Tobacco Documents Online

PH { LI P MORRIS I NCORPORATED CORPORATE AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT GOntaCts SINI'KKA SARRO AND ROSIKSANDUSKV, Ext.405 /401 REMARKS OF DR. PETER BOURNE SPECIAL ASSISTANT FOR HEALTH ISSUES AD-HOC COMMITTEE ON TOBACCO AND SMOKING RESEARCH AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY NOVEMBER 10, 1977 ADOPTION OF THIS MODERATE POSITION BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. HOUSE IN SUPPORT OF DR. BOURNE'S STATEMENT WOULD ENCOURAGE THE WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE TO ALL PHILIP MORRIS PERSONNEL NEXT WEEK. LETTERS ON PERSONAL STATIONARY TO MEMBERS OF.CONGRESS OR THE WHITE THE GOVERNMENT'S DEALING WITH TOBACCO AND TOBACCO PRODUCTS. REPRINTS AT LAST! A REALISTIC, SENSIBLE AND STATESMANLIKE APPROACH TO LETTERS TO THE CONGRESS SHOULD BE ADDRESSED: The Honorable United States Senate Washington, D.C. 20510 The Honorable U.S. House of Representatives Washington, D.C. 20515 New York Residents: New Jersey Residents: Connecticut Residents: Clifford P. Case Harrison A. Williams, Jr. Abraham Ribicoff Lowell P. Weicker, The President of the United States The White House Washington, D.C. 20500 Dear President Carter: If you have any questions, please Jr. contact Edward A. Grefe, I .~ ~~ .;.' . ext. , or Stanley S. Scott, ext. 1091;ti,t- :

adequately warned" :~Ae al"so sasd-tliat'zf-through-~research-we related health problems continues to be one touching the lives of almost everyone in the country. is a problem which the government alone ; r::ar5 ~:. Carter is very concerned about tobacco use and the health hazards':r' discover, "that smoking cigarettes is more dangerous than we associated with it. However, he set•forth during his Presidential campaign his belief that, "the American people have been thought, I would be very eager to see the government present that . - . .. . ,;. , - . . information to the public in a most forceful way". A commitment ,' we intend to keep. Yet, despite the warnings, not enough Americans are heeding•them. Cigarette consumption in the United States AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY November 10, 1977 The issue of tobacco is up from 511 billion a year in 1964 to more than 600 billion The strategy which the federal government adopts must above:,: all be one that works, but also one how much we may favor prohibition of tobacco products, we are 300 years too late_ This is one area where we need to concentrate our research efforts on a number of various issues 0 associated with tobacco ~ O use and the responsibility of the federal government to come up ~ the health hazards of our citizens, ~ 0 while still being responsive to our 600,000 farm families that derive their income from tobacco. On October 12, 1976 then- candidate Carter said "I personally see no need to do away with that deals realistically with the industry and social fabric which over the years has 

a program that costs the government next to nothing, while enabling so many hard working families to earn a living". To date, no one has been able to say why or which social and personality factors predispose and lead people to acquire the smoking habit or what behavioral differences there are between smokers and non-smokers. We need to continue extensive studies to find the solutions to these and other problems that smoking ~ may cause. Regarding the relative importance of our research --efforts; Iibe°lieve-that the-development,y-i-£-•possible,o.fr-a.safeY~: cigarette should have a high priority. It may well be that this will not prove a fruitful course to pursue. ,. Many people who honestly do not want to smoke cigarettes cannot stop. To them smoking is.a relaxing tranquil experience which gives them pleasure and relief at times the two-fold responsibility of the government risks associated with their habits as much as see'to it that they receive notification of those risks. As a part of our effort, research should center upon the identification and analysis of tobacco components. tions in such research }' r s h ld b t Th ti ~ c a sump e e s ou e no au oma - . ., that there are no beneficial effects of tobacco use. It may be" ; ~. products of tobacco have W beneficial or mixed effects.. The safer cigarettes should not be"'-' assumed to be one of low tar the cigarettes i actually increases the number of cigarettes <wr ' AUALL smoked, low nicotine ones may increase the hazards of tobacco components of and low nicotine. It may be that , "tar" cause lung cancer and other side effects nicotine does not. Thus, if it is true that the lowered

