BACKGROUND NOTE: The following document,
discovered and revealed by ASH-UK (Action on Smoking and Health in the United
Kingdom) describes how Philip Morris
has manipulated the science on secondhand smoke on a global basis to
"keep the controversy alive." Many people in the media have accused
tobacco control proponents of believing in a vast and purportedly
unfounded conspiracy to bend the science on the issue of secondhand
smoke. This document, taken with others on UK-ASH's site, prove that
the 'conspiracy' does exist.
Quotes:
[Present at the meeting were representatives of Philip Morris, Rothman's
Imperial, Gallagher, BAT and Covington and Burling, (industry
attorneys)]
Philip Morris presented to the UK industry their global strategy on
environmental tobacco smoke [ETS]. In every major international area
(USA, Europe, Australia, Far East, South America, Central America and
Spain) they are proposing, in key countries, to set up a team of
scientists organized by one national coordinating scientist and American
lawyers, to review scientific literature or carry out work on ETS to
keep the controversy alive. They are spending vast sums of money to do
so, and on the European front Covington and Burling, lawyers for the
Tobacco Institute in the USA, are proposing to set up a London office
from March, 1988 to coordinate these activities. The countries in
Europe where they have already been working are the UK, France, Germany,
Switzerland, Italy, Spain and Scandinavia (via Sweden). A list of
potential scientists who could be contacted in the UK was produced...
Because of the heavy financial burden, Philip Morris are inviting other
companies to join in these activities to whatever extent individual
companies deem to be appropriate....Although action on Environmental
Tobacco Smoke is becoming more vital to the industry, Philip Morris
strategy is perhaps questionable in some respects e.g. involvement of
lawyers at such a fundamental scientific level; disadvantages in
perception of what will only be perceived as as "pro-industry" group of
scientists....
The Philip Morris philosphy of ETS was presented. This appeared to
revolve around the selection, in all possible countries, of a group of
scientists either to critically review the scientific literature on ETS
to maintain the controvery, or to carry out research on ETS. In each
country a group of scineitst would be carefully selected and organized
by a national coordinating scientist...
David Remes presented the approach of the U.S. lawyers, and said that he
believed their function to be to act as intermediaries between the
consultants and industry and also to indicate 'areas of sensitivity' on
ETS research....He noted that in the USA, their strategy at first had
been to meet short-term 'emergencies' by presenting teams of witnesses
as Witorsch, Gray Robertson. He did, however, acknowledge that this
kind of roadshow would be unlikely to be acceptable in Europe....
[RE: selection of European scientists]: The consultants should,
ideally, according to Philip Morris, be European scientists who have had
no previous connection with tobacco companies and who have no previous
record on the primary issue which might, according to Remes, lead to
problems of attribution. The mechanism by which they identify their
consultants is as follows: they ask a couple of scientists in each
country...to produce a list of potential consultants. The scientists
are then contacted by these coordinators or by the lawyers and asked if
they are interested in problems of Indoor Air Quality; tobacco is not
mentioned at this stage. CV's are obtained and obvious 'anti-smokers'
or those with 'unsuitable backgrounds' are filtered out. The remaining
scientists are sent a literature pack containing approximately 10 hours
of reading matter and including 'anti-ETS' articles. They are asked for
a geniune opinion as independent consultants, and if they indicate an
interest in proceeding further a Philip Morris scientists makes contact.
Philip Morris then expect the group of scientists to operate within the
confines of decisions taken by PM scientists to determine the general
direction of research, which apparently would then be 'filtered' by
lawyers to eliminate areas of sensitivity.
Their idea is that the groups of scientists should be able to produce
research or stimulate controversy in a way that public affairs people in
their relevant countries would be able to make use of, or market the
information....
...Not only are Philip Morris active in the US (via John Rupp of
Covington and burling) and the UK and Europe (via David Remes) but other
Covington and Burling lawyers have been commissioned to coordinate PM's
ETS activities in the Far East, Australia, South American, Central
America and Spain...
Although the industry is in great need of concerted effort and action in
the ETS area, the detailed strategy of Philip Morris leaves something to
be desired. The excessive involvement of external lawyers at this very
basic scientific level is questionable and, in Europe at least, is
likely to frighten off a number of scientists who might otherwise be
prepared to talk to the industry. Also, the rather oblique initial
approach may appear to be somewhat less than honest to many
scientists....The idea of setting up a special group of consultants
coordinated by one national coordinating scientists is also rather
likely to frighten away scientists who would justifiably not wish to be
associated with the industry in this rather structured way or who would
not wish to be part of what will inevitably be seen to be a pro-industry
group...
It must be appreciated that Philip Morris are putting vast amounts of
funding into these projects: not only in directly funding large numbers
of research projects all over the world, but in attempting to coordinate
and pay so many scientists on an international basis to keep the ETS
controversy alive. It is generally felt that this kind of activity is
already giving them a marketing and public affairs advantage, especially
in countries in which, until recently, they have played a rather low
profile.
Anne Landman
American Lung Association of Colorado, West Region Office
Grand Junction
Title: Note on a special meeting of the UK Industry on Environmental
Tobacco Smoke London, February 17th, 1988
Type of Document: Meeting minutes
Author/Note taker: Dr. Sharon Boyse
Date: February 17th, 1988
No.of Pages: 6
Site: U.K. Ash http://www.ash.org.uk/
URL: http://www.ash.org.uk/papers/401247331.pdf
