Tobacco Documents Online

-8- asked the industry to agree to a number of proposals in the smoking and health field which would be referred to late~ in the talk. The industry had decided to play for time on the grounds that the proposals would need much consideration and had not, in fact, written to the Minister until shortly before the October election when the Minister was engaged in canvassing in his own constituency. This letter merely stated the industry's willingness to meet Ministry representatives to discuss. the proposals and, in fact, no meeting took place until 4th February this year, when Dr. Owen and his officials met T.A.C. No conclusions were reached at this meeting and the industry, in fact, offered no positive concessions except on one or two minor matters. By the beginning of April, Dr. Owen had clearly lost patience with the industry and he then made a statement in the House of Commons in which he said that the industry had been resistant or unco-operative with regard to the various proposals which he had made to them. He also pre-empted the negotiating situation over the new health warning wording by stating that J the publication of tar and nicotine results would, in future, carry the following wording:- "Warning: Smoking causes lung cancer, bronchitis, heart diseases", and that he had asked the industry to use this warning in future on packs and advertisements. About a month later, on the 12th May, a debate took place in the House of Lords in which an extremely efficient attack on smoking and the industry was made by Baroness White supported by Lord Wells-Pestel and others. Both this debate and the previous Commons statement by Dr. Owen received tremendous press and television coverage. Furthermore, over this period two extremely damaging television programmes entitled "Dying for a Fag" were produced, on the second of which Dr. Owen himself appeared and was highly critical of the industry. The programmes sh~ed horrifying lung cancer operations and attracted considerable attention in the press. The industry had refused to nominate a representative to appear on the programmes and so did individual companies. The producer of the programme then appeared at the Imperial Annual General Meeting and attempted, unsuccessfully, to obtain an answer from Imperial as to why it had not been willing toappear on the programme. J Concurrently with all this publicity, N.S.M. Limited, the I.C.I./Imperial substitute company, was being pilloried in the press and electronic media for its N.T.M. cigarette experiments on beagles. At least 70 M.P.'s signed a motion in the House, -~ organised by the Anti-Vivisection. Lobby, and some 0 two million members of the public are estimated to 0 have signed petitions. ~o In all these circumstances, there were not many ~-4 critics of the tobacco duty increase imposed by the Chancellor in his budget. Co BATCo document for PFSFC 2 March 1999

--7-- As will be clear from the above, the industry has never in its history been in worse odour than it is at present and the credibility and integrity o~ T.A.C. is now at stake. Moreover, the situation was considerably worsened by the totally unsatisfactory T.A.C. meeting with the Ministry of Health officials on the 24th April when the industry showed that it was divided on Dr. Owen's proposals and was unwilling or unable to make any positive concessions. As a result, Mr. Macadam. wrote to the No. l's of the other four companies on the 29th April, informing them that B-A.T. regretfully would have to consider leaving both the T.A.C. and the T.R.C. unless the industry could decide on positive concessions it would be prepared to make, since B-A.T. was not prepared to be associated with bodies which would have lost the respect of the public and the Government unless the industry changed its attitude. Immediately following this letter, Messrs. Stewart Lockhart and Sheehy visited the recipients to emphasise to them personally B-A.T.'s views. Mr. Macadam, who was by then in the U.S.A., also spoke on the telephone to Mr. Hugh Cullman of J Philip Morris to point out to him that his U.K. company were acting against industry interests in their attitude over sponsored racing cars. Imperial and Gallaher then met and produced a paper for T.A.C. which outlined the points on which they were prepared to make concessions and also the points on which the industry must stand firm and insist on legislation if necessary. A T.A.C. meeting then took place on the 21st May and the following conclusions were reached on the proposals which Dr. Owen had made:- (a) Tar qroups on packs T.A.C. would offer to print tar groups on the tear-tape in spite of the legal reservations it had. Individual companies could qualify the wording for legal reasons if they so desired. (b) Reduced wordinq of health warninq T.A.C. would offer the following wording: J (c) "Warning byH.M. Government. Smoking is dangerous to your health." If Dr. 0wen insisted on no Government attribution or on the inclusion of diseases in the warning, T.A.C. would refuse and make it clear that he would have to legislate. Television advertisinq of ciqarillos (rod made0 cigarette style products) O T.A.C. would offer to withdraw from the advertising of cigarillos on television. ~-j t24 ~D BATCo document for PFSFC 2 March 1999

