Tobacco Documents Online

5 smoking through health education campaigns and the media. Research shows that whether one smokes or quits smoking is a very individual deci- sion and has little relation to warnings against smoking. The fact that millions of people con- tinue to smoke despite such warnings is merely an indication that they have exercised their free- dom of informed choice. In fact, there may be a risk of over-warning the public and reducing the public's confidence in government. Where governments have believed it appropriate to require such labels, the Industry has always complied. In our consumers' interests, we believe it is important that labels be accurate, neither exaggerating nor misstating the facts, and be properly attributed to the appropriate government authority. 13. CLAIM: "Passive" smoking harms non- smokers. Certainly, tobacco smoke may be an annoyance or a nuisance to some people but it is not a demonstrated health hazard. Probably because tobacco smoke is so easily recognised, it has become an easy target for those who want a quick, simple solution to the problem of indoor air quality. However, measure- ments taken under realistic conditions indicate that the contribution of environmental tobacco smoke to the air we breathe is minimal. Based on the results of one study on nicotine found in cocktail lounges, restaurants, bus and airline ter- minals, it is estimated that a nonsmoker would have to spend 100 hours straight in the smokiest bar to inhale the equivalent of one single filter-tip cigarette. Concentrating on tobacco smoke ignores the fact that adequate ventilation should always be provid- ed in any enclosed space, regardless of whether or not smoking is permitted. 10

Surely people can solve their problems of per- sonal annoyance through courtesy and discussion between themselves without need for laws and police force. Other personal habits may be equally or more annoying. If we start legislating personal behaviour, where will it stop? 14. CLAIM: Parents harm their children by smoking at home. Even a US Surgeon General's report has con- ceded that studies linking parental smoking to lung disorders in children have produced inconsis- tent and often conflicting results. Other factors have been shown to be associated with children's health, including the history of infections of others in the home, the location of the home in relation to industry and exposures to pollutants, and even the use of gas cooking stoves in the home. Common sense tells us that parents may wish to avoid many behaviours when around their chil- dren. This is a personal decision that parents alone should make as to what may be best for their children. 15. CLAIM: Nonsmokers have the right to smoke-free air. Good manners and common courtesy have gener- ally protected the delicate balance of individual rights not already covered by law. The fact that an activity may not be shared by all persons does not affect its legitimacy nor another person's right to engage in it. Varying theories of community property law would probably dispute individual rights to the air we breathe. Studies on air quality have concluded that tobacco smoke does not play a major role when compared to indoor pollutants such as building materials, furnishings and heating sys- tems or outdoor industrial and environmental 11

exposures. Smokers and nonsmokers alike have an interest in preserving air quality but it is clear that tobacco smoke is neither a major culprit nor a major priority. t 16. CLAIM : Smoking causes social costs and produces no benefits. Blaming smoking for rising social costs is an over- simplified attempt to solve a complex problem. Social services like medical care and national health services are set up for the greatest benefit to the total population - not on a "pay as you use" basis for selected groups. Many lifestyle factors have been associated with disease causation, and therefore it is highly inac- curate to attribute a person's illness and absence from work to any one factor. Some suggest that smokers create less cost than nonsmokers over a lifetime - should smokers be granted reductions in taxes and insurance pre- miums? Should people who pay for social serv- ices but do not use them be exempt from these social charges? Research has reportedly shown that reducing smoking would not reduce, but may even increase, health care costs. Obviously, the use of fiscal penalties to modify personal behaviour is both ineffective, discriminatory and inappropriate. Such claims ignore the fact that tobacco is an important generator of employment, tax revenue, and foreign exchange. As the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) has pointed out: "the cultivation and manufacture of tobacco results in a number of immediate and tangible so- cial and economic contributions, particularly in the poorer producing countries." In the twelve Member States of the European Community, it is estimated that almost 1.8 million people are en- gaged in tobacco growing, manufacturing and re- tailing. Underlining these broader economic ben- 12

