Tobacco Documents Online

t Ci'garettes t+ed Cattcer Pressore Grows for the Government' Aetion.Abroad Th'e economic importance of the to- bacco industry, and the power of the To Respond to Health Hazard tobaceo-producing states in Congress preclude, for the present at leasti, any- `"If tobacco were spinach," saidl a thing, resembling, the vigorous anti- longtime cancer researcher, "the gov, smoking campaign recently undertaken ernment would have outlawed, it years by the British government. The British ago, and'mo one would give a dama"' action followed a report by the Royal . Tob'acco,, however, bears only a: College of'Physicians which concludedi superficial botanical resemblance to ••that cigarette smoking is the most spinach;,it thereafter soars to a unique ; likely cause of'the recent world-wide place in mass affection and economic increase in deaths from lung cancen° significance to become politically, and The Royal College report was prompt+ sociall}r immune to legal' banishment. ly endorsed by the government,, and As a consumer product that is, neither the Ministry of Healtb subsequently dis- food nor drug, it qualifies for federal l tributed more than 400jp0t) 1 posters, scrutiny, only under regulations affect- which~,if'they do not discourage smok- ing deceptive advertising, and these ing will most certainly undermine the regulations have been invoked only to mental well-being,of'cigarette advertis- exclude health claims. The eonsump- ing copywriters. One of the posters tion of tobacco, in short, is not a states: "Dangerd Heavy cigarette smok- matter that comes under any existing ers are thirty, times more likely to die federal authority: of, lung cancer than non-smokers. You. In, 1957;,Americans paid $5.3 billion have been warned." to buy 442 billion cigarettes; last year, The British cigarette industry re- they paid $6.9 billion for 528 billion sponded by scheduling, its televisioni cigarettes. But while they have been advertising for after 9 P.M., a con- puffing, the, conclusion-valid or not - cession of questionable realism to the i C has been growing that c garettes are Royal College's concern over the detrimental to health and that they' effect of cigarette advertising on youth. contributed, heavily to some 37.000 One British firm has alto removed its deaths from lung cancerlast'yean The pr,oductfrom vending machines to help tobacco industry vigorously disputes prevent circumvention of thedaw which this conclusion, but the "position" of forbids cigarette sales to persons underr the American government on the re- 16. In Italy, meanwhile, Parliament lationship between smoking and lung vigorously assaulted the problem by cancer is a 1959 report of the surgeon sl.pping an outright prohibition on general, which states: tentising: cigarette aa_ t " present The weight of evidence a fmplicates smoking as the principal etiological factcr in the increased in- cidence of lungcancer:°' (The Ameo- ean Cancer Society atated Ithe case more strongly 2yearr2 agoo when,it concluded that' a variety of studies had establ ished "bey'ondlreasonable doubt'that cigarette smoking is the major cause of the un- preeedentedlincreaseinlung cancen") The surgeon general?s expression was not followed by any governmentaction, outside of stricter policing, of advertis- ing, nor, as the sales figures would seem to indicate; has cigarette con, sumption been adversely affected. Recently, however, at a number of points in the federall government, the cionviction has grown that the health hazards of,cigarette smoking have been sufficiently well established to warrant more potent federal action, that the government should move from its role of cautioning bystander to a more pos- itive role. Prohibition Not Feasible Here In, this country, there is no easy political path to direct aetioni of the Btitishand Italiani variety: Inaddition, the experience with prohibition has left behind deep suspicion of any ef- fort to promote government regulation of individual tastes. At the same time, however„ the accumulation of evidence on the hazards of smoking is providing, support: for the view that it is thee responsibility of'the government to do something. The White:House is steering clear of the issue, for it can only further arouse congressional elements that are already generally hostile to the Admin+ istration. But Kennedyls broad view, of'the role of, government in American life has createdl a background that favors government concern about too bacco consumption. Against this background, the follow- ing developments have taken place: The Federal Trade Commission is becoming increasingly dissatished with its ability to regulate cigarette ad+ vertising. It has succeede& in banning health claims, but sales have not been affected, and, of particular concern to the FTC;, the manufacturers are putting,considerable effort into wooing younger smokers. This is reflected, in p,art{, by the heavy' p,romotional l cam- paigns cooducted on college