Tobacco Documents Online

basic safety and health, the government has always enacted regu- lations, particularly where we can't wait for the individual restaurant owners to do it. Today, in the District of Columbia, sensitive non- smokers can't enjoy their meal. And they don't want to wait another 5 or 10 years while the restaurant owners wake up and find out about it. [Applause] FITZMAURICE: Now we have a chance for the audience to ta ke a crack at th i s.... ALAN CRUSELL (?): I'm Alan Crusell from Washington, D.C. And my question is to Mr. Dwyer. I realize that it's extremely difficult to figure out a way to protect everyone's rights in regards to tobacco smoking. So I would like to address myself to another problem area. About half of the cigarettes sold in New York City are bootlegged from such states as North Carolina. And I was wondering, should the New York taxes on cigarettes be reduced so that organized crime will not find it worthwhile to bootleg cigarettes to their city? DWYER: You betcha. Thanks for raising that point. 1 f anyth i ng hes ps to suggest what can happen when I aws and regulations get out of step with human nature -- and I have to say, John, you can't repeal human nature, as hard as you try, any more than you can fool Mother Nature. 1-95 has been turned into the new Tobacco Road. The cigarette state tax in North Carolina is two cents a pack. In my former homestate of New York, it's 15 cents at the state level and eight cents at the New York City level, 23 cents in toto. So that differential of 21 cents a pack, 2.10 a carton, $126 a case is an economic inducement, now, to organized crime, who, according to all the law enforcement agencies, sell half of the cigarettes in New York City. If we could bring down that state and city tax to something that is approaching the national average, the economic inducement would be gone. There is a new federal Interstate Contraband Act, and I believe it applies to possession of more than five cases of cigarettes. That's considered to be enough to establish that the individual intends to sell them illegaly, without the pay- ment of the state taxes. TIMN 0112763 § ~. ~

12 Isntt it regrettable and isn't it a precursor of what I was attempting to suggest earlier, that when things are skewed to that extent, that something that is in demand -- whether you like it or not, ladies and gentlemen, cigarettes are in demand by the smokers of the population. And look what happens, just alone, when there's this tax differential. Now, imagine if we had what Mr. Banzhaf wanted. He says he's not a prohibitionist. I have to assert differently. He said on the Today Show -- he and I debated there a year ago -- "Restrict the sale to pharmacies." The previous June, he said, quote, on Good Morning America, "We're asking that sale of cigar- ettes be limited to pharmacies. There would be some form of prescription." No one here is old enough to remember how alcohol was sold from 1920 to 1933, a prescription from your friendly federal government on their form. A doctor would sign it. And that's how booze was sold. It was such a nasty experience. The Noble Experiment became the National Disgrace. Organized crime the big beneficiaries. Let's not repeat it question. BANZHAF: Bill, thanks so much for drifting off the [Applause] What you didn't tell the gentleman is, first of all, with all of your great attitude about not involving the federal government unnecessarily with the tobacco industry, which fought for that federal law, so that the FBI, which isn't busy enough with murders and arson and rape and so on, can get involved in policing the cigarette business. There is, of course, a much simpler answer, and that is not lower New-York's taxes, but, rather, raise the federal tax, which has remained at eight cents a pack since about 1933. At a time when wetre taxing everything else and taxes are going up, I don't see why cigarettes should be exempt. DWYER: They aren't exempt. BANZHAF: We should raise the federal tax on cigar- ettes high enough so we eliminate any differential. Then, if the sovereign state of North Carolina, in its wisdom, wishes to rebate a part of that tax, from the federal tax to its own citizens, it would have the privilege of doing so. Yes, Bill, we're in favor of restricting the outlets for cigarettes. Most states, of course, restrict the outlets TIMN 0112764 T-%AR ~r-,2

