Philip Morris
Beagles, Smoking Article to Be Printed
Fields
- Type
- NEWS, NEWSPAPER ARTICLE
- Area
- LEGAL DEPT/CARLSTADT QRSA
- Site
- N28
- Named Person
- Auerbach, O.
- Boucot, K.
- Hussey, H.H.
- Boucot, K.
- Named Organization
- Ama
- American Cancer Society
- Archives of Environmental Health
- Journal of American Medical Assn
- TI, Tobacco Inst
- American Cancer Society
- Request
- Stmn/R1-004
- Stmn/R1-039
- Stmn/R1-053
- Stmn/R1-133
- Stmn/R1-039
- Document File
- 1005091663/1005091855/703 Position Papers. Bw 971
- Litigation
- Stmn/Produced
- Author (Organization)
- Winston Salem Journal
- Master ID
- 1005091669/1855
Related Documents:- 1005091669-1855 'smoking Dogs' -- Case History of An Attack on Advertising That Failed
- 1005091676 the Truth Seems A Little Twisted
- 1005091677 'all Advertising Should Be Truthful'
- 1005091678 the Voice of the Advertiser Cancer Society, Heart Assn., Admen Voice Opinions About Aa 'honesty in Anti- Smoking Ads' Editorial
- 1005091679-1683 Backgrounder 'the Effects of Cigarette Smoking Upon Dogs'
- 1005091684-1685 12 Dogs Develop Lung Cancer in Group of 86 Taught to Smoke
- 1005091686 Smoking and Cancer
- 1005091687
- 1005091688
- 1005091689-1690 Last Gasp for Cigarettes?
- 1005091691
- 1005091692 Smoking Controversy
- 1005091693
- 1005091694 Tony 'iq' Curtis Pays $120 Pot Fine in London
- 1005091695
- 1005091696
- 1005091697-1711 Remarks of Joseph F, Cullman 3rd Chairman of the Executive Committee the Tobacco Institute, Inc,
- 1005091712-1713
- 1005091714 Tobacco Institute Ads Challenge Cancer Society
- 1005091715 the Tobacco Institute Believes the American Public Is Entitled to Complete, Authenticated Information About Cigarette Smoking and Health, the American Cancer Society Does Not Seem to Agree.
- 1005091716
- 1005091716A
- 1005091716B
- 1005091717 the Cigarette - Cancer Dispute
- 1005091718 Study Data on Cancer
- 1005091719 Smoking Beagles Draw Fire
- 1005091720 Question Validity of Smoking Dog Slides
- 1005091721-1722
- 1005091723 Smoking - Cancer Study Action Rejected by Surgeon General
- 1005091724 Correspondence Between the Tobacco Institute and the American Cancer Society 700227 - 700429
- 1005091725
- 1005091726 the Tobacco Institute Believes the American Public Is Entitled to Complete Authenticated Information About Cigarette Smoking and Health, the American Cancer Society Does Not Seem to Agree.
- 1005091727
- 1005091728
- 1005091729
- 1005091730
- 1005091731
- 1005091732-1733
- 1005091734-1735
- 1005091736-1738
- 1005091739-1741 Report Relates Cancer and Smoking. Auerbach - Hammod Smoking Beagles.
- 1005091742-1753
- 1005091754 Cancer Report Disputed Eject Tobacco Men for Row Wth A.M.A.
- 1005091755 Research Plea Smoking Dog Test Repeat Is Urged
- 1005091756 Tobacco Group Challenges Cancer Study
- 1005091757-1759 No Smoking
- 1005091760-1794 Effects of Cigarette Smoking Upon Dogs I. Design of Experiment; Mortality; Findings in Lung Parenchyma,
- 1005091795-1818 Effects of Cigarette Smoking Upon Dogs II. Pulmonary Neopl
- 1005091819 Why Stifle Debate on Smoking?
- 1005091820-1821 Tobacco Institute Vs American Cancer Society
- 1005091822
- 1005091823-1824
- 1005091825 Ama Journal Decides to Withhold Reports on Dogs and Smoking
- 1005091826 Tobacco Spokesman Says Dog Tests May Be Greatest 'scientific Hoax'
- 1005091827 Ama Journal Rejects Paper on Acs' Smoking-Dog Study Evidence of Cancer Found Lacking
- 1005091828-1829 Acs Researchers Retreat on Claims for Beagle Study Now Say Only Two Dogs Got Cancer
- 1005091830-1831 An Editorial
- 1005091832 Reports Linking Cigarets and Smoking 'not Rejected'
- 1005091833 Voltairean Principle
- 1005091834 Lung Cancer Makes Strange Bedfellows
- 1005091835-1836 Study on Dogs and Smoking
- 1005091837 What Became of 'landmark' Cancer Study?
