Tobacco Documents Online

, ~ u ~( ! Q n I •~) ` ~fl ! '~'tl c~~~ ~ r 1 '~t ~_...~ ~ , (' ~ k~`",V[;d'ertce r~5 C_ C ami c e v siblc reproductions of the slides -chich prc•sumcs a review of its d'csigt and r•ra ~;{~~5+~ ~ ~• ~. 1I1~°t! r~ ~r' the)• have announced prove the de- j~~,r ti L 1u1 t'1.rj .4C. it L:; ti: velopmcnt of lung cancer in the c.v- , perintcntal dogs cxposed'~ to cigarette r ~ _ r smokc. - ~ i . But:. a spokesman for the AMA CI3ICAGO, ILI_ -•I1te Journal ~ Journal said that while the Auerbaeh- tion i l' ic A ssoc a a can 1`lcd of the Ameri, on Fridav became.the second rttcdical journal known to have -rejectr.r for,. puhlicati„n an American Canccr So- : ciety3ponzored research study . -. hich the- ACS has bi~hly publicized as having induced lung, cancer in bea;le dogs with cigarette smoke. IfbK-ever, the Journal exteniled to the two authors of the• paper, Dr. Oscar Aucrbach of the Veterans Ad- ministration Hospital in East' Orange, t\. J., ana tJr. L. C~.uyter narwuuuu of the T.6S statr, an opporwniry rV revise their work for resubmissmn to ublication. - • I th•e p Although the AMA Journal would i ti t di l h l L f vu or tts nt a ao ge t e reasons reteciion of the beagle study, one of the main objections to its publication ~ , at this time, this newspaper lcarned; was the .`,alina of the AMA's scientific / reviewers. that pictures of micro-' / photooraphic slides submitt_d as ~- proof of the putative cancers ctcimcd to have been eaused,by cigarette smoke (t were actually not conclusive of malio . i. nancy. t An AMA spokesman pointed out than the slides thcntselvcs, and that L judgcment'on photor.raphs of the slides tahen of the beagles' lung tissuc rather lv nd tha ; th n tSc slid th s c a es crn cs a ~ poor photbgraphic quality ma • have contributcd to .vhat they felt v::s the indcterminabilip• of the evidcnce. L However, Dr. Gerald D: Dorman, ootro,nF presidcnt of the lihfA, told this ncwspapcY tL:;t such plioto;;raphs , "tvilt' ~onerally show what is there on 'l t1:ee slidr.;' that~ asrcproductiac~u they arC f er••raHy considorsd compi•te and faithful cnotrl;h to be usc•d (or cvalu- / ' ative purf~oses. 0 IjI Also, it is tb b'e presurr•.ed that Dr. Such an effort to gain, maximum jj!Aucrbach and Dr. Hammond would publicity in the lay press for one inter- :,l i~ have taken care to submit in subsran- pretation of a medical research study 1^ tiation of thcir eontrovcrsial ct tint w•ithout~ the study's prior publication in ~ photoLr- hs which wore t'te bcst r,os- bl eicntif5c 'ournal-which c s t ~P ) . n • , ~ aI repu _ implementation, the data produced and its interlr,et:uion, by a pancl', of the researchers' professional peers - is considcrcd a gross violation of profcs . sional ethics within the scientific com _. munity. Hamrnond study was "not acceptable Since shortly aftcr the initial Cancer __ for.putilioation at this time," it' mi;ht Society press conference, the Tubaceo eventually be accepte& if' the resr.:,rch- Institutc has been urging the Society to ers were able to satisfy the rca,tire- submit the Auerbach-Hammord' re- ments su5mitted to them by the Jour- search~ materirl for evaluation by a : nal's scientific re%•icwcrs with licst ' panel of independent erpetas. Tihc In- , weekend's rejection notiee. ` stitutc has offered to bear alt costs of °We included al lar-e volume of such a review. . . sug.-estions for revising the manuscript The ACS has continued to reject the to put it, into~ acccptable formt"' the suggestion, saying that the studj vrould AMA official said. ; be published~ in an independent aad ear h i '- e very n n t " reputable journal ~, „~^nn~ ti:~ze•^ E c'._rtd ~ .. ..- future` to satisiy peu~mo h c most owc of t Iourn 1 of vfcdicinc. ----- prestipious medical jounals i.-t the world, also rejected the Aucibach- Hammond study for pablication, re- portedly because the study had been, previously publicized by the research- ers and their sponsor, the Ameriea;t' Cancer Society, in thepopularptt.ss- ii-< In Fu;.iuary•, the ACS convened a ~ h4C 6 0 _ '711611,C, press cuuference in l:ew, York and 1~ ~ q~/_ t{ J ?~= sent news rel=ases to all the mrdla to publicize its interprotation of tltt work as a landmark achievcment„ demon, .: , for the first time that lun-. stratinc cancer of the kind most'; commonly found in humans can be produ_odi in animals with cigarctte smoke„ so:uc- tlting which innumcrablc researchcrs, despite extensive efforts during, the last several years, have been uuable to da . In the contex¢ of this intcrpn I:rtion, the Society proclaimed publiclt• that thesc putativc findians "cffcctivclj: ' re- fute oo:ttcntions by cittarette m::nu(ac- turin, intcrests that tf:erc was no ci;a- rcnc-eanoer link" (a st:,tcmcnt vrl,ich itself tv:s a misrcprescntation~ of the tobacco industry's pu.:ition) and dr mauds "a rcasscss:nont of the a!t.rtisa ing c1: inu and j•ulicics of the cir .rcttc indusuy.° I V. l'~