smoke rather than reduce them. While it is true that this and allied research could lead to the development of blocking agents, the failure of those who treat alcoholism and drug abuse to find a means of preventing relapses after the use of existing blocking agents, leads me to believe that the bulk of our research dollars should be ex- pended on the acquisition of basic knowledge rather than in search of an effective "cure". President Carter, in a message to Congress on August 2, directed Secretary Califano . to study the• feasibility of making the Addiction Research Center responsible for coordinated research on a variety of drugs including opiates,. alcohol, and tobacco. He also said that, •a sustained effort t must-be made to identify the reason that people turn to drugs including_alcohol and cigarettes". This is an area where wee have much to learn. Research in the area of high risk occupational exposure all factcrs of the occupational environment. For example, take a high risk industry such as asbestos. The components of asbestos itself may consitiute a greater environmental health hazard than do cigarettes'alone. The same is true of other industrial pollutants. Research regarding the effects of smoking in confined areas should not automatically begin with the answer that smoking should be prohibited. It is essential that the strategy be one that will work and is acceptable to the American people. Better O ~Q ventilation may provide•a better and ea ' answer in some

-4- We must also expand our research to include joint studies between cigarettes and other products and educate the public to these findings. Recently, a study was ccmpleted on women who take oral contraceptives and smoke. It was shown that these two things in combination increased the risks of oral contraceptives It is mandatory that more studies are done that show relationships between smoking and other products so that a person deciding --whether- or=-~not°-to-•smoke--or-whether-or-,not-__to__take-bis#.~CQi3t~o~.__, "! pills will be able to make an educated decision based on all of the known factors involved. Addiction is a curious phenomenon. Twenty years ago we - thought we were able to identify certain groups of people who would be prone to addiction and to gear our prevention material to them. We thought only black males between 18-25'would become heroin addicts, only jazz musicians would smoke marijuana, only bored nervous housewives would grow dependent on valium, only southern gentlemen would become alcoholics, etc. However, these sterotypes proved to be false and now addictions are seen as a cross-cultural, age and race phenomenon. We need to under- stand why smokers smoke and how we can diminish any harm their Additionally, our experience with other addictions suggests that federally funded "I Quit" programs may be too costly and the diversion of already too scarce federal research funds may cost us lives as well as dollars. These programs may best be

, . f -5- Our experience with drug abuse education and prevention has taught us that changing behavior in this manner is fraught with problems, and 'it'. is by no means as simple an issue as it appears on the surface. I am not sure that we can yet demonstrate that programs. designed to scare young people out of smoking are cost-effective. Federal anti-narcotics educational efforts have led to the creation "-f-' of-ve~ted-interest-`prohibiti-orf-bureaucracy-whichlcompetes- for --- -- grants, but has little overall impact on drug problems. While some anti-smoking educational efforts with highly educated groups such as physicians have been successful, other anti-educational people away from less drug abuse. We must be public does not efforts, especially those which seek to scare. harmful substances, have led to more rather than aware of certain facts. While the majority of the smoke and is annoyed by cigarette smoke (and a majority of smokers want to.quit), an overcihelming majority wants~ a minimum of government interference in their private lives. Thus the anti-public smoking campaign must be one in which the potential for reducing cigarette smoking and especially the health hazards exceeds the potential for antagonizing a significant segment of the population. Because of the political, social and economic ramifications, feasible short-term goal, and that campaign would bring into question our own credibility. It is there that we are on our it is unrealistic for us to suggest a tobacco prohibition as a weakest ground. While prohibiting use of cigarettes in public "tD , places would please non-smokers, it would not necessarily reduce

