This post is to share hard factual evidence connecting hidden and unregulated pesticide contaminants in Swisher Sweets like DDT, Carbendazim, and Cypermethrin, and the multiple terrible birth defects like holoprosencephaly these so-called “Tobacco products” are inflicting on the children and even grandchildren of smokers. I’ll provide more links below to published journal research that connects Black, Brown and Native American birth defects with these hidden and unregulated pesticides in tobacco products. First a brief look at why these pesticides are doing such damage.
One all too-common, pesticide-caused birth defect (1 in 250 embryos) occurs when a developing embryo’s “Sonic Hedgehog Gene” is attacked and damaged by specific pesticides. In spite of its weird name. this gene is a true Mother Gene – it controls the creation of the human body from the time the embryo is only a few dividing cells. It does this by secreting a complex protein called “Sonic Hedgehog” that guides the developing embryo through all the incredibly complex cell divisions it takes for the embryo to become a human being instead of a fish or a cat or a firefly. This Mother Gene secretes just right version of the Sonic Hedgehog protein at the right moment to biochemically message the right cells in the developing embryo – “hey – become two eyes right there”, “OK – make five fingers here and here”, and “Listen up – become a brain stem!” – important little details like that. When it all goes right, a wonderful healthy human baby is born.
When pesticides attack this gene, the crucial Sonic Hedgehog protein is damaged, and some of the cellular pathways to becoming fully human are now destroyed for that baby, who will never be whole even if they are born at all.
When a young girl or woman smokes a commercial cigarette or little cigar, specific pesticides known to attack and destroy the Sonic Hedgehog gene in human embryos flood her system and circulate in her blood. That’s the simple reality. What happens to that developing baby then is pretty straight science, which I’ll show you. First, to set the stage, here are the pesticides in Swisher Sweets and other tobacco product brands known to attack, damage and destroy the Sonic Hedgehog gene.
The Sonic Hedgehog” gene controls human “morphogenesis” – literally the creation, or genesis of the human body. This gene is responsible for creating the body of the baby from the first instant out of those first few cells that start dividing and becoming. We know for sure that the Sonic Hedgehog can be damaged and destroyed by very low levels of the pesticides that we also know for sure are hidden contaminants of Swisher Sweets. Every pesticide listed above attacks and damages the human embryo’s Sonic Hedgehog gene; imagine the impact when they all attack at once, like a frenzied pack of wild dogs, with every puff.
Now The Really Damaging Connection
BUT – its not enough that the pesticides in Swishers attack the Sonic Hedgehog to directly cause this terrible birth defect. Holoprosencephaly also is caused by maternal diabetes – in fact a Mom with diabetes is 200X more likely to have a damaged baby.
And guess what – pesticide exposure is very strongly linked to Diabetes, and smokers have a very high rate of Diabetes. (more links below) So the DDT and Carbendazim and the other hidden, unregulated fungicides and insecticides attack the baby’s Mother Gene directly, and also cause Mom to have Diabetes, which also attacks the Mother Gene. That baby and mother are at totally preventable terminal risk.
“We now know that smoking causes type 2 diabetes.” (CDC)
Notice that CDC says ‘smoking’ not ‘smoking tobacco’ – that’s just a small example of the duplicity of these agencies. Here’s why:
If “smoking” includes inhaling pesticides, then duh. We already know for sure that exposure to pesticides causes Type 2 Diabetes. But CDC never mentions pesticides in ‘tobacco’ products. Never. At all. CDC wants everyone to connect ‘smoking’ and ‘diabetes” without knowing anything about ‘pesticides’ in tobacco products. If smokers did know, then pesticide exposure causing Type 2 Diabetes could easily avoided by switching to organic tobacco products until/if quitting became an option. But CDC evidently wants people to either quit or die.
So here’s what that Diabetic pregnant Mom who loves her Swishers is carefully conditioned by Swisher’s expensive, heavy advertising and their planted street memes to think is coming ….
But here is what may actually be coming. With apologies for the shocking images – do you see any cute little Swisher babies here?
In a Swisher Smokin’ Mommy, DDT and all those other insecticides and fungicides you see in the Swishers data will be circulating in her blood at exactly the right moment to damage her baby’s Sonic Hedgehog. That DDT is bioaccumulative too, so it builds up in her tissues. It will eventually likely cause breast cancer. It is also an obesogen, so it will definitely make her fatter because DDT needs fat cells for storage.
So every young Swisher smoker’s blood is always full of DDT and a dozen other neurotoxic pesticides, all ready to target any new embryo’s Sonic Hedgehog gene. There are @ 2 million young girls and women just in the US who smoke Swishers regularly. Every one is at severe risk. It doesn’t matter if she’s pregnant right now – as long as she keeps smoking, that little Sonic Hedgehog is toast any time it pops up its little head.
Not surprisingly, birth defects associated with exposure of fetal life to neurotoxic pesticides are extremely high in marginalized communities, where high proportions of young women smoke tobacco products like Swisher Sweets, that are highly contaminated with many of exactly the same pesticides known to cause these terribly damaged babies.
Because nobody since roughly 1968 has published research on pesticides in tobacco products, and since my 2018 “Smoke No Evil” data is still unknown, at least one highly probable cause of holoprosencephaly in the children of smokers in these marginalized and exploited communities isn’t realized by anyone and therefore can’t begin to be be addressed. Here’s some pretty simple hard evidence – don’t you think this might be worth some Public Health attention?
The “Sonic Hedgehog” was named by the quirky scientists who discovered it in the early 80s. This gene basically regulates key processes in the developing embryo all the way from when it’s deciding whether to become a frog or a human and then when it’s deciding how many fingers and eyes to grow and where to put them, and so on. The Sonic HedgeHog gene does all this by sending coded biochemical messages to all the millions of cells whose growth has to be coordinated so they become that first cute little baby you see above – the mythical “Swisher Baby”.
Not all Sonic Hedgehog damage is terminally tragic – since 1 in 250 human embryos experience some level of damage there are many babies born who go on to lead their lives while carrying the burden laid upon them before they were born. Like these young people. Do any of them or their brothers and sisters in victimhood live in your community? Would you like to see this tragedy end? There is a simple solution. Force tobacco product manufacturers to remove pesticide residues from their products. That’s it. Forget any issues with tobacco, nicotine, or smoking. Deal with the pesticides first, then see what happens to young people who smoke pesticide-free tobacco. I have a pretty good hunch what we’ll find.
And as you and I cringe at the images and try to deal with the idea that this is being done to children every day in order to extract money from them, we have to remember that this massive lifelong suffering is the consequence of the reckless act of profit-hungry manufacturers acting with certain knowledge that their product is contaminated with these pesticides. By virtue of their industry position, and their membership in CORESTA, they either know or ought to know the consequences of inhalation of the pesticides that contaminate their tobacco products. They ought also to be aware that the genetics of Black, Latinx and Native American people are particularly vulnerable – and of course, they are. The Tobacco industry calls young Black and Brown kids “replacement smokers” and that’s exactly what they are – replacements.
This is an industry so ready for accountability – once there is even a little crack in their dam of silence it will explode with worldwide genocide trials and global confiscation of assets that will reach into some of the wealthiest families and institutions in the world. After all, Tobacco wealth built America and much of the rest of the “modern” world. Those massively wealthy families are still there, invisible, protected – they think. I may not see it, but their time of accountability will come. The evidence is just too strong and too vast, although still too hidden with vast cleverness in plain sight. When the world can see the extent of the Tobacco wealth built on a hundreds of years of the exploitation, suffering and death of smokers then literally trillions in hoarded Tobacco treasure will be surfaced and can be reclaimed for the public good. It is wasted, unproductive privately held and stoutly protected wealth, supporting the indulgent worthless lives of largely incompetent unroductive people with love only for themselves. This ill-gotten gain, going back decades, has left a trail of evidence in spite of its very very best efforts. It’s the 50 year total gap in research that gives away the Tobacco industry’s screaming nightmare concern. It was around 1972 when the lid was clamped on hard and universally on cigarette pesticide research, around the world and not just in the US. And boy are those early studies out of NCSU an eye-opener on what pesticides smokers were inhaling in the 1950s and 60s. These are the same folks who, if they haven’t yet died of “smoking related disease”, are dying now from all those years of inhaling what you see in these long buried old reports. You can browse a few examples of the surviving tobacco/cigarette pesticide research that virtually ended in the 1970s here and here and here and here and here.
Every organochlorine in the book was present in cigarettes of the period, and the organophosphates were coming on heavy then too. (Remember that in 1960s detection technology was not well-developed.) The level of contamination has only gotten worse in the years since the industry clamped down on research, and my “Smoke No Evil” tests in 2018 strongly suggest.
Then after the early 1970s – nothing. It all stopped – the data, not the pesticides. There had been dozens of studies from the early 1950s through the 60s at NCSU and elsewhere documenting high concentrations of these incredible supertoxins – and suddenly oops – that all stopped. That’s the smoking gun – no research on pesticides in cigarettes anywhere on earth since the industry realized what the data actually showed. It showed neurotoxic, carcinogenic, genotoxic levels of multiple pesticides, dozens of them in fact, that smokers were inhaling every puff. Not one more study, when the tobacco industry continued to be the largest user of pesticides per acre of any crop on earth. Nada. That says pure, coordinated, global conspiracy to me – how about you? In case you missed this earlier, you can browse a few examples of the surviving tobacco/cigarette pesticide research that virtually ended in the 1970s here and here and here and here and here.
