Tobacco Documents Online

Comment EN and women must ~ decide for themselves w fi e t h e'r to ' continue smokdng or not. For the =; Government to try to do, A~,;f.t for them would be an ~ interference with Jndf- A `'vidualliberty. - , 4 'Tht t ouU .asr first reacon to - th9 latest' report on the relaUonshlp between clgar- ; ette amoking, and lung cancer. It comes from the ; Royal'College of Physicians. - whose warnings should be taken1o heartL i; After years oflargilment,there "- ;is no-longer angdoubt about the cotrelation between the smoke and' the dlsease. r The evidence Is too over- , whelming to be explained awsy. ~ No one csa take any more comfort from the theory that smokers are predis- posed to ~ cancer, attyway, and that the habit merely, determihea the site of' the onaet Let us not fool ourselvea 't'HE' DPIIIIY, TELEGRAPH :. y Lontion, 'England' March~ 8, 1962 • 4?-SMqKIhi'G AND HFALTH' ' Ttur smoking,is a cause of.lung cancer hu long b'een taken for granted by the CovernmeaG by ; doctors and by most people aware of the,faots and, prepared to face them. "Smoking and Healthi" the report of'the Royal College of Physiciaas, really does "'aot take the matter much further. The evidence ° 's' alread available was onrwhelmin ;~:.' y gly statistical. So ;'itremains What is obvious from the evidence Is that ttte smoker tends to dodge oA: through some loop-hole fnto a dream •wordd, often supported by wishful statistits: He takes comfors,in supposing, say, thar It is lung, can+aer, which, causes smoking; or that,. smoking,only determines the site of a cancer which was coming anyway; or that the sort of people who smoke just,happen to be the sort of people who als,o get lung cancer, and that there is no necessary causal relationship between the two; or that lung cancer : f! really caused by alcohol or esbaust fumes: One : by one, with a certain grim relish, the report blocks these loop-boles with masses of relevant and pre+ sumabl'y accurate figures. The heavy smoker is : thus leh without escape, alone with the knowledge ; that he may be slowly murdering himself. What the heavy, smoker should do if be can i Is clear enough: he stiould, give it up. What, the Covernmencshould do is not,qpite,so clear. Despite public alarm and clamour, to smoke on not to smo'r.a reemains essentially a private decision. As the report itself concedes, the, majority of smckers will suffer no mortal barmi so many, may prefer to take the risk with the pleasure. Where smoking causes; public annoyance; the Government has a -right to forbid. Otherwise, except in the case of children„it must leave the choice to the individual. What it may legitimately do is to influence tt::: choice,by propagandrand within limits-if it thinks fit-by taxation. This last the, doctors strongly recommend. They would,doubtless admit: however, that past increases in the tax on cigarettes, apart from causing much hardship to the poor, have been of far more benefit,to the nation's finances than to its lungs. Pollution THB cause of lung cancer la sUll unknown. That . it may ardse, from~ a com- binatlon of' reasons fsi ,- shown by the higher mor- tality rate in the townsi compared,with the country. This i suggests that air pollu- tlon, by exhausG ,f,ames or soot, may be a contrlbutory eause: Nevertheleaai It Js smoking w51ch sets off a, fatal sequence found, more rarely among non-smokers. Children should certalnly bee warned. BSnce lt is illegall to supply tobacco to, per- people and there would be baust pipes was made eom>. sonsiunder igllt is a positive wldespread resentment (or pulsory,, • scandal that sa many pay demands) it a packet of' The tobacoo manufacturers schoolboye ;re confessed 20 were put up: to,*say+ 10s. have spent a lot of'money on cigarette nsera. . To regulate smokfng, In public,• researeh into lung cancer C But r1e would strongly oppose places 1t a better proposall and have publishedl the the suggestion that, the The foul atmosphere ofl results without fear or price of'cigarettes should be cinemas and some theatres i favour. As they say them, made alraost prohtbltive: Is a reproach. selves, atillimore 19 needed. Th1a !s the wrong approach. But if restrteUona, are to be: If'they could find haw, to take applied to tobacco;,as they the rlsk; but noG the ReSt~ICt10n " have to smoke from, chlm- pleasure, out of clgarett4s, mya why not also to eat they would do themselves f SMOK'fN4' fs :a virtual ne- fumes,? It is time some i and the public a great 1' ces.dty for mlllionn of' eleanslnrt sDPacatua on ez aetvice. _ ON TRIAL ~ Although it producea no really new evidence, ''the report of the Royal C o l l'e g e of Physicians. "Bmokfng and H e a lith:" ~ must add welght to the pro- more you smoke the more like u are to get not 'K ~Uon that heavy clgar- ly yo ~., ette smoking is one csWse anly lung onocr but also bronchitis: and other * of lung cancer. diseases of the lung, heart and blood vessels. If _, •'~ t~ey a~re ~o ~once. you smoke oigarettea as opposed to a pipe or ciytrs, z~. more before the publlc- tbe risk of lung cancer is, further increased. Of :? and once more the amoker men aged 35, the heavy, cigarette smoker (say„ 25' ': must brood over the statls- ar more a day)Aas a ooe-in-23 chance of dying- r.r tles and make up h1a m1ndd from all causes-within the nezt 10 years, the non. ; whether the pleasures of' smoker: only a oee-in-90 chance. Of men of this ~s weed are aortL the riak, age;,fivrout of'siu non-smokers will reach the age t a e~m great deal ~ more re- of' 65, only four out of siic heavy smokers, search Is necessary before we f.onfronted by faets of' this sort the heavy •~~ rehably aDDOrtion the blAme" on Ghe vatlous agencles:that can-or might . -cause cancer. The RCP commlttee ia their report make only a passing refer- enoe to alrpollutlon (by such man-made hazards as lndus- trlal effluents and diesel fumest; we hope that they will give thls their full'at- tention and7et us have their findings ln due course: Sensible : I The commlttee's proposals for curbing clgarette smok+ 1ng are lar¢ely ratlonali and .•senslble-partltularly the emphasia.on tlie discourage- ment of' the habit among, young- people. Not so desirable 1s the - -' aommlttee'tsuggestlonthata heavler tax on cigarettes might curb amoking, For onr, thinv_, the tobacco taz. has constanUy risen for yearspast, wtthoat any per- manent effect on, the nat- tonal •habit. Furthermore., this otoulC' mean ~. "ratloningby purse " -never an equitable form of control. And'the purpose of taxaston is to raise revenue, not to act as a deterrent or to impose disciplines. The Only W'ay?' There Is no possibillty' of a quick solution of the mysteries oP cancer causa- t1on. Only a long-term and exhaustive probe into all cases ofl the disease can ~c produce the final answers. One method of research- perhaps the only way - would be to make canccr a nottflable disease: to instst that every doctor who slgns a certificate of' death from this cause should itll' in a questionnaire covering the r whole of the victim's per- sonal background Ute con- ditions of'hisdlfef his hablts. his family history.