News | More Resources | Home | Conferences

Annotations of documents gleaned from the British American Tobacco Company (BATCO) and BAT Industries documents at the Minnesota Tobacco Industry Document Depository. There are twenty-six boxes, (18 from BATCO, and 8 from BAT Industries (mainly financial statements, which should be of interest to those tracking industry structure). The material in Minnesota represent about ten percent of a larger cache in Guildford, England, also now open to the public. The box numbers here refer only to this Minnesota Select Set but the Bates numbers should be equivalent.

1. 13 June 1961, Letter from H.B. Grice, Esq. (Tobacco Manufacturer’s Standing Committee) to C.M. Fletcher (Postgraduate Medical School, London), BAT (File no.B1731) 105619356 and -105619355 (Fletcher letter of 16 May).

   Fletcher had asked if manufacturers couldn’t find a way to make a cigarette with less tar because of the risk to health, and so inform the smoker.

   Notable quotes: "We do not claim that smoking in any quantity under all circumstances and in all individuals carries no risk of increasing the liability to disease – it would be absurd to make such a claim." Grice says it would be misleading to inform smokers about tar content: "We believe quite sincerely that the only advice that can honestly be given to a patient concerned about smoking and health is to practise moderation in his smoking habits. This is good advice in all circumstances and would be endorsed by the tobacco manufacturers who have never advocated or sought to encourage excessive smoking."

2. Mid-1960s, Report by F.J.C. Roe and M.C. Pike, "Smoking and Lung Cancer," BAT (File no.B1742) 105453524 - 534.

   Recall that Francis Roe was a leading physician and trusted scientific consultant to the tobacco industry – mainly BATCO but also Philip Morris – into the 1990s. See item 12, below. In this paper he is unequivocal about the relationship of smoking and lung cancer, and what should be done.

   Notable quotes: "The evidence implicating smoking as being causally related to cancer of the lung is very strong. There is a definite and undeniable positive association between tobacco smoking, especially of cigarettes, and lung cancer.... [F]rom the point of view of present day public health there can be no question that people should be encouraged not to smoke" [Emphasis in original.] "In the absence of the smoking habit, in particular of the cigarettes smoking habit, the lung cancer death-rate in the community would be a small fraction of its present level."

   Roe and Pike then review the evidence as available up to 1964, epidemiological and experimental. They note, presciently, that it will be difficult to make a ‘safe’ (their inverted commas) cigarette as filtration can only work on the gas phase, not readily on particulates, and that people needing nicotine will not be satisfied by super filtration.

3. IT IS WORTH REPRODUCING HERE THE 1999 BROWN AND WILLIAMSON STATEMENT ON SMOKING AND LUNG CANCER AS FOUND ON THE BROWN AND WILLIAMSON WEBSITE :

   "Smoking and Health Issues: On occasion Brown & Williamson is asked to clarify it position on smoking and health issues. Others may also, from time to time, attempt to characterize our views on smoking and health and this characterization may not always be accurate. We are, therefore, issuing these statements to make clear where we stand and to explain the basis for our position on these issues. Nevertheless, Brown & Williamson believes that smokers should rely on the advice of appropriate health authorities such as the Surgeon General for information on smoking and health, including the conclusions that smoking causes disease and is addictive.

   Smoking and Disease: Brown & Williamson believes that people who choose to smoke are taking significant health risks. Epidemiological (statistical) studies of cigarette smoking and various diseases show that groups of smokers have a significantly increased incidence of those diseases compared to nonsmokers. While the strength of the reported risks varies from one disease to another, from one population to another, and while the percentage of smokers developing diseases like lung cancer varies between different populations, for a number of diseases the risks are strong and consistent. This suggests that smoking is a cause of disease in humans. However, we know of no way to verify that smoking is a cause of any particular person’s adverse health. Deciding whether or not smoking causes disease in groups of people involves comparing the evidence that is available with a set of ‘criteria for causation’ laid out by the US Surgeon General and others, which cover both statistical and non-statistical evidence. It is then necessary to make a judgment about whether the evidence fits the criteria. This is inevitably affected by the objective of the person doing the judging. In our view, it is appropriate to base conclusions about the health effects of smoking primarily upon epidemiological evidence when the objective of the assessment is to shape public health policy concerning tobacco use. Warning the public is a primary objective of public health authorities, and the available evidence — in particular, the strength of the statistical evidence — is sufficient for them to make the judgment that smoking causes disease. If this judgment is based on statistical criteria, we agree that the evidence is sufficient to determine that smoking causes disease. Brown & Williamson believes it is appropriate for the public health community to conclude and warn the public that cigarette smoking causes diseases. On the other hand, as a manufacturer of cigarettes, the role of Brown & Williamson is very different from that of public health authorities. Our objective in analyzing the evidence on smoking and disease is to produce a less hazardous product for those who wish to smoke. Given this objective, we place greater emphasis on experimental (non-statistical) evidence than is required for public health authorities as this is the best source of information to provide us with practical guidance on how to modify our products to reduce the risks of smoking. While much is known about the health risks of cigarette smoking, unfortunately there is no consensus among scientists about how exactly smoking might contribute to disease. Ultimately it is the biological sciences, rather than medical statistics, which will make the major contribution to this knowledge. Despite years of research, there remain significant gaps in our understanding including: the role of individual smoke constituents in contributing to smoking-related disease in humans; the role that various cigarette design and formulation parameters may have in decreasing or increasing the risks of smoking; which experimental toxicological tests of cigarette smoke are predictive of effects of cigarette smoke in humans; the fundamental mechanisms of how cigarette smoking might contribute to human disease. These information gaps have resulted in several limitations of what we as a manufacturer of cigarettes are able to accomplish. By identifying these and other uncertainties in the existing science, we are not attempting to deny that smoking causes disease. Rather, we are identifying the limitations of what we are capable of achieving in producing an acceptable product to smokers with modifications that might reduce the risks associated with smoking. We do not yet know with certainty what modifications could be made to cigarettes to make them safer. Furthermore we do not yet know how to verify scientifically whether any particular cigarette modification, in fact, results in a product that is safer."