I hope that I’ve been able to help bring a reckoning to those at the top of this cold, inhuman conspiracy. I have only a few treasured illusions, like for instance that you, dear reader, may be in a position to pick up the phone and make something begin to happen. Maybe a nice little class action lawsuit on behalf of any one of the very identifiable classes of people whose lives have been irreparably damaged by the conspirators. And by the way, responsibility and accountability for this slow-rolling, trans-generational atrocity includes all the Federal agencies who have known the cold, hard facts since the research was shut down – they’ve chosen to lie, dissimulate and keep silent for decades, either out of fear or greed – hard to say. Their only “Report” on tobacco pesticides in the early 2000s was a puke on American smokers and their families, designed to shield the tobacco industry, period. I’m just an old guy sitting at a little desk early on a cold morning in Portland Oregon writing these words that I hope will be heard like the prayer they are meant to be. So thank you dear reader for picking this up and reading it all the way to the end of the line.
If you are Diabetic who smokes, or if you care about someone who does, there is a new connection between smoking and Diabetes you should know about. The CDC says that 25% of people with Type 2 Diabetes are smokers, and every one of them is experiencing severe harm that is 100% preventable with a simple behavioral change that is not only not difficult – for any smoker it will be easy. With 32,000,000 people in the US diagnosed with Type 2, that means that 7,000,000 smokers are at risk from this unique, unrecognized threat. If you or someone you know is Diabetic and had a mother who smoked, you also may want to have this information. In this post I’ll give you links to published journal research evidence that this threat is real and that points to serious, 100% preventable harm being done to millions of Diabetics who smoke any brand of cigarette, but especially cheap cigarettes and those sweet, fruity little cigars. The hidden connection between smoking and Type 2 Diabetes is simple to point out but needs then needs some explanation.
Here it is. It begins with DDT. The hidden connection between smoking and Diabetes lies in contamination by insecticides, fungicides, neurotoxins and endocrine disruptors like DDT a specific heavy contaminant of Swisher Sweets little cigars smoked by millions of young people. DDT is totally banned worldwide and has no business being in anything that millions of Diabetics are smoking every day. The other pesticide chemicals you see below, each in its own way represent magnification of the threat posed by the heavy-hitters like DDT and Carbendazim.
Now please let me show you more links and hard data that back up this statement of fact – we know that smoking causes Type 2 Diabetes, and while some of this damage may be due to smoking tobacco, how much may be due to this toxic array of hidden bioactive chemicals, every one of which is designed to destroy life one way or another?
2. We also know for a fact that specific pesticide exposures including DDT and several other identified pesticides in Tobacco Cartel products cause Diabetes in newborn children, teens and adults. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/collections/45847338/
But here’s the problem – one that’s injuring and killing a lot of people. What no smoker knows, and what no doctors evidently know, is that cigarettes and cigars are loaded with exactly the same insecticides and fungicides that Diabetes journal research, plus CDC, FDA and EPA all point to as CAUSING Diabetes.
So smoking isn’t “linked to” or “associated with” Diabetes. It causes Diabetes. So do pesticides. Full stop.
So we have smoking causing Diabetes, and inhaling pesticides causing Diabetes. Could it be that what is actually causing Diabetes in smokers, and is sickening and killing millions of smokers (and their children by the way), is that nobody has a clue that Diabetic smokers are doing both, and are preventably suffering and dying because of it. Could switching to organic tobacco cigarettes as a first step to possibly quitting make a measurable difference in the health of diabetic smokers? I say yes it could, and why not try it?
Here’s a very small sample of pesticide/Diabetes research:
So how about a little discussion of these simple facts.
Many of us already know that smoking is proven to radically increase the risk of developing Diabetes, and to make diabetes worse. As we saw, the American CDC says “Smoking causes diabetes” Not just “associated with” Diabetes or “linked to” Diabetes. Smoking causes Diabetes.
OK. But smoking what, and why is it causing Diabetes? Nobody seems to be asking the question. The answer may be very important to smokers with Diabetes, whose cigarettes and cigars are loaded with unregulated and even banned pesticides in concentrations known to cause Diabetes through chronic exposure – like through smoking, for example. Problem is, not one MD in the world appears to know that the Diabetic smoker they’re treating is being exposed to pesticides several hundred times a day. You have to wonder how many of the “complications” of smoking in Diabetics are actually consequences of pesticide exposure. The docs are seeing the consequences, and the patient is sure experiencing them, and they both think they know what’s causing it – the “tobacco”. Except – many cigarette brands aren’t actually tobacco. And even if smoking tobacco causes Diabetes – which nobody in the world has ever actually tested since they all use industry-supplied cigarettes, never organic tobacco, for all their ‘science‘ – that still leaves the question of what inhaling that cocktail of pesticides you see in the data below is doing to the smoker. Well, we actually do know that because if the smoker were not a smoker but was somehow inhaling that same mix of pesticides you see in the tables below from somewhere, hundreds of times a day, my guess is that the pesticide/diabetes science would apply. They would be at very high risk to get Diabetes, right?
So here’s my question – if we know for sure that exposure to pesticides causes Diabetes, which we do, and if we know for sure that smoking causes Diabetes, which we do, and with hard data from the “Smoke No Evil” cigarette/pesticide tests in 2018 (see the data below) we also know that smokers are inhaling a cocktail of pesticides with every puff. So here’s a question for everyone from smokers to doctors to families to public health authorities – what would happen if Diabetic smokers kept right on smoking but switched to organic tobacco cigarettes and therefore stopped inhaling pesticides? Will Diabetics who smoke still sicken and die as quickly, or at all if they switch to smoking organic tobacco?
Diabetics who smoke are clearly at increased risk of death if they contract COVID19 at the same time that their immune system is being destroyed by insecticides and fungicides with every cigarette puff. Could a simple switch to pesticide-free cigarettes or RYO save at least some lives?
Those aren’t such dumb questions once you take a look at the science. There are dozens of peer-reviewed articles that support the causal link between pesticide exposure and diabetes, just like there are hundreds supporting the causal link between smoking and diabetes. Like these.
Smoking and Incidence of Diabetes Among U.S. Adults
Findings from the Insulin Resistance Atherosclerosis Study
RESULTS—Of current smokers, 96 (25%) developed diabetes at 5 years, compared with 60 (14%) never smokers. After multivariable adjustment, current smokers exhibited increased incidence of diabetes compared with never smokers (odds ratio [OR] 2.66, P = 0.001). Similar results were found among current smokers with ≥20 pack-years with normal glucose tolerance (5.66, P = 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS—Smoking shares a robust association with incident diabetes, supporting the current Surgeon General’s warnings against cigarette smoking.
Now let’s look at the relationship between pesticide exposure and Diabetes. Same conclusions. Remarkable isn’t it? There’s much much more.
“After reviewing 21 previous studies, researchers found exposure to any type of pesticide was associated with a 61 percent increased risk for any type of diabetes. The increased risk for type 2 diabetes — the most common type — was 64 percent, the investigators found.”
We identified 22 studies assessing the association between pesticides and diabetes. The summary OR for the association of top vs. bottom tertile of exposure to any type of pesticide and diabetes was 1.58 (95% CI: 1.32–1.90, p = 1.21 × 10− 6), with large heterogeneity (I2 = 66.8%). Studies evaluating Type 2 diabetes in particular (n = 13 studies), showed a similar summary effect comparing top vs. bottom tertiles of exposure: 1.61 (95% CI 1.37–1.88, p = 3.51 × 10− 9) with no heterogeneity (I2 = 0%). Analysis by type of pesticide yielded an increased risk of diabetes for DDE, heptachlor, HCB, DDT, and trans-nonachlor or chlordane.
The Smoking Gun
So – here’s graphic evidence of the reason for the causal links between smoking and Diabetes. Google any one of these and any of the major symptoms of Diabetes or any Diabetes-related condition. Browse the science. And remember – just because you see “trace” doesn’t mean that chemical isn’t highly bioactive even below the limits of detection.
Please check this link: solid new science tells us that a trace is all it takes of many new pesticides. They don’t depend on dosage for firepower. They are 100% stealthy by design and even a few molecules on-target on-time will do the job on any endocrine system or any nervous system or any reproductive system of any living creature.
(The Journal) Toxicology
“Toxic effects of pesticide mixtures at a molecular level: their relevance to human health”
IMO this is a “sound the alarm, all hands on deck” situation. This is a public health emergency on or above the scale of COVID in terms of suffering and death that could be ended virtually overnight with simple legislation setting regulatory limits on pesticides in tobacco products and incentivizing the production of organic tobacco rather than continuing the futile – but highly lucrative – effort to eradicate smoking.
Conclusions
So – without going into an exhaustive review of the science, which I am working on for a new chapter in “Smoke No Evil”, let me just say that I wanted to publish these ideas now, as I am developing them, so that in case anyone reads this who cares, this long-concealed causal link is now out in the open. There’s a lot more science than I present here behind both parts of this mysterious gap in knowledge. A lot of people who are being badly injured by smoking could be helped if they only knew enough to make their own decision to switch to organic tobacco. I doubt that many doctors, who are among the most effectively brainwashed people when it comes to Tobacco, would ever recommend switching to smoking organic, which is easy and effective, rather than quitting, which is difficult and ineffective. Go figure.
Please share this and help raise awareness that there may be a new path through the wilderness of Diabetes, at least for smokers.
It is such a simple proposition – if you are diabetic and you smoke, before you go through the agony of trying to quit, why not just switch to organic tobacco cigarettes for one month and see how you feel and equally important see how your numbers are looking.
