Tobacco Documents Online

R.J.Reyno(ds Tobacco Company Winstan-Salem, N.C. 27102 (919) 741-5000 nJn October 19, 1989 Memorandum to the file: A meeting was held at The Rockefeller University to develop a position that might be taken regarding the Canadian study of passive smoking which was prepared by a group of scientists under the leadership of Professor Spitzer of the University of Toronto, Canada. In attendance were Dr. K. Ueberla, Director, Institute for Medical Information, Biostatistics and Epidemiology at the Ludwick Maximillion University in Munich, West Germany; Bill Butler, a statistical consultant; Fred Seitz and me. The meeting was initiated by Jim Fyock on behalf of RJR. We spent several hours discussing Professor Ueberla's position relating to environmental tobacco smoke and his position relating to the Canadian study in general. From the beginning it was Profess6-r Ueberla's position that he would not criticize the study in public; however, he felt that a private discussion regarding his opinions might be useful. Professor Ueberla stated that he had been only marginally involved and had taken part in only one meeting. He did say that one of his former colleagues had been more involved and had attended several of the meetings of the working group. He also said that from the beginning and even now he would limit himself to ETS and cancer. Dr. Ueberla spent a day with Professor Spitzer during which time they agreed upon a statement which basically said that the data were insufficient to draw any conclusions relating ETS and cancer. This statement was altered by the working group and did not appear in the final document as agreed upon. Professor Ueberla is in agreement with us that this places the document in a precarious position. He also feels that the methodology is flawed.

Memorandum to the File October 19, 1989 Page 2 We talked about whether or not it was advisable for Professor Ueberla to try to get the statement changed; it was the consensus that if we got the statement changed that it would lose its validity because of the extremely poor methodology upon which the data were evaluated. Professor Ueberla agrees with Dr. Butler's evaluation of the lack of appropriate use of the methods that the working group state were used. Professor Ueberla is going to call Spitzer and suggest that his name be withdrawn from the document; if Spitzer wants his name to remain on the document Ueberla will ask to write a minority report on the cancer issue only. Ueberla's desire is to have his name removed and have no document either as an amendment or as a letter to the editor. Overall, it was a good meeting; Ueberla seems to be a reasonable individual and he is someone that we should keep in mind for future ETS needs. AWH:jp cc: Dr. G. Robert Di Marco