(d) Free samples • T.A.C. would offer to confine free samples to:~ (i) Person to person distribution (by Company representatives or retailers). (ii) Personally addressed mail to known adults. (e) Advertising Standards Authority cigarette advertising code T.A.C. would accept the amendment proposed bl the Ministry with one or two exceptions. (f) Cinemas T.A.C. would offer to remove cinema adverti from all films except "X" films from which child~ were totally excluded in any case. ("X" films represent 46% of total films shown). Philip Morris alone refused to accept this. (g) Sponsorship T.A.C. would agree with the Ministry code of practice for sponsorship. Ch) Imperial and Philip Morris are the only two companies to sponsor racing cars. The former wou agree to withdraw all names, symbols and insignia from these and similar vehicles of other kinds. Philip Morris, however, refused to agree to this. Coupons It was agreed that T.A.C. would offer to reduce the two coupon brands in the high tar group so that these brands came into the middle tar group but no other concession could be made. (i) Voluntary contribution to the Health Eduction Council based on a percentage of advertising expenditure T.A.C. would not agree to this under any circumstances and would make it clear to Dr. Owen that he would have to legislate to ~h~-~ h~, p opo l 100427751 During this meeting Philip Morris d~up~u a completely maverick attitude. It stated that it considered that the Imperial/Gallaher paper was • merely aimed at preserving the present U~K. market status quo. Cinema advertising and sponsored racing cars were most important to Philip Morris but these j had ~t been included in the concessions made, j whereas coupons had been virtually omitted. BATCo document for PFSFC 2 March 1999

-!!- (6) Since these concessions only affected small shares of the market competitors, Philip Morris reserved its right to go unilaterally to the Ministry and to submit its own proposals. If the T.A.C. made a submission outlining these concessions the Ministry quoting Philip Morris by name as an exception, Philip Morris would feel at liberty to state its views to the press as well as to the Ministry. Mr. Stewart Lockhart, on behalf of B-A.T., then said that if Philip Morris persisted with this unreasonable attitude and if the industry could not reach prompt agreement, B-A.T. might have to consider taking the action indicated in Mr. Macadam's previous letter. A draft T.A.C. letter to the Ministry was being cleared with the companies involved but it was not known yet what Philip Morris's attitude would be. It seemed likely they would submit a minority view. It was reported that the Hunter Committee report and guidelines were to be published on the 9th June or shortly thereafter as a H.M. Stationery Office publication. Further detailed information on this subject would be made available at the meeting under item 5 on the agenda. WORLD TRENDS IN SMOKING Mr. Sheehy tabled eight charts on various aspects of this subject, and his comments on the charts are attached as Appendix 'A'. C~ CD tjn ~O BATCo document for PFSFC 2 March 1999

3. SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH (a) (c) Comparison of smokinq with other health hazards Lunq cancer rates in different countries Mr. Widdup enquired, on behalf of Mr. Foley, whether any data was available which permitted a comparison of mortality statistics for lung cancer with other causes of death such as road accidents, heart attacks, cancer at other sites and other diseases. In reply, Dr. Green tabled some charts on lung cancer rates in various countries, based on the latest published W.H.0. Statistics up to 1970. Delegates from Germany and the U.S.A. indicated that there were more recent data available for their countries which extended the findings to 1974, and, in the case of Germany, showed a stabilisation in the overall mortality statistics. J v It was pointed out that intercomparisons between countries were not feasible for a variety of reasons, including different standards of death certification and attribution of the primary cause of death, variations in the population distribution across the age groups and so forth. Nevertheless, the W.H.O. figures were probably the best data available. How the data might be used was discussed and it was suggested that it gave no support for the emotive statements by anti-smokers that there was an "epidemic" situation. Dr. Hughes offered to make available studies by Dr. Kastenbaum, the statistician of the Tobacco Institute. Mr. Widdup foresaw the danger that a reduction in the incidence of lung cancer would be attributed to lowering levels of T.P.M. and would lead to increased pressure by anti-smokers for even greater reductions in T.P.M. He, therefore, wanted to j get lung cancer deaths put into perspective against other causes of death. The suggestion that each Company should collect data for their own country and send it to the Centre was qualified by the need to define the data to be collected. Although the industry is often attacked on the social cost to the community in terms of days lost due to illness associated with smoking, it was pointed out that morbidity statistics, as opposed to mortality data, are seldom available. In parenthesis, Mr. Pare noted that in Canada, the social costs of alcoholism and drug addiction were both rated greater than that of tobacco. I CD C~ It was agreed that a number of causes of death would be selected and the W.H.O. statisticis on these would be collated and compared, and the data circulate~ BATCo document for PFSFC 2 March 1999

