Tobacco Documents Online

- (Continued from previous page) TIRC'asked if it would not have been better to add, "further research s required to asicertain the truth." Researchiprojects by the hundreds are going on to bring out all the complex factors related to smoking and lung cancer as well as other ailments .such as heart disease. As far back as 1959, the Public Health Service issued a statement implicating,cigarette smokingparticular]1y as a leading cause of'lung cancer. "No, method oftreating tobacco or filtering the smoke has been demonstrated to be effective in materially reducing or eliminating the hazard of'lung cancer,"'the statement reported. °Unless the use of tobacco can be made safe,," it concluded, "the individual person'.s risk of' lung cancer can best be reduced by the elimination ofsmoking.° Encouraged by the report of the Royal College ofPhysicians, Sen. Maurine B. Neuberger (D., Ore.) is planning to introduce legislation within the next few days "to deal with this tragic problem.'"' SY'he indicated that her bill might include recommendations by the Royal College committee, which suggested that cigarette manufacturers be requiredito print the tar and nicotine contents on the pack and that the government increase cigarette taxes sharply. ' In 1959, however, a similar bill proposed by Rep. John A. Blatnik (D., Minn.) never got out of committee for a Congressional vote.

This article was distributed by Science Service to its subscribers. Cigarettes on Trial 3/13/02 As Controversy Rages by Faye Marley Science Service Writer Washington-- The attack on cigarettes as a cause of lung cancer by the Royal College of'Physicians in London, England, has fanned a - controversy that has gone on since the Indians taught Sir Walter Raleigh to smoke. Not only a matter of health is at stake; it is a multi-billion- dollar industry that pays the U.S. Government alone nearly two billion dollars in income tax. Both sides debating the effects of cigarette smoking have been equally vocal. The Tobacco Industry Research Committee (TIRC) headed by the well-known scientist, Dr. Clarence Cook Little, best represents the industry's viewpoint. over the past decade, cigarette smoking has beeniattacked by such medical organizations as the American Cancer Society andithe National. Cancer Institute of the U.S. Public Realth Service. Three major objections to the Royal College of'Physicians" report were raised by TIRC: 1. It does not examine the total evidence, but considers only selected material related to a single aspect of human experience -- smoking. 2. It professes to have considered views that disagaree with the conclusions presented. . 3. It claims to demonstrate impartiality by reviewing,"other possible explanations which must be considered."' Dr. Li:ttle's committee questions whether lung cancer has really been increasing in recent years. Present diagnostic facilities and death registrs.tion, along with increased knowledge of lung ca:ncer, are fdctors not taken into~consideration in comparing the present incidence of'the disease with the past. Teniand more years agp the death certificate of a person dyingof lung cancer might have read "pneumonia," "tuberculosis,"'"heart failurey"' or even contained such an item as "senility and other ill-defined conditions When criticizing the report!s recommendation for specific actions to be taken against cigarettes by government andiphysicians, TIRC singled out the statement: "'It should be realized that since we cannot identify the substances initobaicco smoke that may be injurious to health, no firm claims for the safety of'modified cigarette tobaccos or filters can be made. - more -