Tobacco Documents Online

ADVERTISING AGF C may 28, 1962 Ci iaret Forces Build Fire Under, ads. So far, however,, no company has indicated a determination to test the commission's position,, pos- sibly because the tobacco compa-, nies are by no means eager to get numbers of the milder filter cig- arets, so that their net intake of tars and nicotines may be at least as U W Rule , ~~1~e~„'~,~ into a public argpment which S .. ioijl~ L~7 would focus more publicity on the ome scientists also refuse to be Government Inertia, Medical Caution Seen Periling Smokers' Health . WASHINaIl'oN, May 24-There has been intensive behind-the-scenes pressure for the government to make some new moves in the con- troversy over cigaret smoking, and' President Kennedy today nearly found himself squarely in the mid- dle. Some of the pressure originates from leading manufacturers of fi1- ter tip eigaret5, who feel exist- ing Federal Trade Commission ad- vertising' regulations are unfair to them and harmful to the smoking public. Other pressure comes from researchers and scientists, who fear that any change in the exist- ing government policies will lead to a resumption of high pressure advertising for filters. The controversy picked' up mo- mentum a few weeks ago, after the Royal Col2ege of Surgeons is- sued a report! in Great Britain which reemphasized'the health haz- ards which result from smoking: At the same time, however, the British report recommended -that since smokers aren't likely to ~ stop, they should be encouraged to smoke filter cigarets (AA, March T2).. , Shortly after the British report appeared; the Federal Trade Com- mission staff was confronted with appeals from some of the manufac- turers of'filter tip cigarets for mod- ification of the provisions of the - commission's: advertising standards, which bar any ad claim dealing with the effectiveness of filters. . As a result' of' this FTC policy, the companies said, the filter tips have been, prevented from telling the public that filters result in less tar and nicotine. One result, they say, has been a trend back to non- filter cigarets; which-they argue -is hardly a good thing for the public if' there is any basis to the controversy over smoking hazards. The filter cigaret manufacturers feel they have been bullied into a~ situation where they are prevent- edl fromi telling the public the truth about their products in their health hazard issue. a party to a policy statement which  The' President was drawn un- would result in ads emphasi¢ingg expectedly into the controversy to- only the reduction in tars and nico- day by a press conference ques- tine. They say other smoke ele- tion which asked' if he felt our ments may also be harmful-such government is doing all it should as phenol, which, is currently com- in the controversy over smoking. ing under particular suspicion, andi Caught off guard, he sidestepped that an official policy which en- the question by declaring, "The couraged the use of inadequate matter is sensitive enough, and the filters wouldi not be justified. stock market is in sufficient dif- The Federal Trade Commission ficulty" without his attempting to staff, however, is sensitive to the give an answer not based on com- charge that the commission's ex- plet'e information. He said he would isting policy may be depriving fil- be glad to respond in more detail ter makers of making truthf>al' next week. claims which couldl be of some When the President looks into value to smokers. Representatives the situation, he will find that of' the commission have been ex- negotiations currently are under ploring the current attitude of the way between FTC and the U. S, top scientists at the public health Public Health Service to determine service to determine whether the whether the government's official 1959 statement should be modified.. example, Dr. Mi- ing statement on cigaret smok- Recently, , Shimkin, for who is regarded as. ing needs to be revised: Under a statement issued' by the o ne of' the leading experts at' the surgeoni general in late 19'59+ the public health service in the drafting government takes the positioni that of a policy on tobacco, was quoted smoking represents a definite haz- by Reader's Digest as supporting a ard. FTC's ban on claims for fil- proposal requiring a disclosure on ters is based on a portion i of' the cigaret labels of the amount of tar statement which implied that there and nicotine in the smoke. # is no proof that' the use of filters represents an effective safeguard against smoking hazards.  i FTC's attitude; spelled out in an industrywide agreement negotiated by the eommission, early in 1960, is based on the assumption that any claim for a filter is automati- cally ai promise that the use of the filter provides a degree of, health protection. In the current discus- sions with eigaret manufacturers, FTC's staff has been taking the position that this policy cannot, be modified until the public health, service provides assurance that there really is some benefit, to be achieved from, smoking filters! The negotiations are tangled in a host of intramural snares peculiar to the scientific andl bureaucratic worlds, Some government scientists are unwilling to be a party to any change in the attitude toward fil~- ters, because they aren't sure there is any substantial health, advantage involved. One theory, which filter manu- facturers are trying to, combat, holds that smokers burn up larger great as ifi they used non-filter cig- arets.