This post is about a crime being committed right now, today and every day, against hundreds of thousands of Black and Brown living and unborn babies. Their lives are in grave danger from nerve gas and genetic toxins in those fruity little Sweets. Many babies and children have already been irreparably damaged. But those young Black and Brown lives don’t matter, not to Swisher Sweets. This is a WAY profitable product, made with the worst, most contaminated tobacco waste. They market directly to Black and Brown young people, especially girls and women, using every evil little “targeted marketing” trick in the tobacco industry’s book. The facts prove that they knowingly and without regard to human life produce an unreasonably dangerous, life-threatening product that has especially toxic impact on babies with Black or Brown genetics.
Pretty stark, I know, but check this table that shows you the concentration of DDT found in Swisher Sweets when I had them tested by a highly competent lab. There are many more neurotoxic fungicides and insecticides in good old fruity minty fun and funky Swishers, as you can see, but let’s just focus on the DDT.
That DDT concentration you can see in the table – 0.816 ppm – is 700+ times greater than the concentration of DDT inany 2019 food or other consumable product. That’s a HUGE problem for a fetus whose Mommy is inhaling that DDT 50-100 times a day or more. Many young Black and Latina women actually believe the street myth that smoking Swishers is safer than smoking cigarettes so they pass their entire pregnancy inhaling these fruity little sacks of nerve poison.
DDT has been banned for any use except extreme mosquito control for generations, and for plenty of good reasons. It’s still the best killer the chemical industry has ever come up with, bar none, and growers worldwide long to be able to use it again. But alas, they can’t. Unless they’re the tobacco industry, and then it’s OK. So – here it is, freshly applied to tobacco and being inhaled by 3 million+ young Swisher Sweets smokers, predominantly Black and Latinx, over half female.
How many Swisher smokers are pregnant today? We know that only 25% of them will stop smoking during pregnancy. There are communities full of damaged babies of Black & Brown smokers and nobody knows why so everybody just seems to accept it – that’s just the way it is if you smoke. Maybe you can see, after you’ve looked at this evidence, the real reason why so many babies of Black and Brown smokers are born damaged beyond belief. And why it doesn’t have to be that way.
The research evidence, quoted and linked in-depth below, is overwhelming that even the tiniest exposure to DDT at the right point in fetal development can be catastrophic. That’s true of other neurotoxins in Swishers, each with its own special kind of damage. After all, the whole purpose of these neurotoxins is to kill and destroy millions of tiny bugs in a field with just a few molecules of the neurochemical for each tiny life. These chemical companies are the direct descendants of Nazi nerve gas manufacturers and they have not changed their attitude toward “sub-humans” one little bit.
Babies in the womb are being drenched with these neurotoxins through their mother’s blood, across the placenta, straight to their emerging brain, glands and nervous system. Their effects at the molecular level are just being documented, but they are terrible and permanent.
The US and world governments have quite deliberately never tested for these neurochemicals although they spend hundreds of millions of taxpayers money trying to convince people that smoking is bad. Any high-paid government flunky care to really say why? They all know – Agriculture, Justice, the EPA, the FDA, the CDC. The industry has the system rigged at every level of government so it is exempt from regulation anywhere, anytime for this beyond-criminal behavior.
Aren’t these crimes against humanity? Against the unborn? Could they be genocide? Gassing babies ought to qualify, don’t you think maybe? See what the research says about gassing babies just below the data table showing you what they’re being gassed with.
If this table is too small check the one above – and I’ve also included full-size Swisher Sweet & Marlboro tables, without the little Sweetie, at the end of this post.
Recent studies on in-utero exposure to the organochlorine pesticide dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane and its breakdown product, dichlorodiphenyldichloroethene, indicate that exposure is associated with impaired child neurodevelopment.
We present the work of the CHAMACOS study, a longitudinal birth cohort study of Mexican-American children living in the Salinas Valley of California. In this study, we investigated the relationship of children’s neurodevelopment with maternal dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane and dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene serum levels, as well as prenatal and child organophosphate urinary metabolite levels. We observed a negative association of prenatal dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane exposure and child mental development.
Life Sciences
2016 Jan 15;145:255-64.
doi: 10.1016/j.lfs.2015.11.006. Epub 2015 Nov 5.
Potential role of organochlorine pesticides in the pathogenesis of neurodevelopmental, neurodegenerative, and neurobehavioral disorders: A review
The growing body of evidence has demonstrated that prenatal exposure to organochlorines (OCs) is associated with impairment of neuropsychological development. It has been suggested that maternal exposure to OCPs results in impaired motor and cognitive development in newborns and infants. Moreover, in utero exposure to these compounds contributes to the etiology of autism.
This study confirms the association between maternal serum concentration of OCPs and preterm labour, and also reports an increased mRNA expression of inflammatory pathway genes such as TNF-α and COX-2, which have not been correlated with OCPs levels in previous studies concerning preterm birth aetiology. Even if COX-2 and TNF-α cannot be considered as direct biomarkers for pesticide exposure, since these are involved in all inflammatory processes that contribute to the onset of PTB, a possible gene-environment interaction may occur. The association between OCPs with mRNA expression of TNF-α gene should be further investigated.
Toxicology
2013 May 10;307:136-45.
doi: 10.1016/j.tox.2012.06.009. Epub 2012 Jun 21.
Toxic effects of pesticide mixtures at a molecular level: their relevance to human health
The toxicological effects of low-dose pesticide mixtures on the human health are largely unknown, although there are growing concerns about their safety. The combined toxicological effects of two or more components of a pesticide mixture can take one of three forms: independent, dose addition or interaction.
Not all mixtures of pesticides with similar chemical structures produce additive effects; thus, if they act on multiple sites their mixtures may produce different toxic effects. The additive approach also fails when evaluating mixtures that involve a secondary chemical that changes the toxicokinetics of the pesticide as a result of its increased activation or decreased detoxification, which is followed by an enhanced or reduced toxicity, respectively.
This review addresses a number of toxicological interactions of pesticide mixtures at a molecular level.
Examples of such interactions include:
the postulated mechanisms for the potentiation of pyrethroid, carbaryl and triazine herbicides toxicity by organophosphates;
how the toxicity of some organophosphates can be potentiated by other organophosphates or by previous exposure to organochlorines;
the synergism between pyrethroid and carbamate compounds and
the antagonism between triazine herbicides and prochloraz.
Particular interactions are also addressed, such as:
pesticides acting as endocrine disruptors,
the cumulative toxicity of organophosphates and organochlorines resulting in estrogenic effects, and
the promotion of organophosphate-induced delayed polyneuropathy.
Current Opinion jn Pediatrics
2008 Apr;20(2):184-90.
doi: 10.1097/MOP.0b013e3282f56165.
Prenatal tobacco smoke and postnatal secondhand smoke exposure and child neurodevelopment
Prenatal tobacco and postnatal secondhand smoke exposure is consistently associated with problems in multiple domains of children’s neurodevelopment and behavior.
The literature on both prenatal and postnatal exposure is remarkably consistent in showing associations with increased rates of behavior problems, including irritability, oppositional defiant behavior, conduct disorders and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.
Environ Health Perspect
2014 Oct;122(10):1103-9.
doi: 10.1289/ehp.1307044. Epub 2014 Jan 23.
Neurodevelopmental disorders and prenatal residential proximity to agricultural pesticides: the CHARGE study
Conclusions: This study of ASD strengthens the evidence linking neurodevelopmental disorders with gestational pesticide exposures, particularly organophosphates, and provides novel results of ASD and DD associations with, respectively, pyrethroids and carbamates
Environ Health Perspectives
2017 May 25;125(5):057002.
doi: 10.1289/EHP504.
Prenatal Residential Proximity to Agricultural Pesticide Use and IQ in 7-Year-Old Children
This study identifies potential relationships between maternal residential proximity to agricultural use of neurotoxic pesticides and poorer neurodevelopment in children.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A
2019 Sep 10;116(37):18347-18356.
doi: 10.1073/pnas.1903940116. Epub 2019 Aug 26.
Prenatal exposure to organophosphate pesticides and functional neuroimaging in adolescents living in proximity to pesticide application
Conclusions: These findings contribute mixed evidence linking OP pesticide exposures with traits related to developmental disorders like ASD. Subtle pesticide-related effects on ASD-related traits among a population with ubiquitous exposure could result in a rise in cases of clinically diagnosed disorders like ASD
Environ Research
2016 Oct;150:128-137.
doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2016.05.048. Epub 2016 Jun 6.
Residential proximity to organophosphate and carbamate pesticide use during pregnancy, poverty during childhood, and cognitive functioning in 10-year-old children
Conclusions: Residential proximity to OP and carbamate pesticide use during pregnancy and both household- and neighborhood-level poverty during childhood were independently associated with poorer cognitive functioning in children at 10 years of age.
Hi! Thanks for visiting. Just click here to request your free review copyof “Smoke No Evil”. That will send me your email address I’ll send you a PDF review copy.
After you have a chance to read it, I hope that you’ll add your voice to those finally demanding investigation and full accountability for the Tobacco Cartel for this previously unknown galaxy of criminal acts involving some of the most dangerous bioactive chemicals on earth.
I’ve written this book because “smoking-related disease” continues to destroy millions of smokers and families worldwide every year with no accountability.
