Tobacco Documents Online

~h~f'41t~q. M tv0~14'°SR~'Wff Y'a tL j~e. 1^W 1X c R YY~A!n P4..x +f ~~ We Go t1galn 3cTaatOa Penasylvania We seem to be in [or another round of izing his opinions with so little regard for , 28 1959' debate on the highly eontrovers~al ques- that' evidence he has performed a real ~ + November , 1x~ t~ d-~~ a ~ ~ r H!' theelationship between eigarette disservice +on o r ;'amoking and lung cancer}' ! And Dr C C Little, acientific director .. .. The revival is spurred byy announced of the Tobacc Industry Research Com~ _~• . f(s A: AlX findings of IDr Leroy E Burney Surgeon miltee wh~ch makes grants for mde ..,, ~.. t General of the Public Health Service pendent' medical' research„ said: 3~ I'q "Td th bfi Writing in the Journal of the Americanoay, morean evereore, scea- •~??~.!'~;,Medical Association, Dr. Burney declared tific evidence is accumulating that con-~~ ~~ t~*ahat the weight of evidence at present fllcts with or fails to support the tobacco Implicates smoking as the principal cause smoking theories af lung cancer. Many 3'of the increased incidence of lung cancer. of these have been omitted from pr glossed;, ` ~;And he said, further, that filter tips have over in the Public Health Service article " x` y;G~ ` ,=t not been found effective in "materially and press release. ?'reducing` or eliminating the hazard of.' Dr. Little, among other things, pointed !:; t` =out that new evidence finds that people ' lung cancer. a: ~ ~ . Immediately upon the release of Dr described as the world's heaviest cigarette ,~ Burney's views there came protests and smokers have low lung cancer death rates .~ denials from organizations affiliated with compared with people who smoke less but _. the tobacco industry. have been long exposed to urban air r>• _.w .lv-,id r James'' P. Richards, president of the pollution. -•;;` Tobacco Institute,, termed the , Burney '• If these conflicting views are confusing .findings to be "extreme and unwarranted to the average layman he need not fret conclusions:" He charged the doctor with too much over that faet for they are ignoring the balanced' evidence reviewed' equally confusing to the average medical '- ~ in his own scientific paper and "summar- ` man, too Y~A;i . . ~ . . . . , . •.,. . ~, . . •.,ti-, .. . : . .. . ,.. ovei'll1llCllt. ~Scare', EftQUIR.^•.R-rT.E'r15 : .,., r'BattLe Creek, Michigan `% Another segment of American indus- that smoking causes cancer.: He only November 30, 1959 try is in an,uproar over a government said that' "evidence implicates" tobacco. agency's warning against its product- It'was a similarly'worded statement that .;; In l[ght of "prooC" . this time„cigarettes. touched off the cranberry scare 5ecre• ;t .. offered by the U S Sungeon General, .. Leroy E. Burney, the tobeco companies, tary of Health, Education and Welfare ~ seem to be well justified in, their com- Flemming warned that a c}iemicali used ~?! Burney uses rather vague terms toO support his suggestion that "unless the use of tobacco can be made safe, the. -'individual's risk of lung cancer can, be reduced' best" by giving up smoking,, This warning is based on Burney's state• ; ment' that "evidence implicates"' smok- Ing as the "principal" cause of the na- tion's increase in lung cancer. •. As a result of Burney's warning, to• bacco company stocks took a beating,in, the market last Friday: The companies have attacked the surgeon general's, claims and, in general, another "cran• : berry crisis" has been precipitated. In effect, Burney has added nothing. new to tvarnings from doctors and re- search laboratories. The possibility that smoking may cause Iung cancer has been expounded for years. But, the surgeon general has spoken for govennmcnt' in the matter,:lending great weight to the reports of private medical research. The head of the U.S, , Public Health Service'may be correct in h•is statements. We are not taking issue on that score. But, we are vitally concerned' with the manner in which the warning was issued.. Burney did not say' unequivocably on portions of this year's cranberry crop r~ had caused cancer in rats. He admitted . 1 that it was not known whether it woul "~d affect humans in the same way. His an- ~ nouncement, however, d a m a g c d the .~~ cranberry industry to a great degree The government has a responstbtltt X y, to protect the people at all'times: It has ' an equal obligation to safeguard industry ;~ and business. It has performed this func• tion successfully many times in the past. One must observe, however, that in the cranberry case.and in the tobacco warn• ing, government really has done notYing but create confusion among both the public and business. - . Any government statement that may frighten the people or have an adverse affect on industry should not be issued untill clear•cut facts can be.offered. It ~~ should not be couched in vague terms or in such phraseology as "cvidence im- ,~ plicates." Smoking either contributes tor ~ lung cancer, or it doesn't. So far, un' ,.t .f, assailable proof has not been offered. ' But, by the issuance of Burney's state• ' ment• damage has been done to a large segment of American industry.