{b) Hiqhliqhts of recent external research - . % Dr.-Felton reviewed this subject. Papers contxnue % to appear on components in tobacco smoke which might be considered hazardous. These included nitrosonornicotine C (a breakdown product of nlcotine), vlnyl chlorlde monc~e~ and polonium-210. A suggestion that nic~ne correlated ~ Ilwithtum°rigenicityinm°use-skintests~~uire~ confirmation in a specific experiment~gaT~T~t~antlme, T.R.C. had decided against publishlng'~esults it already had obtained. The advent of league tables in Germany \ for carbon monoxide and oxides of nitrogen was noted and attention was drawn to a recent publication in the U.K. advocating a low tar/high nicotine cigarette. Work aimed at defining a susceptible minority of smokers An terms of the inducibility of a specific enzyme system (AHH) was reviewed. Reference was made to a recent lO-year follow-up epidemiological study in Sweden which reiterated most of the earlier findings of the association of various J diseases with smoking, but, in addition, appeared to demonstrate that pipe smokers had an equally high risk of lung cancer as c~garette smokers ana zha~ %he same risk~as men, when the data-were balanced for e~uai ~on~,pti~, i=vel~. Although it is as yet unpublished, it was understood that Wynder was about to claim that smokers in the U.S.A. of low tar (not exceeding 15 mg T.P.M.) cigarettes who consumed only 20 cigarettes a day over the last 15-20 years ran no greater risk of lung cancer than non-smokers. Mr. Bryant and Dr. Stutzer confirmed that Wynder had recently told them the same figure and he was said now to be turning his attention away from lung cancer to the association of nicotine with heart disease. (d) In connection with susceptible minorities, Dr. Hughes reported that the project at Washington J University, St. Louis, had failed to provide immuno- logical evidence of such groups. Despite the claims of Wynder, it was considered that lung cancer was still an important subject in the U.S.A. partly because it was easier to investigate than other smoking-associateddi eases such as emphysema and coronary heart disease. However, in Australia, it had been alleged that the preoccupation of the industry with lung cancer was to divert attention away from the bigger problem of heart disease. Dr. Hughes reported that independent medical O scientists who published objective reviews of, e.g. C~D passive smoking, were then subject to virulent attack ~o by anti-smoking doctors. ~-4 Is there sufficient research on the association of smokinq with diseases? This was raised by Mr. McCarty and Dr. Hughes added that the aim was to develop work to break the casuality lin . ........ BATCo document for PFSFC 2 March 1999

(e) (f) It was said that T.R.C. did not do much defensive research and that it was difficult to find any U.K. medical" researchers prepared to undertake such w~rk or even to work on the susceptible minority concept. Thls did not appear to be the case in the U.S.A. and Australia. It was pointed out that for very many people smoking had positive benefits and that these should be demonstrated. Mr. Widdup recalled that such a .... review had been promised following the first conference in Montreal and Professor Rand had agreed to undertake it, but subsequently backed out. Mr. Ricard questioned the need for further work on benefits of smoking because the consumer was already aware of these. Dr. Green suggested that more work was needed on why people smoked and drew attention to the risk that nicotine might be indicted. It was pointed out that considerable sums had been expended in the U.S.A. and Canada on the subject of smoking as a relief from stress. . Hiqhliqhts of internal research Dr. Green surveyed the Group progran~ne of biological research, recalling that the main effort had been put on mouse-skin painting. This would now be given credibilit~ by the Hunter guidelines which would call for such studies. A parallel series of initiator/promoter tests on mouse-skin would not be endorsed by Hunter despite efforts by the industry to indicate its potential importance. Progress had been made in the development of inhalation tests and delegates would have an opportunity of seeing this during the forthcoming visit to Southampton. Dr. Green then summarised the results of the biological research programme (see Appendix 'B'). ~~e possibility of'removing initiitors~rom smoke was not considered feasible in view of their nature. The belief that atmospheric pollution or previous smoking history could have already caused initiation underlined the importance which was attached to promoters. GroupR. & D. objectives in the smokinq and health context Dr. Green's paper, which had been precirculated, was discussed. Dr. Hughes felt that the item which read "Interpretation of Smoking and Health Discoveries" created a difficulty in that it called for medical ~udgments for which the necessary background and training was lacking. It was pointed out that judgments had been made in the past in respect of lowering tar deliveries and eliminating materials which might be alleged to be hazardous to the consumer. After further discussion, Dr. Green proposed an alteration to "Commenting on Smoking and Health Discoveries" and this was agreed. 100427755 BATCo document for PFSFC 2 March 1999