4. 4 October 1966, Report, no signature, "The role of nicotine in smoking and health," BAT (File no. 1746) 105618081 - 088.

   Acknowledges higher death rates among cigarette smokers than non-smokers, the ratio being higher in younger age groups. They seek to absolve nicotine which has the benefit of increasing alertness and reducing stress.

   Notable quote: "Unlike ‘tar’, which could to a very large degree be expendable, we believe that nicotine is in a very real sense the raison-d’etre of tobacco smoking."

5. 27 April 1965, memorandum, unsigned, "Project Janus," BAT (File no. B1765) 105620239 -040.

   Project Janus was the long-term research program to determine the carcinogenic components of tobacco smoke. Here the rationale is given for research laboratories to be under company control, to keep the matter confidential and to maintain competitive advantage: Notable quote: "...[A]lthough it is our clear intention to make available to the industry any important discoveries in connection with health, it is commercially undesirable to reveal approaches, particularly in the fringe areas."

6. 4 April 1974, trip report, R. Binns (BAT researcher), "Report on visit to U.S.A. and Canada," BAT (File no. B210) 105319046 - 059.

   Among the visits was one to the Bio-Research Institute of Cambridge, Massachusetts where Doctors Homburger and Bernfield claimed to have induced laryngeal tumors in 40% of hamsters exposed to 19.3% tobacco smoke, 2 times a day for 8 minutes, five days a week for 80 weeks. The work had been funded by the Council for Tobacco Research which withdraw their sponsorship:

   Notable quote: "Homburger and Bernfield thought the reason for this was that the work was becoming embarrassing because of the implications it raised." [NB. A Professor Dontenwill reported the same results in the cigarette industry laboratories in Germany in 1975, whereupon soon after the labs were shut down and Dontenwill given a golden handshake.]

   The research protocol is found in BAT (File No. B211) 105359928 - 937.

7. 1 June 1965, research report, S.R. Evelyn, "The effect of additives on smoke chemistry: action of gaseous ammonia on flue-cured tobacco," BAT (File no. B2107) 105454344 - 346.

   Effect of ammonia on nicotine delivery well known in the 1960s. Here the research showed a "30% increase in the delivery of nicotine."

8. 17 April 1978, minutes, E.B. Wilkes, "76^th meeting of the statistical sub-committee," BAT (File no. B214) 105609269 - 272.

   Cites BAT research showing that air pollution in Teeside contributes to disease associated with cigarettes.

   Notable quote: "It may yet be shown that cigarette smoke acts primarily as a promoter for the initial carcinogenic insult received from atmospheric pollution." "The smoking habits of young people must be of interest to anyone concerned with the future of the industry."

9. 1 September 1981, booklet, "Smoking and Health. A BATCo Booklet," BAT (File no. B216) 105362499 - 515).

   Apparently a shorter version of the employee booklet described in item 10.

   Notable quotes: "[A]lthough there is a statistical association between smoking and certain kinds of ill health, it has not been proven that these illnesses are actually caused by smoking." "One of the most emotional allegations against smoking is that it can affect the unborn child. These suggstions are based upon statistical findings that smoking by the mother can lead to reduced birth weight or impaired development of the child, although socio-economic factors such as personality, diet, occupation and inherited characteristics may also be involved." "The industry supports the view that children should not be encouraged to smoke. For this reason, BAT and other major tobacco companies have adopted a policy of neither promoting their products to children nor of making cigarettes attractive to them." "In the rapidly-developing parts of the world, we have many millions of customers and our presence is a resource of considerable value to governments."

10. 19 January 1981, booklet, "Employee handbook on smoking and health," BAT (File no. B216) 105362977 - 997.

    This booklet indicates that a large audience for industry statements are the employees of the firm whose loyalty must be held.