campuses: with prdzes ranging from small amounts of'cash to sports cars. There is growing sentiment at the FTC' for further re- stricting, advertising by requiring, "af'- firrnative disclosure" of health hazards, rather than simply the absence of health claims. Im their more optimistic mo- ments, some FTC officials visualize this as taking the form ofi a warning, on each cigarette pack and advertise- ment, to the effect that excessive use of the product may be detrimental to health. The FTC requires an affirma- tive disclosure of hazards in a~ number of, products; such as inflammable clean- ing fluids. But it is not fully, conflJent about its ability to translate, thc avail- able medical conclusions into a courtt victory. "If' we are going to try for affirmative disclosure, we know we are going into one bell of a court fighti" am FTC official said in an intervi_w, "and we want to make, sure that we are in a position to win, because it would be a disaster if' we tried and lost. The position of the Public Health Service is of cruciall importance forr us if we go to courti but we feel that the 1959 statement of the Health Serv- ice just isnlt strong enougn i for us to make our case." Congressional Hearings Officials of the Public Health Serv- ice say the FTC will probably have to wait a very long time if' it insists on an airtight case, but the PHS is look'ingg into the,preparation of a new statement. Its officials are noncommital on the sub- ject_ Meanwhile, John E. Fogarty, thee congressionall benefactor of inedicall research, said in an i interview that he would like to see the PH5 play a more vigorous role on the issue of tobacco and!lung cancer. The subjectl Fogarty said, will be gone into "thoroughly" when his House Appropriations sub- committee takes up the PH5 budget ne!cbyear.,(This willleome as grim news to the cigarette industry;, whose shares on the New York stock eschange dropped a few points earlier this, year (CoII immediatelij after word leaked out ftom a closed hearing,thatFogardy had heard

page 2' -- SCIENCE May 18, 1962 some briet testimony on the health hazards ofi tobacco.). If Fogarty does go through with his i~ntentions,, it will be only the second time that a congressional committeee has gone at any length into the ques- tion of' cigarettes and health. The first venture is now looked back upon as something, of a disaster for all involved, the investigators as well' as the industry. This took place: in 1958 ' when the Legal and Monetary Affairs Subcorn« mittee of the House Government Op- erations Committee, headed by Con- gressman John Blatnik of Mlnnesota, held hearings on the truthfulness of advertising of filter-tip cigarettes. The subconnmittcc'- conclusion was that "The cigarette manufacturers have de- ceived' the American public through their advertising of filter-tip cigarettes." Further hearings were planned, but before they were heldl the subcom- mirttee was dissolved by its parent com- mittee: There is no hard and fast evi- dence that the subcommittee's dis- appearanee was causedi by its encounter with the cigarette industry-subcom- mittees come and go. But the incident has passed into the folklore of Congress as a warning that the cigarette industry has potent powers of'self-defense: Since. B!latniik's investigation, no congressionall committee has gone near the subject, althoueh numerous bills have been in- troduced aimed at studying or curbing putilic use of tobacco in one way or another. TheIatest ofl Ghese, a resolution (S, J. Res. 174) offered h_.- Senator Neuberger of Oregon4 calls for the President "to initiate and conduct a strenuous public health education program on the hazards of' cigarette smoking, ..." Mrs. Neuberger, also calls for the establish- ment' of'~ a Commission on Tobacco and Health to study the health hazards of: tobacco, and to seek solutions for the economic problems that might result firom a sharp drop in cigarette con- sumption: The resolution attracted stx cospotL sors and!was then:qwietly interredlin the Committee on Labor and Public Wel, fare. There is virtually no prospect thatt it will ever be given serious attention.- The six major cigarette tobacco pro- ducing states are well represented in key positions in: both houses; and they feeli that any attempt, to undermine tobacco is absolutely unnegotiable. The economic stakes involved' are enormous. North Carolina farmers, for example, received $5'27' million for tobacco: last year; Kentucky, $273' mililion;, South Carolina, $99 mill'ion: Virginia, $96 million; Georgia, $84 tnillliont and Ten- nessee, $81 million. A direct assault through, Congress would seem to be impossible at this time. But the publiaity-generatiing, pow- ers of' members who share a concern about the hazard of tobacco are con- siderable, and if' they make enough noise, and if the medical reports be- come sufficiently damnirog, it is going to become increasingly difficult for the issue to remain dormant. -D. S. Gt2EENBERG