Tobacco Documents Online

......................................... Christopher Caldwtll Smoke Gets in Your Eyes But it probably doesn't give you cancer, despite what the EPA says. . weed to dust, and most people wou1Q psnt to pwtts. not the statt, the responsibility to keep than away frorn ponu- mnta. Aucrnpts to link bean diseau to ETS have not bdme frvit. And in 1996. a Yale University medical school study of asihmatics eapoaed to ETS showed thu not only did the smoke not cause any acuto rttp'uatory risit-it actually de- creuod bronchial eortstrietion. "Even with the 'rigged jury of standard sutistical proce• durca,' wrort Dr. Kevin Do 'n the lune 1991 issue orthe Briush joum ononur atrs,'-it turns out, contrary to {wpular myth, that thcm is still no convincing evidence in favour of the advcrse cffocts of passive smokin:.' Yet, a yaar previous to that, the EPA, having failed in its attcmpts to esnblish clear<ut and readily cottfumabk proof of the P roving dangers to non-smokcrs from "cnvironmental to- bacco smoke' (ETS, or "passive smoke") has not bettt escy for anu-smoking activists. While every nag in every airport waiting room complains about her '-smokc allergy,' no study has cver establiahcd aller- gonic propcrtics in tobacco smoke. While children have bcen shown to be sen- ;itlve to F.TS. it has long bccn knov,n thut chtldren arc more :ansutvc to any- Ikat in the air, from rag- Chrisropher Catdwdll is msisraer nmrtaglRl editor of The Amerinn speetttor. harms of ETS. had used a complicated and incgular scientific mute to clatm a minimal link. Patching to- getfKr spousal studies. the EPA claimed that womon marTied to smokers were 1.23 tlmes as likely to con- ¢act lung canca-and that ETS was to blame, The EPA teaked a draft risk as- sessmens describing emi- ronmental tobacco smoke as a "known human cu- cinogen.' The months since have sccn anu-smok- tnf activists catling for ntore legislation in public places, atd mbaem intarscs ard Gbertsriam poindng out gaps in what tAsy say is dishonest and politicized science. E spoatue to envitonmenral toh.cso smoke is dii}icult to measue by incsrments. Fuu of all, although im- sponsible scientiw have vied, one can't extrapolate lung eancu risk from dte dosagss aetlve smokers take into their lungs. For one, the substances are chemically and Quantitatively diRerent: "active" tobaao smoke is made up of sttoke psnicles-and pknty of them-while 'pastive' smoke is highly diluted, with a partiilIy vaporous content. In addition,'activ.' smokers take deep breaths through their mouths and hold the sRtoke in their tungs. 'Rauive' smokers breathe 4r=ely tht0qlt the nose, which filten out impurities. While blood tatu and tuine samples do show that non- smokers absorb nicaine from the smokets atound them, it 0 t1n Neerv,w spee+mr rd.y tysl s

. • is in such smatl doses tAat this can dt seen as a ttiumplt mete for modem sienafic :.ali`xacon Wn for any cause• andsifoct relationship. It's rstiw LiYt remarldn; tMt every cubic foot of ocean water contains ash from Mount Pinatubo. or that almost aU of the paper money in Miami eontains traea of conina-it's true, impressive, and mean- in;less. In teal•iik seu/n`s. tha dangers of pwculatrs are even Iess impressive. A 1918 study in the Inrernarional A.chives of Occupationaf Enviroeetteraf /Irat7h claimed that it would tike I i to 10 hours in an extremely smoka poUuted environment to absorb as much nieotine as a smoic• Cr takas in from ana cigarette. In Britain, whese smoking was legal on subway ttuns unul the mid-1980s and was un- lit recently permitscd on buses, the Freedom Organization (or the Riqht to Enjoy Smoking Tobacca admated that ene would have to ride in the smoking ss«on of a bus for four- and-a•half woeks to be exposed to one ciQuette's wonh of