I believe that many if not most of those deaths are preventable with a new, evidence-based approach – regulating pesticides in Tobacco Cartel products using existing consumer product pesticide residue limits as the standard. That’s it. Simply requiring that tobacco products meet minimum pesticide residue standards, like those imposed on Tobacco’s nearest comparable crop Cannabis. This makes the legislative process easy. Cnnabis is the only other consumable product that like Tobacco is also combusted and inhaled, and pesticide residues are already recognized as a serious health hazard on Cannabis flowers inhaled by smokers and there are residue limits because of the threat they represent.
Ludicrously, Tobacco Cartel products are exempt from pesticide regulation. If you go to your state health authority they will tell you that they have no authority to regulate tobacco products, including pesticide residues on those products, and if you go to the Feds they will tell you that they don’t inspect tobacco products for pesticide residues although – they righteously explain – hey do st limits on pesticides used by American tobacco growers. Do they inspect the leaf once it leaves the field? No. More importantly, do they check the leaf coming in from Cartel companies in Brazil and India and others where even DDT, supposedly banned worldwide, is sprayed without regulation on tobacco? No. American tobacco products simply don’t contain that much American-grown tobacco anymore when it can be grown overseas and brought in without any regulation or inspection – just a meaningless self-certification.
This book documents what the Cartel has known and kept secret for generations: that smoking-related disease and death may be caused not as much by Tobacco as by exempted & concealed super-toxic xenobiotics used by Cartel companies purely to boost profits, free of any effective regulation.
I don’t claim that smoking Tobacco, even organic Tobacco is safe; I do say that inhaling a proven carcinogenic/neurotoxic/genotoxic fungicide/insecticide cocktail a hundred times or more a day, from whatever source, combusted or vaporized, will surely and certainly destroy human energy, health & life.
This book offers hard evidence, new facts, and numerous peer-reviewed research citations to raise awareness that the Tobacco Cartel has, in plain view, engaged in a trans-generational conspiracy to commit crimes against humanity on a scale beyond imagination.
I hope that you’ll consider the evidence on its merits.
Here’s the Table of Contents
Introduction: Let Hard Data Speak
Links To Individual Xenobiotics In The Data
More Background On This New Data
Xenobiotics – Substances That Destroy Life Itself
Kentucky Reference Cigarettes – Invalidating 50 years of Research
About Those Dangerous Mint Flavors …
The Practical Reason For Pesticides In Tobacco – Pure Profit
Hello! This blog post is now part of my newly published ebook “Smoke No Evil“, which is published on Amazon but its available free for the asking to visitors like you – see below.
I here’s nothing wrong with smoking Tobacco. It’s as safe as wine, beer, or cheeseburgers. It’s the Tobacco Cartel’s products that sicken and kill. “Smoking-related Death” has nothing to do with Tobacco. Many people understand the truth, but don’t know the whole story.
Just click here to request your free review copy of “Smoke No Evil”. After you read it, I hope that you’ll add your voice to those demanding investigation and accountability for the Tobacco Cartel. My hope is also that the knowledge in this book can be life-changing for smokers who are trapped in addiction to commercial Tobacco Cartel products, and life-affirming for those who already understand and smoke or vape only organic tobacco whenever possible.
Whether you smoke, vape, or chew tobacco this book destroys the myth that tobacco is going to harm you. Using data and hard evidence, this book proves that it’s not tobacco killing millions of smokers every year, and it never has been. You’ll see how the “science” used to prove that Tobacco is a killer is pure fraud and deception on the part of the Tobacco Cartel, and pure hypocrisy on the part of regulators and anti-tobacco propagandists.
My hope is that the knowledge here can be life-changing for smokers who are trapped in addiction to commercial Tobacco Cartel products, particularly people who are members of oppressed minority communities where the damage from pesticides in cheap tobacco products is magnified by genetic vulnerability.
In order to make the case for why organic tobacco is not only safer than pesticide-contaminated tobacco, but is very likely perfectly safe to smoke or vape especially in moderation, I want to share both hard data and published science with you, as well as some ideas for dealing with this hoax, actually a massive criminal conspiracy, that the Tobacco Cartel and government agencies have created and sustained for 70 years.
The data on pesticide contaminants in tobacco products from cigarettes to little cigars that you’ll see in this post are unique – nobody has tested cigarettes for fungicides and insecticides since research like this published in the early 1970s when all such research worldwide literally disappeared. Here’s a quick example of what was being found in cigarettes back then.
I hope you’ll allow me to set the stage as you read on, but if you clicked that link above and looked at the 1970s data, now check out this new hard data on what smokers are inhaling today. Not one published research study, out of the tens of thousands of “studies” funded with hundreds of millions of dollars, has compared organic tobacco cigarettes with commercial tobacco cigarettes, yet this 2018 data from research for my book “Smoke No Evil” shows clearly that smokers have been inhaling pesticides along with their tobacco smoke continuously for over 60 years since at least 1959 with complete US government knowledge and consent.
In other posts I have tracked this remarkable disappearance of research on cigarette pesticide contaminants to a global effort by the Cartel to erase the topic of pesticide residues in tobacco products from public awareness. From the early 1950s through the early 1970s there was extensive research on the topic of pesticides in tobacco products in multiple scientific/agricultural/chemical journals, every study revealing concentrations of organochlorine and then organophosphorous pesticides in every tobacco product studied, but as medical science on these xenobiotic chemicals advanced the industry understood that their most heavily contaminated products would very likely attract horrified attention and be banned if brought under proposed environmental and agricultural pesticide regulations unless they took control of any research that could lead to such regulation, and so they did. They managed to shut it all down, worldwide.
During these same years the Tobacco Cartel successfully maneuvered and manipulated Congress and the agencies to get tobacco products exempted from pesticide inspection, regulation or even tracking by any government agency. To this day in 2021 no agency inspects or regulates tobacco products for pesticides, and in the regulations of every agency dealing in any way with hazardous or toxic substances, from EPA to CPSC to FDA tobacco products are specifically exempted. It took a lot of satanic lawyering and political corruption to get every single piece of regulatory exemption in place but that’s how the Cartel rolls.
Please use your own research skills to confirm this absolutely remarkable absence of attention to what in any other product consumed by millions of people would be completely horrifying. I would love to hear of anything you find on pesticide residues in tobacco products – cigarettes, cigars, bidis – anything, anywhere. Of course, there’s plenty of pesticide residue research on Cannabis, and plenty of careful regulations, strictly enforced. Can’t have pesticide residues on Cannabis, and we have to study their potential health impact pretty carefully in order to protect Cannabis users. But on what you would think would be a natural hot research topic, toxic pesticide residues on those nasty old tobacco products that we all hate, there’s nothing since the mid-70s. You’ll find some limited published research on pesticides on field tobacco, but zero on pesticides on manufactured tobacco products. Pretty strange, you’ll have to admit. If you do find something please let me know.
You can browse a few more examples of the surviving tobacco/cigarette pesticide research on DDT and other organochlorine pesticides in cigarettes that virtually ended in the 1970s here and here andhere and here and here. You can see from the reference sections of these journal articles that from 1950-1975 there were entire journals devoted to researching pesticide residues in cigarettes and tobacco products. Then it stopped.
It seems to me that a coordinated policy decision must have made at a level of world government that we never see, at the level of power and influence wielded out of public view by generational and corporate wealth shielded by the best legal minds, ensuring that there would be no more of this kind of information readily available to the public. If there is any industry research it is kept tight in the Tobacco Cartel’s so-called scientific organization CORESTA.
The research funding for research on pesticides in tobacco products was simply cut off by government agencies, and all those scientists lucratively re-purposed so they didn’t complain, and this must have been operating under coordinated control. I haven’t been able to find a single study, funded by anyone, including the so-called non-profits that raise hundreds of millions for so-called tobacco research, and their own salaries of course, that has looked at the health impact of inhaling the supertoxic cocktail of pesticide residues in tobacco products that every Federal agency, every ‘anti-tobacco’ organization, and the entire Tobacco Cartel all know are concealed in these products.
We know that the agencies involved have played major CYA on this subject over the years, because they’ve left a clear trail of both deliberate omissions and deceptions. They’ve even occasionally had to dodge legislators like they did with Congressman Henry Waxman in 2003 with the massively deceptive GAO Report to Congress “Pesticides On Tobacco: Federal Activities To Assess Risks & Monitor Residues“. That piece of work deserves its own blog post, but the bottom line is that pesticides are no problem and the government is totally on the case – no need to worry. But interestingly enough, when it comes right down to it, here’s how EPA deals with the reality of pesticide residues in tobacco products:
“EPA does not assess intermediate or long-term risks of pesticide residues to smokers because of the severity of health effects linked to use of tobacco products themselves.” EPA 2018
There’s a lot of that kind of deliberately misleading bullshit in the Federal records, but the clarity of this statement is what makes it such a great example. Hey there EPA, couldn’t the “severity of health effects linked to use of tobacco products themselves” maybe be because of the pesticides you don’t care about? This is a truly classic “we don’t give a shit” and says everything that needs to be said about how carefully the Tobacco Cartel’s crimes are being shielded by EPA.
Everywhere you look in the Federal regulatory establishment it officially all comes down to saying “It’s the Tobacco, bitches, and just the tobacco, and we’re not going to look any further”. This from a government and anti-tobacco elite that knows perfectly well that there has never been a single study of the health impact of smoking organic tobacco cigarettes compared with smoking any of the commercial cigarettes that it knows are universally and often heavily contaminated. Not one study, not ever. They really do not want to hear about organic tobacco, or that tobacco may not be anywhere near the problem they have staked their entire careers on “fighting”. Maybe there’s nothing to fight, and maybe these folks know it and are terribly afraid people are going to find out. Why else would here be absolutely zero research on something this obviously important in 50 years?