13 for alcohol right now. !n Virginia you can only buy it from a Virginia state store. Because alcohol is a dangerous product, although we don't have prohibition in Virginia. We restrict the sale of pornography and dirty books because we recognize that those create a problem. But anybody who wants to buy a dirty book has no trouble today buying it. We have -- we s i mp f y say that today, when we know the health hazards of cigarette smoking, when we know that the great majority of people get hooked when theytre still kids, as young as 10 and 12, we shouldn't be selling cigarettes in unattended vending machines, where any kid who is tall enough to reach up to the coin slot can get it. If I were selling booze or Hustler magazine out of an unattended machine, the wrath of every government would come down on my head. And yet, that's exactly what we do with cigar- ettes. We say, simply, cigarettes are as dangerous a drug as virtually any other that you buy at a pharmacy. Buy them at your pharmacy. Now let's go on to the next question. DWYER: What about a law that already exists, that you have? Why aren't you pushing for the enforcement of the laws that exist in every state of this union which make it illegal to sell cigarettes to minors? BANZHAF: Because those laws, as you well know, are unenforceable when your companies, the ones you represent, go around putting their cigarettes in unattended vending machines. Bill, right over your head is a little sign from the set we're sitting on, "Murder Game.', And I think thatts very appropriate... DWYER: That's... BANZHAF: ...for an industry that lives off the pro- fits of death and disability. DWYER: That's also a cheap shot. [Applause] FITZMAURICE: Well, let's let the next questioner have a shot here, cheap or otherwise, sir. MAN: Mr. Pinney, there's been a lot of discussion so far about smoking and health and the nonsmoker. I'm curious, are TIMN 0112765 TIA'I-S'3 i•

14 there any passages in that document that indicts, as you say, cigarette smoking which talk about the smoking and health effects of cigarettes on nonsmokers? PINNEY: Yes, there's an entire chapter. I could read down the 10 summary points that were made, if you'd like. One.. BANZHAF: ...be able to understand them, but he can read them. DWYER: Why don't you let the people decide that, John? [Applause] PINNEY: Read them? FITZMAURICE: Well, no. Why don't we just keep moving along here? Okay? The gentleman on the right, you have a follow-up here? MAN: Yeah. I'm more interested in knowing if -- we have a spectrum here. We've got John Banzhaf over on one side and we've got Bill Dwyer over on another. And maybe there's some middle ground on this issue. And I think Mr. Pinney knows if there are statements in that document that provide that middle ground, that maybe the health claims just might be exaggerated for nonsmokers. BANZHAF: Well, I could provide a simple and unbiased middle ground. Anybody who's interested in the problems of ambient tobacco smoke can write to Action on Smoking and Health and get our material, including articles. They can write to the Tobacco Institute in Washington, D.C. and get Bill Dwyer and the tobacco industry's point of view. And can write to HEW here in Washington, D.C. and get the entire Surgeon General's report. I suggest that you do so, read them, and make your own decision. DWYER: But is there some hesitancy to have a summary statement from Mr. Pinney, who is the executive editor of the Surgeon General's report, on this question of what the effects on nonsmokers are who are exposed to tobacco smoke? PINNEY: What follows of that chapter. will be essentially a lay summary First of all, Mr. Banzhaf referred to surveys which show that a large majority of people surveyed do experience severe irritation from cigarette smoke. Secondly, cigarette smoking in the household appears to TIMN 0112766 i T~n.1.3,95•1

15 have some effect on raising the incidence of respiratory compli- cations among children in that household. Thirdly, for specific health-impaired groups, people who have respiratory problems, allergic predispositions, and others, there appear to be potentially severe health effects as a result of heavy exposure to cigarette smoke. Cigarette smoke in enclosed spaces does, in fact, raise the concentration of pollutants in the blood stream. It raises the ambient carbon monoxide level beyond the levels acceptable under most occupational safety standards. Beyond that, i n terms of l ong-term hea l th i mpa i rment, there is no specific evidence to date to show, for example, that cigarette smoking in an enclosed room would result, in any way, in the development of lung cancer, for example, in a nonsmoker. But there are a number of indications that, beyond irritation, there is risk, and sufficient risk for the policy of the Depart- ment of Health, Education and Welfare to support the adoption of state and local level of reasonable restrictions against smoking in public places and in the workplace. DWYER: May I make one addition to it? Because it really does depend on where you're reading from in that chapter, quite obviously. F i rst of a l l, the former Secretary of HEW sa i d i n Seatt l e, "The j ury i s st i l l out on the q uest i on of harm to non- smokers." This was Mr. Califano, who conducted what many regard as an ambition... BANZHAF: The former Surgeon General. DWYER: Surgeon General. HEW Secretary. Excuse me. I didn't mean to demote him. From their chapter: "Healthy nonsmokers exposed to cigarette smoker have little or no physiologic response to the smoker, and what response does occur may be do to psychological factors. "Secondly, levels of carboxy hemoglobin" -- that which comes into the blood stream from CO exposure -- "produced in involuntary smoking situations are functionally insignificant in health individuals." Finally, we hear of this one about benzopyrene, the carcinogen that is contained in cigarette smoke, as well as what we get on our charcoal-grilled steaks. "The effect of chronic exposure to very low levels of this carcinogen, benzopyrene, as found in cigarette smoke, has not been established for humans." } TIMN 0112767 ~9 ,~ , ~ r T~'1.,..~_ .~