    Notable quotes: "Should I work for a tobacco company?.... Should we really carry on making cigarettes when so many doctors say it is bad for us?.... I’m sometimes criticised for working for a tobacco company. What do I say?" After all the usual arguments, the booklet concludes, "Commercial life is never easy.... [W]e hope this booklet will have shown that [the issues] are being tackled in a responsible manner that reflects B.A.T.’s high standards of commercial and ethical behavior."

11. 9 June 1982, Report from BAT Industries, "Statement on B.A.T. Industries’ tobacco interests in developing countries," BAT (File no. B218) 10536439 - 442.

    "Since its formation in 1902, it [B.A.T. Industries Group] has been an international tobacco company concerned with developing its business worldwide. From the outset it began to invest substantially in its overseas markets, including many countries in the developing world, with the result that today the Group has manufacturing operations in more than 50 countries and sells its products in virtually every country in the world." "As far as smoking and health issues are concerned, it must be up to individual governments, which have, of course, sovereign rights over their policies, to state how they wish such matters to be handled. It follows that the recommendations on tobacco issues of international agencies such as the World Health Organisation are matters on which governments must determine what action, if any, should be taken."

    The rest of the document goes on to remind readers of the importance of tobacco to developing countries’ revenues and agriculture, energy-conservation and re-afforestation, and employment.

12. 27 May 1982, minutes, R.E. Thornton (research director), "The issues of smoking," BAT (File no. B218) 105363499 - 501.

    "Dr. [F.J.C.] Roe, in his capacity as a Consultant to BAT, has been asked to comment on a draft of this document.... It should be borne in mind that Dr. Roe has a number of medical degrees and is a respected independent consultant." According to the minutes, Roe’s opinion was that this draft "would be a disaster for BAT if it was published as it was non- credible.... Discussion on causality should be minimized or. Totally excluded."

13. 21 January 1983, notes, D.G. Felton and Sam.R. Evelyn, "Notes for BAT conference," BAT (File no. B219) 105381935 - 940.

    "The credibility of the industry. Of the steps listed under this heading, the weakest appears to be (c). The legal reasons for maintaining the stance that Smoking and Health is still a debatable issue are well understood, but increasingly this is seen by informed opinion as cynical equivocations. This view is particularly reinforced when the call for more research is qualified by the legal requirement for this to be ‘at arms length’ from the industry. This policy appears to arise from the belief that the demonstration that smoking low delivery products now is associated with reduced risk to health, ipso fact ‘proves’ a causative mechanism. This could be poor logic."

14. 1 April 1971, report, unsigned, "Visit of Sir Charles Ellis" (research director), BAT (File no. B225) 105400501 - 510.

    Sir Charles discusses a hand-drawn diagram showing how polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons could cause cancer by effects on DNA. "A scheme outlining the possible mechanisms for chemical carcinogenesis due to P.A.H. in tobacco smoke is shown overleaf."

15. 5 September 1968, research report, S.R. Evelyn, "The absorption of nicotine via the mouth: Studies using model systems," BAT (File no. B225) 105446718 - 723.

    Notable quote: "The major factors which control retention of nicotine in the mouth are the pH of the smoke and the amount of nicotine in the smoke, i.e. it is controlled by the type of cigarette which is smoked..... The rate at which nicotine is absorbed into the blood stream from the mouth appears to be largely controlled by the pH of the saliva in the mouth."

16. 27 June 1978, two reports, the first unsigned, the second by David Creighton (researcher), "The amount of ventilation achieved in cigarettes at different flow rates," and "Compensation for changed delivery," BAT (File no. B225) 105553903 - 915.

    The first document acknowledges that smokers smoke differently than machines, and that smokers "compensate for low delivery products in a number of ways and this includes taking larger puffs (increased flow rate)." Depending on the brand, larger puffs decrease or increase ventilation from the paper or the filter. "Thus, it is probable that, all other factors being equal, cigarettes in which the degree of ventilation decreases with increasing flow rate (filter tip ventilation) would be preferred to cigarettes in which the degree of ventilation increases. [NB. "Preferred" by the smoker, that is.] Creighton describes research showing that low delivery products are smoked more intensely than low delivery products, a habit that was sustained over the experimental period of a month.

    Notable quotes: "Nicotine is the most pharmacologically active constituent in tobacco smoke and is probably the most usual factor for the maintenance of the smoking habit." He discounts the ritual of handling cigarettes, or smoking of herbal cigarettes: "The main difference...is nicotine." He distinguishes heavy and light smokers, the former needing to keep a level of nicotine or else they become irritable, make mistakes. "Many smokers will fall between these two extremes and their smoking patterns suggest that they wish to maintaina certain blood level of nicotine but to add occasional spikes to it." Simply making a high nicotine cigarettes is not the answer as it is irritating. It is difficult to separate tar from nicotine. Compensation will therefore increase the amount of tar taken in.