If you press them you’ll also hear that the government actually does test tobacco and it regulates the pesticides that can be used on tobacco too. Well, those statements are both kind of true and also very misleading in a carefully crafted lawyerly kind of way. There are so many deliberately-crafted, subtle misdirections in government agency claims around pesticides and tobacco that it is, also deliberately, hard to decipher them, but the bottom line is that there is zero regulation of pesticides in tobacco products and there is zero interest in what these xenobiotic substances are doing to smokers and their children, no matter what kind of language these agencies use to try to make it seem like they are on the case. Read carefully and you’ll see the weasel language everywhere, trying to obscure the single compelling fact that no agency or regulatory organization inspects, tests or regulates pesticides in tobacco products. At all. Period. They are all quite simply complicit with the Tobacco Cartel in concealing this public health atrocity.The standard of guilt at the Nuremburg trials is that the top Nazis “by virtue of their command authority, either knew or ought to have known of the crimes committed under their jurisdiction.” Ditto.
So that’s probably why finding all that published journal research from the 50’s-70s isn’t easy. Even in Land Grant University libraries where these old ag science journals are supposed to reside, and many actually do, it’s very difficult to get access to the print copies of these old agricultural journals and the digital archives appear to have been scrubbed – although digging around pays off.
Oddly enough, considering the suppression of public tobacco product research, the Tobacco Cartel itself kept very detailed internal review and research processes going throughout the 20th Century aimed at determining the impact of each of the pesticides they were using on consumer taste. They were nominally concerned that these biologically hyperactive chemicals might make smokers think the cigarettes tasted funny, and they spent hundreds of millions on this research – in plain sight of government agencies. But because all of this research was private, and because they were able to totally suppress any publicly-funded research on pesticides, what the Cartel scientists knew by the 1980s about what these chemicals were doing to smokers was totally concealed behind corporate walls.
There was an explosion of science and medicine in the 1980s and 90s around environmental exposure to pesticides, which everybody agreed was terrible and dangerous and had to be controlled, and which ‘nobody knew’ smokers were being exposed to daily, but there is zero published evidence that the Cartel ever tested their own products for pesticide residues – although I’ll bet that subpoenas of Cartel manufacturing records would turn up decades of detailed batch testing. There looks to be a conspiracy of silence around this whole domain of science and public health and criminality that can only be due to impeccably concealed political and economic influence and the deepest possible public agency corruption by private, concealed power and wealth.
The tests that yielded the data I showed you above were the first of their kind since the 1970’s, and were run by a uniquely qualified pesticide testing lab, a US subsidiary of a major EU company that has been doing testing on tobacco product substrate for years. Some EU governments do regulate pesticides in tobacco products but they have a deal with the Cartel to keep it quiet and so nobody even realizes that it takes place. For example, German cigarettes are simply somehow very, very light on pesticide contamination, because you never hear about it, or why the German government inspects and regulates tobacco products for pesticides. It simply happens quietly, behind the scenes. That’s undoubtedly the agreement. But any American smoker who has ever gone to Germany and bought their same brand there, or any German smoker who has ever done the same in the US, will know exactly what I’m talking about even though nobody has the true facts that would so easily explain the differences.
But back to the lab tests I ran that opened all this up for me. I’m lucky to be living in Oregon, where because of Cannabis there are a number of highly qualified pesticide testing labs. I found one with impeccable credentials in testing both Cannabis in the US and Tobacco products in – guess where – Germany, their home base. Testing cigarette tobacco for pesticide residues is far more complicated than testing Cannabis, which is this lab’s main business in the US, so being able to have this lab’s scientists collect and test random samples of tobacco products against their massive tobacco substrate database with their experience in doing so was real plus.
Here’s that data again. You tell me – is smoking organic tobacco not safer than inhaling any of the factory smokes you see here? The FDA wants you to think that organic tobacco is not safer. But FDA will never show you actual data to support their claim, which they nevertheless enforce with the full power of their Federal authority. What do you think? No safer?
So I hope this data on even a few brands shows the hypocrisy of the too-clever bullshit from self-serving agencies like FDA and from anti-smoking hustlers like Truth Initiativeclaiming that organic cigarettes aren’t safer than regular commercial cigarettes because all tobacco is equally hazardous. Besides being obvious bullshit that’s either a deliberate lie or gross ignorance. They either actually know nothing about the tobacco industry, although they claim to be unimpeachable experts, or else they do know about the true nature of the health consequences of even the lowest levels of exposure to these bioactive xenobiotic chemicals and they are true co-conspirators in this atrocity. I am all about documenting and showing readers the evidence that the latter is tragically true. US regulatory agencies have been corrupted to the core by the Tobacco Cartel.
Here’s another way to look at the range of contamination smokers are exposed to with non-organic tobacco products. It’s pretty obvious when you see the data displayed this way that as you go lower in price you go up in exposure to a huge range of bioactive chemicals any one of which has potential health & life-threatening properties if inhaled often enough regardless of how tiny the amount.
But please reflect a moment longer on this data and ask yourself – who are the markets for American Spirit Blues, Marlboro Reds, and Swisher Sweets? Who are the people smoking these brands? What are the socio-economic and demographic characteristics of the smokers in these different markets? What are the poor folks inhaling vs the better-off smokers? And why are there such big differences in the amounts and kinds of pesticides and insecticides affecting these different groups of people? Those questions all have hard evidence answers, which I try to cover in my blog posts and books, but you can probably answer them yourself just by looking at these three brands. Let this slightly different display of the same data you’ve seen above speak to you. It reveals the dynamics of a hard truth behind millions of deaths. Not just these three brands – the landscape of chemical madness they reveal. Who is smoking the premium brand and who is smoking the cheap brand? What does that tell you?
After all, government at all levels and “non-profit” parasites like Truth Initiative are full partners in the revenues generated by tobacco products, and they have every reason to conceal the fact that they know that pesticides are a major, even primary and 100% preventable cause of smoking-related disease and death. The only reason pesticide residues are in tobacco products at all is because it is much more profitable and far more convenient for Tobacco Cartel companies to produce them that way than to make them cleaner and safer and organic, and the only reason that nobody has called them on this atrocity is because they have spread so much money around in so many places for so many years. If you want to identify tobacco industry co-conspirators, or maybe just pathetic dupes, just look for the ones claiming that all tobacco products are equally hazardous, organic American Spirit and Swisher Sweets alike.
If around now you’re thinking “Well, some of those pesticides look pretty bad but those concentrations look awfully low to do any damage to smokers” please understand that science now knows that many of these designer chemicals are highly bioactive in human nerves, tissues and organs even at molecular levels.
“Toxic effects of pesticide mixtures at a molecular level: their relevance to human health”
The damage even goes well beyond the smoker. If your mother smoked a brand contaminated with DDT, which as you saw earlier was almost a certainty any time from 1950 – 1972, and you are a woman, then your odds of developing breast cancer are much, much higher as a result of what DDT in those cigarettes did to your mother’s DNA. That genetic damage is passed on to both female and male children across generations.
For peer-reviewed journal research on maternal DDT and Breast Cancer see also here and here andhere. Oh, and how about Obesity? If your mother was exposed to DDT while she was carrying you, your odds of uncontrollable obesity rise dramatically. Remember, smokers from 1950-1972 were probably universally exposed to DDT, and even if they quit during pregnancy there was more than enough DDT circulating in their bodies to damage you before you were even you. Every brand in those days was contaminated not just with DDT but with Endrin, Aldrin, Lindane, Dieldrin and literally dozens of other OC and OP pesticides. Remember those links to the 1950-72 research here and here andhere and here and here?
So please tell me – are there any differences worth mentioning between those non-organic American Spirit, Marlboro and Swisher Sweets? Would tobacco cigarettes without these specific contaminants be safer than contaminated cigarettes. Prove it for yourself. Search for any one of these fungicides or insecticides listed above along with keywords like “neurological”, “fetal”, “diabetes”, “obesity”, “birth defect” or “cancer” and see what you get. As you’re looking at the results, ask yourself:
Is the least contaminated tobacco product safer than the most contaminated one, or not?
Even if you assume that the tobacco in all three brands is the same, which it isn’t, would you say there are differences in safety levels, or not?
If someone you love is smoking and you can’t get them to stop, which of the three brands above would you want them to smoke, and why?
If your kid is sneaking off and smoking, which of these brands would you least want them to be smoking, and why?
Looking at that hard data, only blind arrogance or a hidden agenda could continue to claim that the DDT, Carbendazim and Penconazole residues in the little cigars that kids are smoking right now, today, by the tens of thousands in every city in the US, doesn’t matter because tobacco itself is so bad anyway. Yet that is exactly what EPA, FDA, all the anti-smoking groups, and all the state health departments pretend to believe. That’s their excuse for doing nothing, and it’s pathetic. Here’s why.
First as I said before, there is simply zero research on the health effects of smoking uncontaminated tobacco products. No such study has ever been done. In addition, virtually all smoking and health research that used tobacco smoke obtained that smoke from “Research Standard” cigarettes supplied by the Tobacco Cartel itself, and with zero data on what pesticide residues were present in any of these “research” cigarettes. Please tell me any other area of research where the materials to be examined for their health impact are not completely characterized? No research study I have found, and I’ve looked pretty carefully, has ever acknowledged the presence of pesticide residues in the “tobacco” they were using to test the health effects of smoking tobacco.