nicotine. It's poesible to meuure de'•respir7ble suspended parB• cles' that surround a smoker, but very difficult to disun- guish ham from other partictes that may be in the air 6om cookin=, rug fibers, car et- haust, atr-condicionin, ete. Pro-smoking activists like to menuon "sick buildin6 syn- drome- as an major cantrib• utor. At firnt {lAnce, callins poor ventilation a "syn- drome' and a health thrcat appears as hysterical as us- ing the word "choc•a'holic" to claim that tha scionce-fa- I seuches have sought s link in epidemiological st>,d;es '. sutdia based on the trsndars of aftliction acroes larse ;.c: tdatiotu. Here is what dse thirty midie that have been mn- dlrred to date teport: Iwenty-fasr show no snusr-lly sla- mricam link at all; sia show a weak link; nine show vst beinj maftied to a smoker acn+ally deenraur one's chance of c4ncactint; lung atscsl One would think that a combimd sotdy--showiny ETS exposure fram all nwca, inctudin` the work mviraimcnc and including oditr snsokinf family membors-would show a eleafer Rlatiaasltip Yet no cambiral study has ever show n a statistically si;niftcant assocution. Even shoddier is the hilutt of mos af ths lunt careu wts to probe cancsrs hisu} lositatly-dnt is-by funpling for onco=ens in cells of the in- tacted orpns. Only limited histokspr was done even mthe laqe and inAwntial 1961 Hirayama study from Japan. wh ch is the comentona of the ETS/nncer scare. As everyone knows, carwr metastasius, and failure to distinguish be- tween cancers ehat originated in the lunis and chose ;hai moved then lFem artaha orfan makes the fiDues considrs- ably "sotae- Tha Ff,eayama sntdy aLm tetied on qucsuon• naires, which made no at• tempt to determine whidt noeamokers were es-smok- ets. Than there is the qucs- don of contoundinz factors. like Dr. Gao's rapesced eil. Confounding factors in smoking are so numerous and unpredictable that it Ss almost impossible to unnv- "Active" smokers take deep breaths through their mouths and hold the smoke in their lungs. "Passive" smokers breathe largely through the nose, rvhich fflters out impurities. uonrsque u:nors that afi)Ics the true addict apply to soms- one who is basically a;luuon. But the 1916 Ccdionnaires' disease outbreak is a sick•buddinj; incident that cost twenty- nine lives, and occupauonal studies tend to bear the pro- smokers out: in only 2 to 4 percent of indoor air quality problems is tobacco smoke the major culprit. H ow much particulate mwer enten the air due to smaking? Anti-smokinS aetivists would have us believe a tremendous amount. Dr. David Burns. testifying before the Los Anplas City Council Health Commiuee, argued that particulues.'*rhen smoking is al- lowed. Iincreasel about ten-fold from the background lov- els.' This is simply falaebtsod in the serviea of anti-smok- int propapnda-a 1990 study of smoking sections in forty.one restaurants showed that only halt ot the paticu- lates wen from smoka: another study. from 1983, put the fi;ure at 2111 percent. As tar as eatind in resuurants is con- cemed, the cuisine might be as much of a risk as tlu smoke: a 1987 Shanghai study by Dr. Y.T. Gao and three resaarchen from the National Cancer Institute found that nonsmoking woman who cooked with rapeseed oil had an incidence o( lung cancer 2.5 times as high as those who cooked with soybean o[1. Given ths inefreetivenas of espostue measurements. re• 24 el smottini; as a eawe ftorn a welter of non-smokinQ bchsv• ias that smokers engage in with shoclrin` disproponion. Stanley Coten, a Canadian expett on "handedness,' wnus that a Study in lf•iettigan has shown ths left-handers smoke cansiderabty mon than rijht-handers.t ('fhey also die nine yeats esrtia-and na dtae to smohin=,) In 1990. two pspea published in tha lounrot of rJte Mterisan Medical