Tobacco Documents Online

HORACE R.KORNEGAY PRESIDENT 6 EXECVT1vE DIRECTOR 296-8434 This letter is being sent to you to reveal the facts: about what may be P one of the great scientific hoaxes of our time. Eight months ago--just as House and Senate conferees were about to meet and resolve different versions of the 1970 cigarette bill--the American Cancer Society called a news conference at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in New Yorl: City. It announced that two researchers had "for the .first time" produced lung cancer in dogs as a result of heavy cigarette smoking. It was, in the Cancer Society's view, a "significant achievement, It which, should have a "significant impact"' on cigarette smoking, lead to "a reassessment" of cigarette advertising, and "effectively refute"'the ciga- rette industry's contention that previous charges were "'only statistical. " The mass media accepted the unevalnzated andunverified findings at face value, duly displayed the story on front pages, and exposed it on prime- time television. The Cancer Society did not reveal that the experiment was as yet unpublished in any professional journal and had not been evaluated by any independent scientific reviewers. Walter Cronkite broadcast the Society's claim that "this is the first such direct cause-effect link between cigarettes and higher animals made to inhale. " A Reader's Digest article stated: "h''ever again can the tobacco industry hide behind its most used defense--that no one had induced cancer in laboratory animals with cigarette smoke. " newspapers as declaring; ". .. We have snapped the la~st link in the chain .. There is no question that there is a cancer causing agent in cigarette smoke. 1,KZ~~_, One of the researchers who conducted the experiment was quoted in THE TOBACCO I N ST ITUT E„ I N C. 1776 K STREET, NORTHWEST WA'S H I NGTON, D. C. 20006 -_•

I V F I I I producing cancer in dogs with anything, or mice, or any other animal, and this was not our purpos e in thes e ex-perirnents."' The Tobacco Institute believes that "the case of the smoking dogs" is a misuse of science. It has misled the public and, if left unchallenged, it could help influence Congress to impose even more restrictive laws againstt cigarette advertising, tobacco agriculture and even smoking behavxor. In- the strong Senate bill on advertising when House-Senate conferees meet later "smoking dog" press conference, a Senator issued a press release praising the research and stating: "This only confirms my determination to fight for deed, on the very day eight months ago that the Cancer Society heM its this month. " cused, and the public misled by such misuse of science. This is not the first time that tobacco products have been unfairly ac- For over 15 years, the Congress and the Nation have been targets of unprecedented anti-cigarette lobbying consisting of dire warnings, televised "fear"' commercials, statistical distortions--instead of solid scientific evi~- dence. The smoking and health controversy must be resolved, in the only way , possible--by the facts, by objecti~ve scientific research. Conducting a crusade against a scapegoat is so much easier. But it is an unworthy substitute. The American people deserve better. . That is why the tobacco industry is funding more independent scientific research in the field of smoking and health than any other organization, govern- mental or private. And that is why the tobacco industry stands ready to commit additional funds to support additional scientific research that offers to shed light on any facet of this'important question. I am enclosing, for your information, a copy of a letter which Represent- ative Tim Lee Carter of Kentucky sent to the Surgeon General of the U'. S. Public Health Service. Rep. Carter, who is also a physician, raises some grave questions about the Surgeon General's endorsement, sight unseeny of this most dubious beagle experiment. With kindest regards and best wishes, I am