So all statements about tobacco products begin with the unstated, unproven assumption, which is super-convenient for the Cartel, the government ‘regulators’, and the non-profit parasites, that tobacco is causing so much of the obvious harm that any damage being done by those insecticides and fungicides, that are absolutely necessary for the Tobacco Cartel to maximize profits, can safely be ignored. Not just ignored, but actively placed outside consideration or even public knowledge. In other words, concealed by conspiracy.
This level of self-serving deceitfulness while enormous numbers of people die from pesticide contaminated tobacco products every year, and while children around the world are sealing their future fates by being lured into smoking these cheap contaminated tobacco products, all of which is 100% preventable, is beyond disgusting.
The question that must be asked – if it were possible, wouldn’t the kids smoking this trash, idiots that they certainly are, be safer smoking these products if they were made from exactly the same crap as they are now, from trash and waste tobacco and cheap chemical flavorings but weren’t contaminated with those extremely hazardous pesticides we can all see in the hard data for the first time now?
We know that 1 in 13 of all the children under 17 alive today will die prematurely, painfully and expensively of “smoking-related” disease. That is a whole lot of children and future suffering. Do you think any of it could be prevented just by requiring tobacco manufacturers to remove pesticide residues from their tobacco?
They could do that, almost in a flash. Why don’t they? Because they don’t have to, and because it’s much more profitable to use chemicals than to use labor, even in the remote areas of the Third World where they grow their tobacco out of sight of regulators and inspectors.
Every tobacco product on the market could theoretically be made with responsibly grown and even organic tobacco – no problem. Give the industry 3-5 years and a drop-dead set of conditions and they will do whatever they have to do. It would take longer to actually become widely organic, but in 3-5 years the world tobacco supply could be 75% cleared of extreme and severely hazardous pesticide residues and the lives of millions of people conserved for a future with their families.
However as long as “players” like FDA and Truth Initiative and others like them play the “All Tobacco Is Equally Bad” game nothing will change. Of the total number of smokers dying each year, a significant number die because of the arrogant conceit of those who believe (or at least pretend to believe) they know all the truth there is to know about Tobacco when they have never once set foot in any tobacco field anywhere, much less a field that has just been sprayed with DDT inIndia, Nicaragua or Brazil. These countries supply hundreds of tons of contaminated tobacco waste to US manufacturers that they make into fruity little sweet smokes for our kids. US companies are also totally permitted to import tobacco products like fruity little cigars from these countries with zero inspection for DDT or any other pesticides. As long as they pay their import taxes they skate, and all that toxic load goes straight into the lungs of the young black and brown smokers in poor communities.
And then in 2015 the moralists and parasites had the nerve to go after organic tobacco. The problem is that they apparently don’t know what Tobacco is, or really that much about it, because if they did they wouldn’t have gotten themselves into the really stupid trap of insisting for the record that there’s no difference between organic tobacco and severely contaminated tobacco. They may claim when finally confronted that they don’t know about all those pesticides, but they are on the record as fully informed.
Notice that in the data tables above even the regular American Spirit Blue non-organic brand is lower in pesticides than the Marlboro or another RJR brand, Camel. That’s a big difference in safety levels even among non-organic brands, much less between organic and non-organic. However, if RJR had defended American Spirit organic tobacco on that simple evidence-based premise then they would have had to admit how contaminated all their other products are, and why. Oops! That’s a non-starter. Think of the lawsuits!
So it was a much, much better deal for RJR to let FDA pretend they scored a big win, just like years before the Surgeon General’s warnings were a godsend to tobacco manufacturers. It let them say – hey, you were warned. The so-called “Tobacco Settlement” was an even bigger fraud – look at what is actually being done with all that money. Lots of “Tobacco is really really bad” advertising, lots of huge salaries and nice perks, everybody congratulating themselves on what a great job they’re doing, and no change in the numbers of people suffering and dying, or in the number of kids heading down that dead-end road.
Until my little non-profit finally got funding and was able to begin testing tobacco products in late 2018, not one dime has ever been spent by the “anti-tobacco” forces to test for these contaminants that by themselves make these products illegal, period. But then the “Tobacco is really really bad” game would be over, wouldn’t it. Imagine the public reaction if it became clear that people in positions of responsibility and authority had known about pesticide contamination of tobacco products for many smokers’ lifetimes and had never once spoken out.
FDA knows what it has to do in return for being allowed to look like a winner in the organic tobacco derby. Their part of the deal is not to make too much noise about all those “crop protection agents”. That’s what the industry calls pesticides. After all, crops need protection, right? so much better than a nasty word ending in “cide”.
FDA and the anti-tobacco PR and advertising shills are allowed to beat the drums and make up endless variations of the “Tobacco Is So Bad” meme because that doesn’t hurt the tobacco industry one bit, but it does allow thousands of people to keep doing extremely dubious work to justify their lucrative titles and careers “fighting tobacco”.
Ever wonder why FDA is being so helpful in the industry’s pivot away from tobacco and toward e-cigarettes? Are they are all hoping that their complicity in 75 years of slaughter for profit will just slide on out of sight? Yes, complicity. FDA has had institutional knowledge of the presence of heavy concentrations of hazardous pesticides in tobacco products for over 50 years and has not once, ever brought it up in any hearings or testimony or research. That’s complicity.
I call the tobacco industry’s reckless, negligent, criminal behavior “slaughter for profit” simply because the tobacco industry doesn’t have to use pesticides at all. Traditional tobacco growers used hand labor for hundreds of years and did just fine. The tobacco companies use chemicals in place of labor strictly for increased profits and they have rigged the regulatory systems of the world so that they are protected from the consequences of their greed-driven decisions.
Should people who smoke be protected from these contaminants, or do they deserve whatever happens to them?
If these chemicals were in wine or beer, would that be OK just because alcohol is known to be so hazardous to health anyway.
Does it not matter that the most hazardous of these brands, the one with 375 times the highest background level of DDT, is the one that most kids 11-16 love?
“Because use of tobacco products, with or without pesticide residues, is so hazardous to health, all of the Oregon Health Authority’s efforts around tobacco are aimed at discouraging use of tobacco products and encouraging cessation of tobacco use in people already using it.” Oregon Health Authority 2018
“EPA does not assess intermediate or long-term risks of pesticide residues to smokers because of the severity of health effects linked to use of tobacco products themselves.” EPA 2018
“Organic,” “natural” or “additive-free” product labels may imply a healthier or safer choice, but that couldn’t be further from the truth when it comes to tobacco products. A cigarette with organic tobacco or tobacco with no additives does not make it healthier or safer than other cigarettes.” Truth Initiative 2018
No differences at all? Really? Then no problem, right? Except, hold on a minute …..
I’ll skip the long, long back story and get right to the point. If you’ve been looking for a way that individuals and small groups of people acting on their own initiative can control dangerous tobacco products at the local level, this is it. Here’s wishing you a successful 2019.
I recently had a number of off-the-shelf tobacco brands tested for pesticide residues. This was the first time this has been done in the US, in spite of the massive amounts of tax and private money spent every year on so-called “tobacco control and prevention”.
In this post I’m including hard evidence showing the concentration of illegal, totally banned DDT I found on the most popular brand of sweet & fruity little cigars, Swisher Sweets – the top choice among low-income, Black and Hispanic teens. They are also arguably the most toxic piece of shit in the whole pile of toxic shit that this rat pack of corporate criminals sells to kids. Don’t get me wrong – I found extreme pesticide contamination on many of the brands I tested – it’s just that the little cigars stood way out at the top of the contamination chart.
Don’t just take my word for the toxicity of little cigars – the University of North Carolina conducted an extensive study in 2016 comparing the toxicity of little cigar smoke, including swisher Sweets, compared with cigarette smoke. This study was also the first of its kind, just like my pesticide residue study. The North Carolina researchers found detailed hard evidence that little cigars are extremely toxic and are particularly dangerous to young, Black, and Latino smokers compared with cigarettes. (This study, combined with the hard evidence I’m sharing in this post, will blow your mind if you care about mass poisoning of innocent children.)
The one area that this North Carolina study missed was the key role that pesticide residues play in tobacco product toxicity. Like every other scientific and medical study before them, these researchers totally failed to account for pesticide contamination in the tobacco products they tested, and so they were understandably puzzled by the extreme levels of toxicity they found.
However, once you factor in pesticide contamination, the whole picture emerges clearly. The North Carolina data makes sense. It’s the differences in the pesticide burdens of different types of tobacco products that account for the differences in toxicity among types of tobacco products. That’s why it’s so important for local communities to understand the nature of this hidden threat to their children.
I found actionable levels of many different pesticide residues in all the tobacco products I just tested, including several cigarette brands popular with kids. But the overall pesticide contamination of Tobacco products, which regulators manage to ignore, isn’t the key point here. The key point for tobacco product control at the local level is that these little cigar/DDT results are not only grim news for smokers but flat out violate the law.
It is illegal to sell any product contaminated with this level of DDT anywhere in the US. and much of the world. Only soil or water-residual DDT is allowed in any food, beverage, cosmetic or other consumer product, and there is no way that the level I found could occur as a residual from soil or water – it was sprayed on the tobacco used to make this product, and it was sprayed recently. (See commentary below the data.)
The DDT concentration shown below is 700+ times the highest level found anywhere in the entire US food chain from lingering soil or water contamination, and I will guarantee that a sampling of 100 such products will yield similarly shocking results.
So here’s my suggestion. Take this data on your phone to your health department. Show them the DDT levels. Tell them that the same little cigar products are being sold at the mini-mart. (They are.)