Assoc a• tiat by ste¢stnoidn= raenrehers Alexander Glatsman and Rabns Anda sltowed dsat smokas wre sis times as ukcly as sqnsmotas to sttCer from ttsajor depression and twice as likely n suSa t)'om chronic deptnsion. David Krogh, an and-smoker, rensarked on the smoking personality in one of the maut fascinatini bootcs ot 1991 s: LMet being a ifaltiaa cr a xouha diver meke a person more or lw likNy ro te a smokwt ... Dew being in group A maYs )w my npre u'kdy te be a smatra than bNna in yeup 57 The .rwrr te Oir is elaeAY ye. You we more 1&ely (aid 'v+creu- alJy bYdy) r ba a srokar if you ee peer, for uInpat or if you aw pmrly edueatd. No ntrprisn there. But whu rbcut tThe f.Qt-ffae(er fyn/reAU: IfU CeYfd OI/ Con#qY(Ker a/ ft)t•Kanf.tnas. New Yark: 7)r hes hara. 3" peaes. SZt9J aSoo": TlleArrijteie/ laaia. N.w York: W.H. Freatnm rid carepany- 176 paps, $17. 91 T4 Arnon spWwar Mn 1991 2074144171

tbeae ehinv You ae mQe litsly to he a smoker J you re di- veee.4 yeu ~e t~e 1~e',itisiy u rase a sea Selt if yeu re a snwak.r: youn( whY wnsas ww Molte ue musE mon Iiksly to he binae drotken tha sre thair neesnek.nj counrrpeu (Y- meu haU as.6 a nsa twa so thtee dmw higMr Nae that of noa- fmokina wma): mrt who es dowrowardly mobitc mlaova'o theu parena sse reon likely to be rrokan, whJs man who se upwarAly moblle .e les loit.)y.. .. M a fyoup Ufey iatd to rank hiiha eha nmvnolters oe scalas dus mnsure risk-ukina efd unaeoe-ssekina. ... Smokes mnd to rank hiah in a masielktios of chracteruda Oat mllacti.dy ee refined b in the now quindy old-fash• iatd iam'aui•soeial." ... They W ro 6e nwn mbel)ioua" be n+crs dsfi.u, asd have higJter levels ef mismnduct. TLs mrrelaians fn Ns cateaory us vey smena. ... fmoYvs ss.n to have wha can atly be caUed a hiaAer ses deiv.-w pshe" • a lovra sac uNitztias--has tupumckas.... Smoka*s rank hi{h in impulsiveneu. . . . Fwlty, w have reuas to eelNM that imokY7 W mae henst than natsmok• tss ut the view of Qumrlvea dtss ihay Reaens to othrs. Hans Iurgen Eysessck whom Krogh describes as 'berhaps the best known psychologist in Britnitt atd crltainiy ane of the most iMuential psyeholo- gists in the world in the araa of persottality Uaory: has at- temple4 to tasonamiaa smok- ats' catfounding facsors, and considers Ihem so extensive as to undem,itse, rar the ptes- eat time, attempts to use smoking as an cdolejieol fae• tor in disesse ma's could be drauica)ly wmtsj: if his subjects ane disptoportiostatety ham workitsgelass itttfasvial ateu (Ney did), and ff smoking is mate peevaleat among the Japastese working classa (it is). lfsrayama's wives of smokcn would have a higher fafe df lung anca thaa wives of aon•smok- ers, regardtess of winklng behavior. FinaBy. ratos of lung cancer infection vary deutieally atzard'ag to ta[s and na• lionaliry: British epidaniologist P1tJ. Euteh showed in the 1970a that Fbw, who smoke only halt as much as Ameri- c.ans, are twice u likely to develop lung cancer. Using for• eign sotdics to atyiw at cancer links is like using AQican numbers to measure the thseu of ama in Nonh AmeAea- the entire m¢hanism of inreetioa may be ditfetent. !t's sigt nificant that the EPA did not cite a single U.S. study show- ing rs ETSkancer link in its risk asxssmettt.