Tobacco Documents Online

This article by Science Service has been noted'in various papers. PRESS-NEWS SCIENCE NEW'LETTER Cleveland, Ohio March 24,, 1962 March 29,, 1962' PUeltc HEALTH Controversy on SrnoRing Cigarettes on Trial . Still Rages By Science Service WASHINGTON'- The at- 'ten years ago~ tne death tack on cigarets as a cause of certificate of a person dying lung cancer by the Royal Col- of lung cancer might have lege of Physicians in London; read "pneumonia." "tubercu+ England, has fanned a com losis." "heart failure," or even troversy that has gone on contained such an item as since the Indians taught Sir "senility and other ill-defined Walter Raleigh to smoke: conditions." Not only a matter of health When criticiiing the re- is at stake; it is a multi- port's, recommendation for billion-dollar indhstry that' specific actions to be taken pays, the U:S. Government~ against cigarets. by govern- alone nearly. two billion dol- ment and physicians, TIRC lars in income tax. singled out the statement: "It Both sides debating the should be realize& that since effects of cigaret smoking we cannot; identify the sub- have been equally vocal. Th'e. stances in4obacco smoke that Tobacco Industry Research may' be injurious to health, Committee (TIRC), headed by no firm claims for the safety they~' e1l-.known scientist, Dr., of modified cigaret tobaccos Cl :e Cook llittle, best or filters can be made." rep sents ft h e industty''s TIRC asked if it would not viewpoint. have been better to add, Over the past~ decade; cig. "ftuther research is rrqujred aret smoking has been at- to ascertain the truth." tacked by such medical organ- Research~ projects by the izations as the American Can- liundreds are going on to cer Society and the National bring,out all the complex fac Cancer Institute of the U.S. tors related to smoking, and Public Health Service. lung cancer as well as other Three major objections to ailments such as heart dis- the Royal College of Physi; ease. cians' report were raised by ' TIRC: IT'DOES NOT EXAMINE the totalevidence, but con- sideto only selected material related:to a single aspect of'. ltuman expenience-smokmg. .IT PROFESSES to have considered views tf:at dia- agree with the conclusions presented. IT CLAIMS toAemonstrate impartiality by reviewing "ot.her possible explanations which must be considered." Dn. Little's committee ques- tions whether lung,cancer has really been increasing in t years. Present diag- nC : facilities and death registration, along with in- creased knowledge of lung cancer, are faetors,not taken into consideration ih compar- ing the present'incidence of the disease with the past. 10, THE ATTACK on cigarettes as a cause "No method of treating tobacco or filter. of lung cancer by the Royal College of sng the smoke has been dkinonstrated to Physicians in London; Engltnd, has fanned be effective in materially reducing or eVimi- a controversy that has gone on since the nating the hazard of lung cancer," the Indians taught Sir Walter Raleigh to smoke. statement reported. •'Unless the use of Nor only a matter of health is at'stake; tobacco can be made safe;" it concluded, tobacco is a mul8-billiondollar industry "the individuallperson's risk of lung cancer that pays the Ul S. Government alone nearly can best be reduced by the elimination oE two billion dollars in taxes: smoking"' Both sides debating the effects of' ciga- Encouraged by the report of the Royal rettt smoking have been equally vocal. College of Physicians, Sen. Maurine B: Neu-. The Tobacco Industry Research Committee berger (D.-Oreg) ' is introd'ucing legislation (T1RC) headed by the well-known scientist, that would require printing the tar and Dr, Clarence Cook Little, best representsnieotine contents on each cigarette pack: the industry's viewpoint,. In 1959; however, a similar billlproposed Over the past decade, cigarette smoking by Rtp. John A. Blamik (D: Minn.) never has been attacked by such medicallorgan- got out of committee for a Congressiomall S d ociety an izations as the American Cancer vote. the National Cancer Institute of the US: Public Health Serviee:. Three major objs•ctions to the Royal Col• lege of Physicians' report were raised by TIRC: 11 It does not'examine the total evidence, but considers only seltcted' material relited to. a singiee aspectt of human experience- smoking. 2. It profcsses to have considered views thardisagree with the conclusions presented. 3. It claims to demonstrate impartiality by reviewing "other possible explanations which must be considkred2' Dr. Litde's committee questions whether lung cancer has really been increasing in recent years. Present diagnostic facilities and death registratioo„along.with increased knowledge of lung,cancerq aree factorsnot taken into consideration in comparing the . present't incidence of the diseasee with, the past. Ten and more years ago the death certifi- cate of a person dying of lung.cancer might have read "pneumouia;" "tuberculosis,"' "h'earn failure,"' or eaen contained such ari iter : as "senility and other ili-deEsned condi:i6-~s." " Wh'en criticitiing the report's recom, mmdatin:n forr speeific actio„sto lxe taken aga.ast cigarettes: by gove.nment and ohy- sicians, TIRC singled out the statement: . "It should be realized that'sincewe unnott identify the substances in tobacco smoke that may, be injuriouss too health, no fitmclaims for the safety of modified cigarette tobaccos or filters can be made."' TIRC asked if it would not have been better to addJ "further research is required to ascertain the truth':" Research projects by the hundreds are going on to bringoutg all the complex fictors rclated to smoking.and lung cancer as well ass other ailments such as heart diaeasc. As far hnck as 1959; the Public Health Servicee issued a~ statement.implicating,ciga- rette sma,king,1~arrticulzrlyas a leading cause oflungcunccr.