sample="rhetorical" bates="1005102036" isource="pm" decade="1960" class="ni" date="19630204" February 4, 1963 Paul D. Smith, Esq. Vice President and General Counsel Philip Morris Incorporated 100 Park Avenue New York 17, New York Dear Paul: I think this may be an appropriate time to report on what I conceive to be the problem involved in attempting to make an effective presentation of the industry's scientific position to the Surgeon General's Advisory Committee. The people directly engaged in this effort are, as you know, the lawyers making up the so-called ad hoc committee and Drs. Little and Hockett.of TIRC. The Advisory Committee communicated only with and receives communications only from TIRC (In one instance, at the suggestion of TIRC, the Advisory Committee requested certain information from the Tobacco Institute.) Dr. Hamill, the medical coordinator of the Committee, has indicated that he will be happy to receive whatever material and in whatever amount that TIRC may wish to submit. He has also asked for information on specific topics. Over the past two months or so, the ad hoc committee and TIRC staff have been working on developing material which it is hoped will have scientific impact and advance the proposition that there are serious deficiencies in the scientific data which is cited as suggesting a link between smoking and certain diseases. A number of difficulties have been encountered in pursuing this task. A serious difficulty results from the fact that the information which could be used as a "platform" for stating our position with respect to the several scientific areas to be covered has not been organized in any useful form from which a cogent presentation can be made. This means in working up material for presentation in connection with some of the principal areas under consideration, we are starting from scratch. It also appears that the ad hoc committee will have the burden of preparing a greater part of the material in which the industry's position with regard to any broad area of inquiry is stated. For the most part, it seems that Drs. Hockett and Little will have to attend to other aspects of the work such as maintaining contact. with the Advisory Committee members and staff and fulfilling their commitments with respect to the TIRC research program. There is apparently no other staff member at TIRC who can be called on for assistance. In many of the important areas to be covered, TIRC who can be called on for assistance. In many of the important areas to be covered, TIRC has no expert consultation available. In attempting to develop a sound and thoroughly documented scientific position with respect to such important matters as statistical studies, emphysema and cardiovascular disease, principal experts in these fields must be consulted. No such consultants are presently on the staff of TIRC, and furthermore, it appears that at least some members of the Scientific Advisory Board are not willing to lend their cooperation. This was the case when TIRC requested the assistance of Dr. Bing to prepare a memorandum on smoking and cardiovascular disease. Recently, when TIRC was asked for a memorandum on smoking machines, it was necessary to ask the research director of one of the companies to prepare it since TIRC had neither the time, the manpower nor the material at hand to deal with this subject. The necessity to resort to outside help for the collection of important information has lead TIRC to take what I consider an injudicious step by requesting the assistance of Mr. Todd of the Tobacco Manufacturers' Standing Committee in England to arrange for someone to investigate and report on the progress of experiments carried on abroad in which animals are exposed to tobacco smoke. Mr. Todd selected a Dr. F. J. C. Roe to look into this matter. This would appear to be a bad choice since Dr. Roe is one who has in the past characterized tobacco smoke as a promoter of cancer. TIRC has assigned projects to several outside consultants. Some of these are in areas of principal concern, but other seem to be of minor importance. The problem resulting from the shortage of manpower is made more sever in that TIRC is often informed on very short notice that the Advisory Committee wants a particular piece of information. In order to meet the time deadlines, work must often be done hurriedly and without sufficient time for careful consideration. The difficulties described above resulting from lack of staff and misdirection of effort might be partly overcome if it were possible to obtain reliable and detailed information concerning what the Advisory Committee members now consider to be the major questions raised as a result fo their studies to date. The Advisory Committee met on January 25, and 26 and, from advance informations, it appears that at least one member, Dr. Le Maistre, was ready to report on his subject, i.e. emphysema and bronchitis. It would be expected that other members would have reported on how they were following out their investigations. Mr. Hoyt of TIRC tells me that Dr. Hockett spoke to Dr. Hamill on the Monday following the meeting, but that Hamill did not volunteer any information about what had occurred. TIRC is reluctant to make a straight forward request for information of this kind and is relying upon reports from other sources. I believe that the industry is entitled to learn about the progress of the investigation so that it can direct its presentation of material to the problems which appear to be of greatest importance while they are under active investigation. I have tried to indicate what I think are the principal obstacles to a successful presentation of the industry's case. I shall be glad to make any further explanations or cite specific examples in connection with any of the forgoing. Sincerely yours, AH:fs Alexander Holtzman