-in fant no U.S. study has ever found such a Gnh. A puticularly weak aspect of the 1990 EPA repon is that Jt is easy to see how a study such as Hiraya- I 4 naiad on meta-analysis. or weighting tlilferent mrd~ to arrive at an ag,peesee :ieure•-i.e., not analyxirtg data Sut atu/yztng arolyses. Ft's very useful in rortowins dovn con- ctusans from a bnmry of similar espenments with ssnular conryols, but inesponsible whea used-as it is herc-tu draw common asstunptiotts about dispsraro popu)ations. es. pedaJly when those populatiom have been establishcd as having vastly varying tates of aAlieticts. Thete wa obvious sclective bias u wor(t in the 1990 EPA risk ancsvnens Tltree of Ihe most comptshestsive studies of pssan smoke ever undertaken were irroxplinbly ezcludod &ete the risk as•^s^^ent: the so-citlltd Shitnizu and Sobue studies from Japan. and the latgest American case.,:onvol study ever condueted, by Luis Varela of Yale Univenny, which was later publisherd in the New EAalmd /ournd o/ MedIcine. None of the three studies showed any stausucal link between spousalsmak- ing aod lung cancer. Publica• tion bias, though not the EPA's hult is also a facux- studies showing no link be- tween ETS and lung cancer have tended not to be pub- lished, as they wcre non•news until the Hirayama study. As Michael Fumento has wnum of Ama in these pagas. 'Oc- easional heterose:ual cases will make news for the same reason that planes that crash make news while pWtes that lasd safety do nat' The EPA went out on a limb to classify passive smolx aa "Group A: Known Human Cueinogen,' even though most of the studios showed no signiricant nsk. some showad a negative tisk, and the dnal dsk ratio, after meta-analysis• was a slim 1.2g. (The highest ever recordcd for ETS was anothes Hlayama study, Ne sotalled "In• auYNHinyame." at 2.55.) whtn a similar assessment was made of ditael etnistions in 1989. the risk ratio was 2.6 and all die animal lab>raaxy tests wne out positive (a0 were negative for E75). Despite the soemingly gnvu thma4 d e EPA rated dicsel only as "Group B: PtobaEie Human Car- citsogen." An EPA teview of the ott:inogenic ptdperna of elecuwnagnede fiesds in 1990 found several risk ntios over 3.0, as weU u a"consistentiy repeated pattem of lym- phoma, leukemia, netvous system cancer and lymphoma in childhood studiu.' Bu eleetromagnetic fields were not deemed suffkienay perilous even to clasfity. The ETS risk assessment is the only one 1!u EPA has ever based solely on epidemiologieal evidwce.llte tact that it faIIed to meet the EPA's own seven•pofnt guidelines fix epidemioloQical stud- 0 na A.,,aSPMU, Ma,t>'a n

f 0 is of potential ort:inoSetu (itwed in 1999) makes it seem even moea It7ce advoeacy. Radical antiatnokers claim they nave to aet as advowm to eounter dr atlvoqoy of toateeco companiet, and iehaoeo interests do indad have major budgets for their own inde- ptxtdent rssearch inw smoktn= hatuds. But the industry hat no monopoly on the ptoGt motive. The EPA even commis- aoned anti•stnokinj activist Stanron Glam to write a chW tv in its dratt report on ETS haaards. Glants, who rnns ci8stetteywttin= seminars and develops anti-smokin= re=u. 4uons toe profit. had this to ssyt at the 1990 world eonter- errs on tabaceo and Health in Aussalia about his motives for oppaina envitonmmuJ smokc The rnain thina ths uiae. /us dons ae ehs isrw of ET3, in ad- ditien m help peopie like ma psy martataes, u it hu kait- imitad 1110 eeneerna thr people havs that they don't like ci8ueaa unoko. And that is a seon8 ueodaul forrr dut trods to be harnesue+d atd uNti. We're on a mR and fia baaanM aa anduM Others may be mouvatad to push bad se(ence not out of avarice but ignorance. There are even those who muddy the water out of a genuine social concern. Michael Cough, program manager of the SioloSical Applitations Rogram of the offiea of Technology As- aesstnent. chooeei to 1Qnore an's ann7al risk of eontractins lung cancer--Ia p- 100.006-and aee what danaef he poses to her. Jf we = cept, arluendo, tha 1,13 risk tuio, the srnokei s rite's n' risa to 61 per 100.J7p0. T7tat's 13 esta cases per IOOALC, Put simply' maximisin= in every way possible the most e= «ems scarurio painted by the EPA study, a smoking hus band has a t-in-a,10p chattes of Sivin= his wife lung nrce. in i given year in the futrtre. How