THE American tobacco giant Philip Morris secretly recruited influential
people to help allay fears about the health risks from passive smoking,
according to a memo dating from 1990. Among those claimed to be acting as
consultants were an adviser to a British parliamentary committee and 鈥渁n editor鈥�
of The Lancet.
The memo is one of 39 000 tobacco industry documents central to a lawsuit by
the state of Minnesota, which aimed to recover from the tobacco industry the
costs of treating illness caused by smoking. The case was settled last week.
Philip Morris鈥檚 index of the documents it handed over says the memo came from
the London offices of its lawyers Covington and Burling.
Under the heading 鈥淟ancet鈥� the document says: 鈥淥ne of our consultants is an
editor of this very influential British medical journal, and is continuing to
publish numerous reviews, editorials and comments on ETS [environmental tobacco
smoke] and other issues.鈥�
Advertisement
Elsewhere, the document says that other consultants include an 鈥渁dvisor to a
particularly relevant House of Commons select committee鈥� and several 鈥渕embers of
the working groups of the International Agency for Research on Cancer鈥�. The IARC
is the UN agency in Lyon that rates the cancer risks of pollutants, foods and
chemicals. The document defines consultants as people who 鈥渁re not paid unless
and until they actually perform work鈥�.
The claim about The Lancet, which has been highly critical of the
tobacco industry, will amaze and shock medical researchers. 鈥淭he documents
reveal a cynical attempt by Philip Morris to infiltrate some of the most
respected institutions in science,鈥� says Clive Bates, director of Action on
Smoking and Health in London.
The Lancet鈥檚 current editor, Richard Horton, who did not work for
the journal when the memo was written, told 麻豆传媒: 鈥淚 have
spoken to senior editors who worked at The Lancet in March 1990 and who
then had responsibility for the journal鈥檚 content. They have absolutely no
knowledge of Covington and Burling鈥檚 European Consultancy Programme . . . A
review of The Lancet鈥檚 coverage of smoking in 1989 and 1990 shows that
all published research articles, editorials and reviews emphasised the adverse
effects of smoking, including environmental tobacco smoke.鈥�*
Paolo Boffetta, head of cancer epidemiology at the IARC, says the agency has
not knowingly worked with Philip Morris consultants. 鈥淏ut we don鈥檛 know
everybody connected to the industry,鈥� he says.
The memo does not name any of the consultants. Indeed, it stresses the
鈥渃ontinuing need for care and discretion in the groups鈥� activities to protect
their usefulness鈥�. Despite repeated requests, neither Philip Morris nor
Covington and Burling supplied a spokesperson for comment.
However, the reference to a House of Commons committee would appear to refer
to its Environment Committee, which published a report on indoor pollution in
1991. One of its advisers was the late Roger Perry, an environmental scientist
at Imperial College, London. Other documents among the 39 000 state that Perry
was paid by Philip Morris to carry out research.
Frank Cranmer, clerk to the committee at that time, says that its members
knew Perry had done research for the tobacco industry. He cannot recall Perry
mentioning that he had any deeper relationship with Philip Morris.
*See Planet Science website for full statement