(g) (h) Publication of bioloqlcal/product research Mr. McCarty and Dr. Hughes sought the views of the Conference as to the desirability of publishing the results of sponsored biological research on product modifications which may be highly positive. While it was generally agreed that any reliable scientific work should be submitted for publication, it was felt that it would be a health claim, and therefore improper, for the publication to be referred to, even obliquely, in advertisements. Any reference to the product development should depend upon the media picking it up from the scientific literature. Mr. Pare, in particular, counselled against using the smoking and health issue as a marketing tool and suggested that conflicting health claims between competing companies would result in Government intervention and the discrediting of the industry. Mr. Macadam warned that, unless care was taken, the introduction of non-tobacco materials into the U.K. market could lead to a breakdown into a competitive situation with claim and counter-claim. Dr. Stutzer indicated that an unscrupulous competitor could circlunvent industry agreements by arranging for the publication of slanted reports. Mr. Sheehy suggested that such advantages could be of a very temporary nature, in that it would lead to retaliatory articles and adverse reactions. The use of publications by a manufacturer was a very questionable point. Life expectancy of smokers Mr. Widdup referred to published statements that smoking a cigarette shortened a smoker's life expectancy by iO or so minutes and said that Australia were looking ~or authoritative data on this subject. Although some delegates felt the validity of such : data was questionable and the conclusions unjustifiable~ the crude arithmetical calculation was about right for smokers of 20 cigarettes a day if the life expectancy of smokers was about 4 or 5 years less than that of non-smokers. It was pointed out that the position was complicated by variations in consumption level and by variations in smoking habit. Mr. Pare drew attention to some Life Assurance companies which offered modified rates for non-smokers and, while it was pointed out that it was difficult to isolate the risk from smoking from that of drinking alcohol and other factors, it was agreed to seek data in this area from actuaries and, perhaps, the Tobacco Institute statisticians and T.R.C. O O ~O BATCo document for PFSFC 2 March 1999

4. EXTERNAL RELATIONS AND POLICY IN THE FACE OF CONSTRAINTS AND THREATS TO THE INDUSTRY "" (a) Social unacceptability It was reported that the momentum of this trend was growing in the U.S. The U.S. industry accepted that action was needed, particularly in response to initiative" taken by small local groups to influence State and Municipal legislation in this field. The Tobacco Institut Executive Committee had recently agreed to test two advertising campaigns (attributable to the Tobacco Institute), although no final commitment to them would be made until the industry was satisfied that the tests had proved satisfactory. The tests would be conducted under controlled distribution. The campaigns were as follows:- (i) Magazine and newspaper advertisements based on the historic contribution to the U.S.A by the tobacco industry - the key note being "mother- hood". Philip Morris was particularly keen on this idea although other companies had reservations. (ii) A campaign built on the recognition that smoking is indeed a prominent social issue - with advertisements on the following lines:- (a) Conversations in which the views of the "reasonable man" were expressed. (b) Advertisements pointing to the excessive . concern of Government to control people's (c) private lives. "._J Advertisements making the point that the answer to the problem was common courtesy rather than legislation. In addition, the Tobacco Institute had hired a young man and a young woman to talk about the smoking problem to clubs and other organisations and to appear on television programmes. Both these people were non-smokers and attractive personalities. The line that they took was in no way provocative: they merely presented the other side of the question. So far, the public had appeared to be very receptive to them and the tobacco industry planned to engage more people for the same purpose. In areas where legislation was pending the Tobacco Institute had also hired lobbyists to organise the forces opposed to such legislation. There were eight such lobbyists in all, each having responsibility for 100427757 BATCo document for PFSFC 2 March 1999

a geographical area, and to date they had quite a good success record. It should be emphasised that in all the above activities a conciliatory tone was adopted and this was the first time that the industry was publicly recognising that smoking could be criticised on social grounds. In a related area a woman in Texas had organised a "courteous smoking" campaign, originally aimed at would-be legislators, but now addressed to smokers and neutral non-smokers in general, using the slogan "Smoke Friendly". It was reported that in Germany the industry was thinking on somewhat similar lines but they planned to achieve results through articles and editorial comment rather than paid space advertising. In this respect it was fortunate that B-A.T. had very good relations with the press. Australia was facing a somewhat different problem in that up and coming politicianb and administrators saw smoking and health as a bandwagon on which they could climb to make their reputations. As mentioned under item 2 of the agenda, the industry was taking steps to deal with this situation which was really a political problem rather than a "grass-roots" movement. This did not mean, however, that the "socially unacceptable" issue would not emerge on a broader front in the future. In Canada social unacceptability was the biggest single problem at present but it was not yet acutely serious. The canadian industry was concerned about the danger of causing back-lash by any action it took and was watching carefully developments in the U.S.A. arising from the Tobacco Institute's activities there. ~. An attempt had been made to co-operate with the Ministry of Health in planning a moderation programme but the Minister decided that he could not involve his Ministry in such a project because he feared that the programme would only make people smoke more. In the U.K. there was much evidence that social unacceptability was becoming a major threat and it was recognised that the T.A.C. would have to consider very seriously what could be done about it. It was agreed that B. & W. would submit to Millbank, for circulation to all delegate countries, a description of the activities of the two young people 8ngaged by the Tobacco Institute, together with newspaper reports on these activities, and that when the test results of the two advertising campaigns were available these should also be sent to Millbank and circulated. C~ CD tj1 co BATCo document for PFSFC 2 March 1999