But here’s the beauty of the hard evidence I’m offering. It doesn’t matter if your local health officials think they can regulate tobacco products specifically or not. It doesn’t matter if they think have the authority to regulate tobacco products or not. Unless they are somehow forbidden to investigate and take action in cases of toxic substance contamination in consumer products being sold to children in your county, they do have the authority to act. You may have to make them act by going to the School Board, the District Attorney, and your local media, but they do have the authority to act locally and independently on high-level DDT contamination of anything in your community – period.
These contaminated tobacco products are illegal not because they are tobacco products; they are illegal because they are consumer products contaminated with hazardous concentrations of extremely hazardous, totally banned pesticide chemicals that will be emitted when they are used as intended by the manufacturer.
If you enjoy a sweet irony, I can guarantee that when all the testing is done, most of the premium cigars that the 1% love will turn out to be the most highly contaminated of all. Although some premium cigar tobacco growers still use traditional methods, and grow tobacco without industrial chemicals, I’m quite certain that most premium cigars will prove to be far more contaminated than the cheap little cigars the busboys out behind that five-star restaurant have to smoke.
Pesticide Residue Test Sample #1 Multnomah County, Oregon Received 12/13/2018
** Relevant to risk assessment for these “Little Cigars”; the highest levels of DDT p, p- in all foods tested by FDA in their comprehensive “Total Diet Reports” for 2017, were for catfish filets and for frozen potato fries. The 2.17 ng/g potatoes and 2.3 ng/g levels expressed in the FDA “Total Diet Study” are the equivalents of 0.00217 mg/kg for potatoes and 0.0023 mg/kg for catfish. compared with 0.816 mg/kg in the single little cigar sample tested. Based on my knowledge of tobacco industry practices, additional testing will show serious levels of OCP and other classes of pesticide contamination particularly on tobacco products in the “discount” and low-price market segments and, as we will see, in the premium cigar market segment as well.
I know for certain that as we test other tobacco products, especially the cheap ones, we’ll find stuff that makes DDT look like a hint of mint. However, this data is right now, and approximately 800,000 children between 11-15 are smoking this particular brand of little cigar every day and inhaling every one of the pesticides listed.
But even if the only contaminant were the 0.816 mg/kg (or 816 mcg/kg) DDT ….
“Average adult intakes of DDT were estimated to be 62 µg/person/day (1000 micrograms = 1 milligram) in 1965 and 240 µg/person/day in 1970, before the DDT ban was instituted. The FDA Total Diet Studies show that the daily intakes have fallen since the ban, with daily intakes (for a 16-year-old, 70 kg male) averaging 6.51, 2.38, 1.49, and 0.97 µg/person/day for 1978–1979, 1979–1980, 1984–1986, and 1986–1991, respectively.” https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/htdocs/chem_background/exsumpdf/ddt_508.pdf
“Based on all of the evidence available, the Department of Health and Human Services has determined that DDT is reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen. Similarly, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has determined that DDT is possibly carcinogenic to humans. EPA has determined that DDT, DDE, and DDD are probable human carcinogens.”
It was at least partly from the hidden and unaccounted-for pesticides, which were overlooked in this study as they have been overlooked in virtually every American scientific and medical study of “tobacco” smoke. Little cigars are far more contaminated with far more toxic “crop protection agents” than cigarettes because of differences in how the tobacco is raised, and in how much highly contaminated tobacco manufacturing waste is used in making the product.
Highwaymen in the Middle Ages gave travelers a choice – they could hand over their cash and all their possessions, or they could hand over their life. At least those criminals gave their victims a choice.
Big tobacco wants both. “They just keep lining up for a smoke, so we grab ’em, drain ’em, and toss ’em aside – there’s plenty more coming down the highway. “
This post offers you an inside look at how Big Tobacco spreads its money around to buy scientists and regulators in order to create meaningless tobacco regulations based on purposely faked science so they can say “See, we’re playing by the rules, so you can’t touch us.”
Well, I do believe that Big Tobacco has outsmarted itself with its attempt to move smokers away from smoking and into vaporizing. That’s because in order to accomplish this massive feat of social engineering Big Tobacco has inadvertently revealed some things about their industrial practices that will, when clearly understood, point directly to their massive corporate crimes.
This post is an excerpt from a World Health Organization internal document titled: “Tobacco Company Strategies to Undermine Tobacco Control Activities at the World Health Organization”. This 250 page report reveals the extent of Big Tobacco’s subversion, corruption, intimidation and seduction of scientists, regulators, institutions, and anti-tobacco efforts worldwide. WHO estimates that by 2050 Big Tobacco will have killed 1 Billion people in its rampage, and this is a detailed look at how it has managed to accomplish the miracle of killing millions of people for profit and never being held criminally accountable.
This courageous and powerful report reveals in great detail the remarkable efforts Big Tobacco makes to cover its tracks, and it seems pretty clear that the only reason it would go to that enormous trouble and expense would be if they knew that if the truth about what they are really up to were to get out there, and if the truth could break through all that very expensive social engineering they’ve been doing for decades, they would all be doing the CNN perpwalk.
The reason this is relevant to a blog on Coca and Cannabis is that if you look closely at the methods Big Tobacco has used to systematically subvert scientists and government agencies worldwide to protect itself and pursue its goals, you can explain a lot of otherwise puzzling and inconsistent things about the American “War on Drugs”. After you read the following excerpt, and maybe the whole WHO report, see if you don’t agree with me that the “War on Drugs” has had the smell of Big Tobacco all over it since the 1970’s.
THE REPORT, Section Seven: “Subverting Science And Health”
Distorting WHO Research
Tobacco companies have a long history of distorting science to oppose restrictions on tobacco. Some of the tactics the tobacco companies have used for decades to manipulate the scientific and public debate include:
1. Secretly Funding Speakers at WHO Conferences
Tobacco companies have attempted to influence the tone and content of WHO- sponsored scientific conferences by paying “independent” scientists to attend and present papers. For example, Japan Tobacco Inc. (JTI) planned to pay 40 scientists to “present ‘neutral’ papers” at the 6th World Health Conference on Smoking or Health held in Japan in 1987.117 JTI calculated that the 40 scientists they would plant at the conference would exert significant influence:
“J.T.I. is trying to change the very nature and tone of the conference through these efforts.”118
INFOTAB, too, planned to encourage the submission of papers favorable to tobacco companies to the 6th WCToH.119
JTI also planned to get a scientific foundation controlled by tobacco companies (SRFS) involved as a member of the Academic Committee for the conference, to permit JTI to participate in the screening of papers for the conference:
“If the SRFS can send members to this committee, ‘neutral’ papers could be submitted to the conference.”120
2. Holding Scientific Symposia to Promote Pro-Industry Positions, with Tobacco Companies’ Role Concealed
As part of its campaign to undermine the IARC ETS study, tobacco companies arranged for several symposia on ETS at which speakers chosen for views consistent with the tobacco companies’ position would present papers. Tobacco company sponsorship of some of these symposia was concealed or minimized. Some of these conferences were primarily sponsored by tobacco company front organizations, such as Healthy Buildings International and CIAR.121 The views expressed at the symposia were disseminated by tobacco companies as “independent” scientific viewpoints.122
3. Misrepresenting Tobacco Company Work as WHO- Supported
In an apparent attempt to enhance the credibility of a tobacco company-sponsored ETS conference, industry officials widely misrepresented the conference as WHO- sponsored, based on the attendance at the conference of a single WHO official.123
4. Using “Independent” Consultants with Concealed Tobacco Company Ties to Lobby WHO Scientists
Echoing its use of front organizations as surrogates, tobacco companies have used outside scientists with concealed tobacco company ties to approach and lobby WHO on scientific questions related to tobacco.
5. Contacting WHO Study Scientists to Influence Study Results
As part of their plan to undermine the IARC ETS study, tobacco companies set out to establish contacts with the study investigators and collaborators.124 With some exceptions,125 the tobacco companies arranged to have contacts made through outside scientists acting as tobacco company consultants.126 The tobacco company affiliation of the consultants who contacted the IARC investigators was frequently concealed.127 These contacts with IARC scientists were to be used to gather “the best information about the status and likely findings of the study,”128 convince study investigators of the weaknesses of the IARC study,129 and, ultimately, achieve “the objective of no report or a report which draws mild conclusions from its data.”130
Through their contacts with IARC investigators and collaborators the tobacco companies were successful in gaining a large amount of information about the design and conduct of the study. More importantly, they were able to gain confidential information about preliminary study results and about how the study was likely to be interpreted. The tobacco companies were not able to influence the outcome of the study, however.
6. Presenting Tobacco Company Arguments Through “Independent” Scientists with Concealed Tobacco Company Ties
Tobacco companies’ scientific consultants have also lobbied WHO on scientific issues without revealing their tobacco company ties. For example, Peter Lee, a tobacco company consultant, wrote to the Director-General of WHO,131 apparently at BAT’s request, providing a lengthy criticism of a WHO study of mortality from tobacco use. In his letter, Lee described himself as “an independent statistician/epidemiologist who has followed the literature on smoking and health very closely for over 20 years.” He did not disclose any tobacco industry affiliations.132
7. Compromising Independence and Credibility of WHO Studies by Involving Investigators in Tobacco Company Research or Activities
Tobacco companies, through their front organization CIAR, attempted to involve IARC and its investigators in collaborative ventures. These ventures included (1) using IARC investigators to conduct studies on ETS confounders that could be used by tobacco companies to challenge the IARC study, (2) offering research grants to IARC investigators, and (3) offering to put an IARC investigator on CIAR’s advisory board.133
According to the study coordinator, IARC itself did not pursue any proposed collaboration once IARC became aware of CIAR’s tobacco company connections.134 One IARC collaborator did, however, conduct a study for CIAR on confounders. The tobacco companies’ purpose in using an IARC collaborator was almost certainly to undermine the IARC study results by attempting to produce evidence, under the name of one of IARC’s own investigators, that would undercut the study.