16 It really doesn't support what is being sought, and that is legal action. What it does support, obviously, is more research. And we hope it also supports good sense on the part of public policymakers to let those who want to control smoking do it by private management decision, rather than by more govern- mental intrusion. BANZHAF: Mr. Moderator, this problem of trying to... [Applause] ...find scientific proof by having panelists read selected portions out of context in quotes to people really isn't a very effective way to spend an hour. Again, I would suggest anybody who has an interest in the problem write to Action on Smoking and Health, Washington, D.C.; write to the Tobacco Institute, Washington, D.C.; and write to the Department of HEW, Washington, D.C. You can get all the material. You can read it for yourself. You will not be subjected to quotes out of context. And, Bill, those quotes that you gave us before simply don't square with what mos-t people in this [Confusion of voices] FITZt9AURiCE: Mr. Dwyer. audience know... DWYER: ...accept the Surgeon General's report as such a weighty document in support of your action, you can't cull selectively from it. You have to take it or not. FITZMAURICE: Okay. Let's take another question.... JOHN BRACEPIT (?): My name is John Bracepit. I'm from North Dakota. I address my question to both -- to the gentlemen from the Tobacco Institute and from ASH. First, to the Tobacco Institute. Why is the Tobacco Institute using the question of civil rights so much in trying to protect their, quote, right to smoke, when I feel it's nothing more than a privilege? And the purpose [sic] for the gentleman from ASH. Why does ASH want to limit sales purely to pharmacies, when there could be other methods used other than that, and not doctor'-s prescription, as I feel that is going too far and In- volving too much government? first. FITZMAURICE: Okay, Mr. Dwyer. The question to you 7 TIMN 0112768 t~;~~~~ T •M

17 DWYER: On the civi I rights. We see -- and we're backed up by sociologists, who are studying this increasingly -- the con- troversy as having shifted from the health arena to the political arena. There are significant, serious health questions raised about smoking. The answer will never come from Kennedy Center, from Capitol Hill, from any of us. (t'll come from research, from bench science. What's happened is that the attack brought by anti- smoking people, well-intentioned, sincere crusaders.-.. [Laughter] I'm feeling charitable this morning -- focused on the product initially: package warning labels, broadcast advertising bans, higher taxes. It didntt work, from their point of view; didn't slow the sales. A little frustration, one assumes, sets in. And rather than going after the product, go after the consumer of the pro- duct; shame that person who smokes; make us appear to be morally flawed; indicate to the rest of society that we're enemies, we're violators, we're weak-willed, we're akin to the types who would steal the wash from the neighbor's clothes line or introduce rabid dogs to the countryside, portray us as those who've had no evident success in business or in bed. Now, what happens is that that isn'fi working either, because it just hasn't had the enforcement that the public smo- king laws were expected to have, since America has mightier and taller priorities. '4hat we see is the effort, then, being one that is sort of to cr i m i na l i ze the smoker, to go after the behav i or, i n an attempt to regulate personal preference. BANZHAF: Thank you, Bill. I think once again you're a little bit overreacting here. Simply because we put out T-shirts and signs that say, "Nonsmokers make better lovers," and, "Non- smokers do It without puffing." Dt+lYER: How do you know that, by the way? [Laughter] BANZHAF: It doesn't mean, Bill, that... DWYER: Have you gone i nto the bedrooms? BANZHAF: ...smokers are failures in bed. With regard to the gentleman's question about why should T1MN 0112769 TI'I - " 9!~- 7 3

18 the sale of a dangerous product be restricted to certain outlets, the answer is very simple. First of all, this is one of the trad i t i onal ways of l i m i t i ng and gett i ng out of the hands of children dangerous products. We limit the sale of other dan- gerous drugs to pharmacies. We limit the sales of alcoholic beverages either to state stores or certain other stores where careful -- where IDs are very carefully checked. We restrict the sale of fireworks in many areas. 'r!e restrict the sale of dirty books and pornography -- and those are two different things, as I think you know -- because we have a problem with keeping them out of the hands of kids. Any person could go to a drugstore -- goodness knows, there are enough of them around -- and buy their cigarettes there. But at least wetd be sure that they'd be over 12 years old, or over 15, or, hopefu I! y, over 1 8 years o I d, wh i ch i s not the case today. Cigarettes containing nicotine are a dangerous drug. They ki 11 more than any other drug in the country. And if you -- and, obviously, I don't mean you, sir. But the women in the audience, for example, if they want their birth control pills, they canit buy them out of a vending machine. They go to a drugstore, because they are a dangerous substance. Cigarettes are the most dangerous substance known. They're the most dangerous consumer product. They kill over 320,000 people every year. ence... FITZMAURICE: We have another questioner in the audi- CAROL MCNALLY: Hi. I'm Carol McNally, and Itm from Si lver Springs, Maryland. And I'm addressing this to Mr. Pinney. The latest Surgeon General's report says, and if I may quote, "it may be that women do not generally perceive smoking as a threat to their health." Women in this country have been exposed to the same anti-smoking information as men have over the years. Since you're the executive editor of the Surgeon General's report, would you explain what this means? Are you saying that women are incapable or too dumb to interpret or understand the Sur- geon General's report? PINNEY: No, I'm not. I think the point that was being made there, and one that w i 1 1 be emphas i zed even more great I y i n this coming January, when we release a report on the health con- sequences of smoking for women, is that, over the years, women neither smoked in large enough numbers or smoked enough to have 7CIMN 0112770 T-~~. ~;~ 5,9