efits, tobacco has apparently provided pleasure for centuries to smokers throughout the world. 17. CLAIM: Smoking should be banned in workplaces since it increases employer costs and reduces productivity. Smoking has not been proven to be a health haz- ard either to smoking or nonsmoking workers. Therefore, workplace policies against smoking are only justified where there is a clear danger to products and equipment such as food, sensitive machinery and chemicals. Claims that smoking increases employer costs through higher medical and insurance expenses are largely unsubstantiated. Insurance rates for workers' compensation are determined by oc- cupational category, not by employees' smoking habits. As researchers poini out, smokers may have higher insurance and accident rates but only because as a group they are employed more often in occupations with greater exposure to physical harm. Concentration on smoking may be diverting attention from industrial exposures known to affect health. Moreover, those who claim that smokers are ab- sent from work more often than nonsmokers rely on a statistical association that is weak at best. One expert has argued that th higher rates of absenteeism and smoking may simply relate to and reflect other factors including age, sex, family responsibilities, job satisfaction and commuting time. Research has also reportedly shown that smokers are not less productive than nonsmokers. In fact, one study found that smokers were actually more productive than-nonsmokers. We believe that good sense and common courte- sy between smoking and nonsmoking employees should govern decisions about smoking at work. ~ ON 13 I

The question of when and how workers may smoke is best settled by employer and employee consensus, not by legislation. 18. CLAIM: Tobacco advertising should be banned since it encourages people, particu- larly the young, to smoke. Advertising cannot force anyone to buy anything. It can only inform or influence choice once the consumer has already decided a particular pro- duct is needed. In mature or saturated markets like tobacco, advertising creates brand loyalties. Its purpose is not to get people to smoke but rather to get established adult smokers to switch brands. Existing limits on advertising have reportedly not succeeded in reducing total consumption or even in slowing its growth. Even in certain Eastern Eu- ropean countries where modern cigarette adver- tising has never been permitted, sales have in- creased more rapidly than in others where adver- tising is allowed. For example, the percentage in- crease in cigarette smoking in Hungary, Poland and Bulgaria has been three to five times that of the United Kingdom or the United States. Like- wise, sales have continued to rise in Western Eu- ropean countries imposing tobacco advertising restrictions or even complete bans, as in Norway and Finland. The ineffectiveness of such measures is under- standable since researchers report that advertising does not play a significant part in the initiation or continuation of smoking. Instead, the desire to smoke appears to arise from a combination of personal and social factors. Social scientists studying why young people be- gin smoking have concluded that the example of friends or family members may have a determin- ing influence. Clearly, no one favors smoking by young people. We believe smoking is an adult 14

custom, an adult decision based on mature in- formed freedom of choice. 19. CLAIM: Sponsorship by tobacco companies is used to circumvent advertising restrictions. Certainly not - we are extremely careful to en- sure that all our sponsorship activities are com- pletely in line with all regulations. We sponsor cultural activities for the same rea- sons as other organizations dealing with the pub- lic, namely to gain goodwill by associating the Company with community activities and to get public recognition as a good corporate citizen. Philip Morris has also gained considerable good- will from its sports sponsorship but, more impor- tantly, our involvement has benefited the par- ticipants and the public. We believe those who would censor tobacco sponsorship of sport are making a serious mistake since without this incal- culable commercial support many sports would not have become as popular as they are today and, in some cases, they would no longer even exist. Over the years, Philip Morris has established an enviable record both of the extent of our sponsor- ship largess and of our compliance with all rules governing sponsorship participation. 20. CLAIM: The tobacco industry does little to solve health questions about smoking ex- cept to deny that smoking is harmful. So far, the tobacco industry has committed more than $130 million worldwide for independent re- search on smoking and health questions. In fact, industry awards have often exceeded that of gov- ernment departments and have always exceeded research funding by voluntary health associations which regularly spend more of their donated funds on administration and public relations cam- paigns than for actual research. 15

Industry grants are made to independent scien- tists and institutions who have full freedom to publish their findings whether or not they are "favorable" to the industry. Through this research, valuable data concerning lung cancer, heart dis- ease, chronic respiratory diseases and other ail- ments have already been gathered. But more re- mains to be learned and the industry's commit- ment-will continue. References to the information contained in this brochure can be obtained from the Corporate Affairs Department, Philip Morris EEC Region in Lausanne, Switzerland. 16

Produced by the Corporate Affairs Department of Philip Morris EEC Region Brillancourt 4 Case postale CH-1001 Lausanne Switzerland Tel. (021) 271311