- 1005091839-1845 of Beagles, Smoking, and Cancer Cigarette Smoking Canines Answer the Demand for Laboratory Confirmation of the Statistical Cancer Link by Developing Invasive Lung Tumors
- 1005091846-1847
- 1005091848-1849 Study on Dogs and Smoking
- 1005091850 Cancer Society's Test on Dogs Looks Like A Hoax, Tobacco Industry Says
- 1005091851 Hoax, Institute Suggests Smoking Dog Cancer Test Challenged
- 1005091852 Cancer Society Was Wrong
- Characteristic
- EXTR, EXTRA
- MARG, MARGINALIA
- Date Loaded
- 24 May 1999
- UCSF Legacy ID
- baf91a00
Document Images
WsbN-.SnLE iN Toul~,vAk
q1 rc~~ 70 ~ ~~g
~
eagles, Srn~kingAniele t a BeTrinted
I
I
F
I
I
I..
I
I
I-
L
A controversial experiment
that used beagle doos in
evaluating the relationship of,
cigarette smoking to cancer will
be pubGshed by a scientific
journal.
the study decided to submit
their papers to her f o r
publication. "
"Smokino is a major public
health problem of our time and~
tthese findings deserve to be
Dr. Katharine Boucot o f( published;" she said. She added
-ZVynnewood, Pa., editor of the ~ that she welcomes all types of'
Archives o f Environmental
Hpalth; told the 1Vinston-Salpm
JournaI by telephone yesterday
she plans to pub:ish the study in
manuscripts and that many of
them are rejected.
Her publica,ion, one of 10
a press conference in New York, a letter in April that said, "The
City. " American Cancer S o c i e t y' s
The gist of the findina was exploitation of this unpublished
that cancer of the human type worf: for publicit'y purposes is
had' been produced in beagle truly tir-ithout precedent in the
does from cigarette smoke scientific community. And in
inhalation. June, the Tobacco Institutee
suggested in a letter to the
Since that announcement the president of the A m e r i c a n
,tobacco industry has sought the .1ledical Association that "it
full data on the Cancer Society might be helpfutif the AIIA at
experiment' "for evaluation by a this point. would release the.
panel of independent experts.to substance of the reviews in its
be designated by the Tobacco possession concerning t h i s
lnstitute and subject to the study, including any negative.
lapproval of the A m e r ic c a ni findings."
,Cancer Society." The institute Also in June the Tobacco
lotfcred to bear the costs oC such Institute called on, the Cancer
a winter issue, possibly , in ~ specialized publications of the
December. She said she could I American :liedical. Association
not say just when: has about 9,000 circulation and
The studS, she said, has been is distributed throughout the
returned by reviewers s h e ~ world. The maiw eomphasis of
h
hl
i
h
ne, s
e
er mont
3 maeaz
selected "to tear it apart" and i
report'~ back to her. The findings
are now being prepared for
publication.
said, is preventive medicine and;'a retitew. Society by letter "to a;ree to
impartial review which we
-i
the
ucli"
o
bl
f
t
r
en
nmen
s
pro
ems o
I The American C2ncer So
as pollUtion: etety's reply to the tobacco have requested"' and stated,
The stud y done by Dr: Oscar industry v, as that it wouU not "there is now good reason to
Her policy,, she said, is not to querbach, a research arantee ob'las'; these scientists to submit
lisuspect 'hat this report' was far
disclose the names of reviewers lthe American Cancer Soclet};,Itheir findings "to any selected, frcm
accurat'e and that it is
of such papers. \o editor does ( d I H d l committee chosen by thei likely that none of the dovs
de ~
D
E
C
this, she said.
u} er ammon , a ~
an
r.
,
vice president of the American( ToSacco Institute or any othe I veloped lung cancer."
Dr. Boucot said she did not
know just why the authors of
~-
Cancer Society, was announcedleroLp;
by the Cancer Society Feb. 5 at~l The: Tobacco InstitutP
criticize the American Cancer
( Society for the way it handled
the report of the dog experi-
ment and its failure to permit
;'an impartial review.
% Dr. Huoh H. Hussey of
FChicago, editor of the American
1lfedicat Association's Journall
jtold! the Winst'on-Salem Journal
by telephone yesterday that his
jpublication had given Auerbach
'and Hammond an opportunity
to "resubmit their
manuscripts" to the A:%f A
'Journal. Auerbach and Ham-
-mond decidecl uot to send their
manuscrii?ts back,
There had been claims by the
,Tobacco Institute that t h e
iAmeivcan Medical Association
had rejected the papers pre=
pared by Auerbach a n d
Hammond. This was not exactly
the case, Hussey said. The
.papers submitted: to t h e
American Medical Association
Journal were submitted to the
Consultants who made critical
xuogestions for revisions.
Hussey said the papers of
Auerbach and Hammond could
' have been published by the
: AMA Journal with corrections
and revisions as suggested by
h
consultants
=
~
e
rt:
s<W.,,
, -s.Qr "A,
:A,sr+WtA~. ~t
The tobacco industry throu.gh
issued its institute has continued to
i
,