-6- overall cigarette consumption or reduce the health consequences. We have done little research on the health hazards, if any, of other people's cigarettes. We are'attempting to issue orders to a large, if annoying, segment of the population. The social disruption and discord engendered by this struggle exacerbates tensions and problems. For example, if our behavioral research shows that a high percentage of cigarette smokers began the habit in a rejection of authority then we must be sure that the imposition of government authority will not do more to increase their dependence rather than encourage them to quit. The reaction of those who compulsively overeat, overdrink or over- work may be precisely the opposibe of.what we intended. Obl-igatory measures to reduce cigarette use should clearly be pursued cautiously,.being sure that we know what the impact is that we I believe that we should perhaps stick to our best known and most valid arguments. By turning to compulsion and by .. '~r . . seeking to affect smoking habits by~ direction and inconvenience we may present the public with our most selfish and, therefore, our least valid virtue: cigarette smoke. our own annoyance at the odor. of The number of non-smokers whose health is adversely affected by the cigarette smoke of others may be very small.-- ~;-i Even as to them, there has been inadequate research as yet p regarding the effects, if any, of sidestraam or ambient smoke

, It should be a high priority for us to pursue this area of' research, because should we find some direct effect on other people's health, it would dramatically bolster the*rationale for more stringent measures aginst smokers. There are active anti-cigarette lobbies which are against people smoking in public places. They have been instrumental in restrictions on seating in airplanes and banning smoking in elevators--, -etc-; -We-must-,F=however-,--be-cautious._ia j.eopar.dizing.``__ _- our credibility in a struggle which involves the competing, rights of others. There is-a small minority of people who have a-hypersensitivity to smoke; we cannot write the laws to protect this small group, overlooking a much larger group who are entitled to the same basic rights, but rather they *_aust take special care of themselves and we will do what we'can to help them. To protect and to alleviate the annoyance to non- smokers , . : smokers of cigarette smoking, notice requiwements posted at public places would eliminate the problem. Private proprietors could simply be required to notify'the public of their policy -regarding smoking, no smoking, and private sections. In short, regarding that problem, I believe that we should rely primarily upon the democracy of the market place. If the proprietors of stores and restaurants are required to prominently post smoking policy notices on the outside of their establishments and in the entrance way so smokers and non-srriokers will be put on notice. Then they can vote their , preferences with their pocket books.

I believe that research remains the key to effective public policy in this area. Adequate scientific information would strengthen our hand enormously in taking some of the more decisive steps we'need to take and in reducing much of the political controversy that surrounds this issue. Rather than creating an adversary relationship, I feel we should try to work more closely with those who would be most threatened by a dramatic change in use patterns. Within the tobacco industry itself, there must be some w'io would6'hidIp -and`-seek-help=~frqm=-ets:= The research of that industry would be of great value to us, and eventually, we must seek out from within~that industry more progressive forces which must exist. * The two alternatives are to do nothing or to prohibit the product. Efforts to make outcasts of smokers are similar to the worst appeals of existing drug abuse programs. Those of us in the health fields should have learned that one of our greatest problems in the treatment of alcohol and drug abuse is the social opprobrium attached to alcoholics and drug abusers. , Psychiatrists know that decades of outcasting the mentally ill worked agianst the development of sound treatment programs. Those of us who deal with disease must face up to this prob-~ lem. For we risk hurting rather than helping the very people we are trying to help. Presently, as one of my other areas of responsibility, am studying the issue of world hunger. We have asked the O.

9 .private sector - those who have the greatest influence on the supply and demand of food, to contribute to our discus- sions. Even though their interest may differ from ours, we have found them to be most helpful and they are an excellent• source of invaluable information. They are delighted to be involved. This may be true of at least the more progressive ' elements of the tobacco industry. Their advertising expendi- tures for the promotion of low-tar and low-nicotine cigarettes indicates that at least some of them would be willing to cooperate in the development of.a safe product. t To me the soundest programs will aim-at the problems of the smoking rather than the non-smoking population; at problems presented by an existing 300-year old agriculturally•' based domestic industry; at the reduction of'cancer and.other • health problems rather than at punishment. This Administration is strongly committed to addressing this nroblem. Secretary Califano has taken a deep personal interest in this issue and is giving it the kind of priority •that is essential.if we are to significantly reduce the _ 1 American people every depressing toll that cancer takes on the year. However, if we are to accomplish this goal, it cannot be done by the Federal Government alone. The role of your organization is crucial for in the final analysis, education of the public is the only real solution to the problem.