19 the same demonstration effect as smoking among men did. They d i d not see themse l ves dy i ng of l ung cancer. They d i d not see themselves suffering the effects of smoking on their cardio- vascular disease status. They weren't as aware of the effects that smoking would have on them. And most of the information programs, most of the education programs were targeted more specifically at men, because that's where the knowledge was. Now we know that women and men equally share the con- sequences of long-term smoking. And our efforts are •now turning much more towards catching up and closing that gap. It's not a question of lack of consideration for women at all. Unfortunately, now, women have achieved the status of equa l i ty, in terms of suf fer i ng those same health consequences. MCNALLY: Doesn't the -- doesn't the '72 report have a section on pregnancy? That's at least -- what? -- seven years. I mean I just find it insulting, the way that chapter was written PINNEY: I'm sorry, i don't understand. The way the '72 chapter was written? MCNALLY: As if we were not aware. I mean we're aware. I mean you'd have to have been, as i may quote Mr. Dwyer, a cave dweller not to be aware of the hazards. And i beiieve that the Surgeon Generalts original report was based on some studies that were done both on men and women. PINNEY: The Surgeon General's report of 'b4 makes a very specific statement about the fact that... MCNALLY: It talks about men, but... PINNEY: ...the evidence regarding women is nowhere near as significant, and leaves a number of questions unan- swered. The '79 report... MCNALLY: I beiieve they're using some of that as the basis to reiterate the new report, too, aren't they? They're using Hammond and Horn and using that data, just puiiing it out now... PINNEY: No. The i979 report, in its conclusions on women, uses studies which included much larger populations of women. MCNALLY: All right. Thank you. FITZMAURICE; Okay. Let's have another question from the audience.... TIMN 0112771 7

20 MAN: I'm [unintelligible] from North Yemen. I am here at American Language Institute at Georgetown University. My question to Mr. Pinney. I want to know If the Department of Health have any statistical surveys or documents to show us what are the dangers the dangers and the side effects of smoking for the pregnant womans and the womans who are nursing babies. FITZMAURICE: Mr. Pinney, you're being asked another question out of your report there. PINNEY: There is an entire chapter in this report on the consequences of smoking for pregnant women and for infants. And that section is based entirely on a series of studies, some of them with populations up to 50,000 pregnant women, that have been conducted over the past years. J So, yes. And i'd be happy -- we have taken a number of these sect i ons and repr i nted them. Itd be happy, i f you ld leave your name, to send you a copy of that entire section. FITZMAURIGE: And, let's see. We have a question on a card here from a member of the audience. M. Burton from Alex- andria, Virginia asks Mr. Dwyer: If another equally lucrative use for tobacco were to be developed, such as using it as a food source, as some experiments have tried, would your institute be as emphatic about smokers' rights? Aren't you really just arguing to save the economy of the tobacco industry? If not, why can't smokers support their habits in private, without inflicting health hazards on others? A question for Mr. Dwyer. be... DWYER: We have an economic interest in this. It would [Laughter] DWYER: I'd be ludicrous to suggest that we didn't. We even make profits. Of course, we also provide some jobs, pay some taxes, a little return on investment along the way, and also respond to a demand for goods that exists in the marketplace. Take the legal tobacco companies out of business, kind of akin to 1920, put the federal padlock on the tobacco bar, make i t i I l ega l, maybe wi th a new Vol staad Act, to se l 1, import, manu- facture tobacco; just substitute the wording of the 18th Amendment for alcohol to tobacco. We're out of business. Does anyone here seriously believe that smoking is going to stop? John said -- John says that the smokeasies would take TIMN 0112772 T'~.?!.~'~?~(;U