Studies. Granting and Contraeting -- i--, 2 ------- -____ • ~ ---- --- I A ssistant(s) for Clinical Epidemiological Studies ' L--- - J Itl will be noted'that what is proposed here substantially alters the philosophy of CTR' established at its creation and'maintaiiied through its course to the present. We„ in effect, propose abandonment of CTR's broad commitmentl to "the study of the disease entity, "; ini other words, we are proposing abandoning CTR's interest in the etiology of di'sease as its primary area of concern. Secondly,, we would abandon the role of' CTT "s~ Scientific Director and staff as little more than housekeepers to channel applications for grants to SAB and to channel funds from SAB' to grantees. Under a moree objecti've-oriented structure, the Scientific Director and staff, with consultants, I ~ don= ~ `_

-5- would be activists in formulating the overall program, developing the specific projects in implementation of that program, in finding researchers to carry out the desired work and to expedite performance. In this respect what we have loosely termed consultants wouldl, we believe, constitutle a truly "'scientific advisory boardL " Such a group will be available as experts to the Scientific Director and his staff; their role should not be financial in any sense since it would be the responsibiliity of the Scientifilc Director to control the budget spending. If the industry is to have a~ properly balanced' overall research program, conforming to industry needs, it ilss necessary that there be coordination between the various ef'forts. We would propose that the overall program coordrinationibe formally done through a committee comprised of': the Scientific Directors of Channing,and CTR, and industry representatives. Apart from this group, we further propose t'hatl the industry should agree to informal communication and~ consultation between the Scientific Directors of Channing, and CTR.

---