resstnable is it to tarotn him with ahe prospect that he is slowly knocking off his loved ones? Jy, it poes wiotaw saying that sienrs suffers for the ause of snoldn6 ptevaw:wt. Jiut what if the cause itself tuNers? It ts not uncommon otat when bad sct- enee is ineodueed into the smscrtre of sociaJ poliry. the en- tira edifice of proscription and caution coilapsn. Jn 1985 the ]3ritish government sent a hystarical mailina on atLt to ev- ay household in the counay. Makio= dire prettiuions af an epidemic. it warned tha Ams was aa equal opportaniry da- eass Gom which no one wu sde, and tasd axrreme cau- tion for all. The result? otd ladies in provincial towns were peail'ted. Non-monoga- mona homosexuals and in- uavenous drug users, if con- vinced by the paeketthat their risk was no different frotn that of the rest of the eountry, now saw less reason thaa ever to modify their be- "The main thing the science has done an the issue of ETS, in addition to help people like me pay mortgages, is it has legitimized the concerns that people have that they don't like cigarette smoke." ihe science of ETS in the interest of roducin{ smakin=, a he indicated in an October 29, 19901etter to Thomas BotoJ- li. manager for sciendfk issues at Philip Morris: Widwut e.rehd redina of drc dwis rby 1+ds Vw1% rutdng m linh beweat ETS aM lung catoorl or untul mauian m tne ETS wts. I t.d b a8r.e with tJt. Yrsis trd dr Mealeau cluia; of your lou,r. On the eYSt hattd I pebaby pofautmy dissas with stry uss d+at otight be mads of de...neht.ims by JTi)iv Mtmis a+ny atAar tehmee emtqany. AnrhinS ttnt ndues anaFieg hu.ukst.vid hWdt bndlo, nd making smakes into Parinu, fw whstevcr raun, dm jup thtt lous from wiilinf ness to aoeept bad seienrs as a basis poliey? Citizens wishinj to exercise their tt'Deaisi, of cwrsa. and not just mrokers, As Dr: James La Fanu put it in 8ritain's Sanday TderraOk lan May. "Ws could reaeh a sitttation whem health aetivists, us- in= dubious scientific evidence, will be in a position to blaclmuil us into behaving the way they think we should. It is not an atteaedve prosptst' Second, on a mom personal level, the smoking widowv who has lost his wife to lung cancer-and whose being fur- Wer stigtnatizad as a murderer and a"pariah" is the {oal of the EPA report-loses again. For a closer examination of the gonnds on which the husband is mada a pariah. ln's take Ne highest available caimate of a non•smokinj wom- haviot Within a yea, the I-0rtdott Spee+aror was su8tesuae that this "public seniee' was aauallY *f0diAi A=. Closv to Mme. pranoid anti.drus oqaniradons tilrs t>us- nership for a DntS-Free America may be eaacerbuut8 the drug probleem by dematizin« drugs like marijuan&--tntld compered to the President's Hakion, and quite innocuous aomptnd b alminl. it is a point srarldy made by Ik. Lesrr QtYupooe. a Hsvod psychiartia and drug spsiaGA as wnt• tsn Itp by Riehatd Slow in an eacmlleat ezpa6 of Pumership dtatappaatd fa Wa~titt=eon's Ctry i'ape>' laa Deeemberr hnorahip adr ahwt mnju.u "xat. the heII' out at a hish- ashopl ssniot rtii tetdeot thsn aotl aC w eDJJese, whe. hia taaaunrs mwka eurijuana wiYt no app.r.nt dv.ne .Qeu q widmat Soinj os to shmt haoin. He betins to wond.r it h.'s bod IJd bW aM wind6 up uyinj pot ta hinuelf. He li•a. Jfevina rejaeud 1tWrrch{q waminp about muiju.na. h. tniaM aubquendY raj.ct mm+ imPonant w.aOas cbau ri.M- N mup n.b a oeraLr or bwein. Such a beckJash could result if poople consider the yues- tionable scienea of environtnental tobacco amoke reason to ignore iJte suqeon (eneral's and other warnings on the baxatds of tobaeeo smoking itself. If so, the EPA's hasty risk nssessment could create more than inconvenience, raneot, and diminished personal liberty-it could create anoters. O ~ u 71cA.wtoesP~ M.yt992 2074144173