Tobacco companies conducted and publicly promoted a large number of studies, conferences, and literature reviews on ETS that were designed to challenge the validity of the IARC ETS study. These activities were generally carried out through third parties to create the appearance that the data and opinions were independent of tobacco industry influence.
The data from these studies were used successfully by industry officials when the IARC study results were released to cast doubt on the study. For example, the Sunday Telegraph cited the tobacco company-financed studies as evidence that:
“Passive smokers inhale the equivalent of just six cigarettes a year from other people’s smoke, according to the largest ever study of actual exposure levels of non-smokers. The figure, which undermines previous warnings about the dangers of passive smoking, is a thousand times lower than that faced by direct smokers, and so tiny that it could not be measured statistically.”135
8. Creating an Ostensibly Independent Coalition of Scientists
Tobacco companies sought to create an ostensibly independent coalition of scientists in Europe to help criticize the IARC study and other scientific studies used to support tobacco control policies.136 Like The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition (TASSC) created by Philip Morris and a public relations firm in the US, the European group would appear to be independent but would be initiated and funded by tobacco companies and by other industries.137
The committee of experts was unable to determine the success of this plan. Ong and Glantz have reported, however, that the likely outcome of this initiative was the European Science and Environment Forum (ESEF),138 although ESEF claims to receive little or no tobacco industry funding.139 ESEF has listed on its website at least two working papers criticizing the IARC ETS study, and the methods used in ETS epidemiological studies.140 Lorraine Moody, ESEF’s “key contact,”141 wrote an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal claiming that the IARC study showed a possibly “trivial or nonexistent” risk of lung cancer from ETS, demonstrating that the health risks of ETS are overstated.142
9. Misrepresenting Scientific Studies to the Media and Regulators
The results of the IARC ETS study, released in 1998, showed that non-smoking spouses of smokers have an estimated 16% increased risk of developing lung cancer and that non-smokers exposed to ETS in the workplace have an estimated 17% increased risk of developing lung cancer.143 IARC’s reported results were consistent with the results of other ETS studies, showing an increased risk of lung cancer for nonsmokers exposed to ETS by a spouse or in the workplace.144 However, there were not enough subjects in the study for the increased risk to reach “statistical significance,” using common statistical methods (i.e., at the 95% confidence level).145
Shortly after the results of the IARC ETS study were released, BAT issued a press release stating: “New scientific research from the World Health Organization has shown the risk of lung cancer from environmental tobacco smoke to be either non-existent or too small to be measured at a meaningful level.”146 Thus, BAT claimed that the lack of statistical significance was equivalent to a finding that there was no relationship between ETS and lung cancer. These claims were picked up first by the Sunday Telegraph and then by other news outlets.
Despite subsequent clarifying statements from IARC and WHO about the study results, the misrepresentation of the study results in the BAT news release was repeated in media accounts around the world. Tobacco companies may also have distorted the IARC study results when addressing regulatory authorities.
10. Staging Media Events or Other Diversions to Discredit or Distract Attention from WHO Tobacco Control Activities
Tobacco companies planned a series of distractions from the 8th World Conference on Tobacco OR Health. These plans, at least some of which were carried out, included a media campaign just before the 8th WCToH, emphasizing the need for childhood immunizations; a major soccer game to distract attention from Jimmy Carter’s arrival; training journalists to disrupt a press conference held by the conference organizers; and embarrassing US Senator Ted Kennedy by planting journalists to ask questions about drinking and sexual harassment allegations.
One unattributed BAT document with the handwritten title “Dietrich/WHO” on the title page also planned an event, called the “Global Children’s Health Conference,” to “distract the media from extensive coverage of the May 31, 1990 International Anti- Smoking Day and the 1990 theme of Smoking and Children.”147 According to the document, through the Institute for IIHD, run by Paul Dietrich (see Chapter VI), BAT would hold a conference for business and government leaders and launch a longer- term strategy to increase private funding for children’s health issue. In describing the program strategy, the BAT document states:
“ The event will be staged to pre-empt monitored WHO meetings and conferences“,150 had confidential WHO contacts,151 and obtained confidential documents and information.152 Examples of clandestine surveillance activities are described in several of the case studies.
“The conference can facilitate the development of a long-term initiative to counteract the WHO’s anti- smoking campaign
“At no time during the event will the issue of smoking be addressed…
“…Design the Conference to address primary health needs of children underscoring the ‘real crisis’. Develop an oblique critique of WHO’s anti- smoking campaign which identifies it as trivial when the global infants’ and children’s crisis is evaluated.
“Introduce alternative solutions which, in the long-term, could successfully undermine the WHO’s overall mandate.”148
It appears that BAT did not carry through with this conference.
11. Conducting Systematic Surveillance of WHO Activities
Tobacco companies have carried out intensive monitoring of WHO and its Regional Offices to gather intelligence about its tobacco control programs.149
Some of the industry’s intelligence-gathering has been conducted openly, through attendance at open meetings and conferences and through open contacts with WHO and other UN officials.
There is also evidence, however, that tobacco companies have secretly monitored conferences,150 had confidential WHO contacts,151 and obtained confidential documents and information.152
Examples of clandestine surveillance activities are described in several of the case studies.
This ends the excerpt. You can read and download the full 250 page UN Report in PDF format here:
If you are inclined to look at references, here they are – just for this section. The entire report contains thousands of similarly damning references that put the moral degradation and greed of this industry on full display. And they really don’t care, because they have convinced themselves that they are untouchable. They would do well to remember – Al Capone was brought down by a simple little tax violation and not by any of his vast criminal conspiracies and crimes.
I think that the industry’s attempt to engineer a shift from smoking to vaporizing is going to reveal the tobacco industry’s equivalent of a simple little tax evasion crime that will be enough, when all the evidence is brought to bear, for the initiation of a crimes against humanity trial in the World Court that will ultimately result in worldwide government and civil seizure of tobacco industry assets.
Notes & References
WHOIIOCUIUICC: Strategies and Tactics. January 31, 1989. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501045143–5147 at 5143. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 32846.
Appendix I, INFOTAB January 1989 Discussion Paper. January 30, 1989. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501045258–5268 at 5262. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33561.
World Watch: Protecting our Global ‘Next Generation’-A Proposed Conference on Children’s Health Issues. October 1989. 300516227–6285 at 6235. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33691.
WHOIIOCUIUICC: Strategies and Tactics. January 31, 1989. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501045143–5147 at 5143. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 32846.
Hartogh JM. To all members of the ICOSI task force 4th world conference on smoking and health. [Memo by E. Brueckner.] June 26, 1979. British American Tobacco Company. 100433043–3047 at 3046. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33162.
WHOIIOCUIUICC: Strategies and Tactics. January 31, 1989. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501045143–5147 at 5146. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 32846.
Appendix I, INFOTAB January 1989 Discussion Paper. January 30, 1989. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501045258–5268. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33561.
WHOIIOCUIUICC: Strategies and Tactics. January 31, 1989. Philip Morris Companies Inc. .2501045143–5147 at 5146. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 32846.
PMI Corporate Affairs Action Plan 1990. November 2, 1989est. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2500019979–9999 at 9980–9982. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33558.
Sullivan J. IARC Study. September 2, 1993. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501117793– 7797 at 7795. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33603
Egawa E. April 25, 1986. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2021654119–4123. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 66.
Bloxidge JA. International Tobacco Growers’ Association (ITGA). October 11, 1988. British American Tobacco Company. 502555415–5417 at 5417. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33284.
Boyse S. 8th World Conference on Tobacco and Health. August 28, 1991. British American Tobacco Company. 202019292–9293 at 9292. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33262.
Bible G. Corporate Affairs Conference I Action Plan. December 13, 1986. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2021596422–6432 at 6429. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 32834.
Appendix I, INFOTAB January 1989 Discussion Paper. January 30, 1989. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501045258–5268. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33561.
Interview with Alan Lopez, Coordinator, Epidemiology and Burden of Disease, World Health Organization, May 4, 2000.
Oldman M. [Letter to G Pedlow]. March 13, 1991. British American Tobacco Company. 502555357–5363 at 5363. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33278.
Agro-Tobacco Services-Programme Review No1. 1992. British American Tobacco Company. 502552606–2611 at 2609. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33290.
Interview with Alan Lopez, May 4, 2000.
Lee PN. Dr. Helmut Schievelbein. August 9, 1979. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501159889–9891 at 9889. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33717.
Minutes of the Meeting of the Working Group of the E.E.C. Tobacco Manufacturers’ Associations, Held in Luxemburg on 4th and 5th October 1979. November 11, 1979. Philip
Morris Companies Inc. 2501015083–5096 at 5088. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33716.
Belcher P. Scientific Committee on Tobacco and Health (SCTH). February 9, 1994. Rothmans International. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2024188905–8907 at 8905. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33715.
Independent Scientific Review of the Toxic Substances Board Report, May 1989, Summary, Commissioned by the Tobacco Institute of New Zealand. 1989est. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2504203558–3559. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33535.
Collett C. Memo to Ted Sterling re: International Symposium on Environmental Tobacco Smoke, November 3-4, 1989.
November 1989est. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2062856942. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33536.
Rothman’s International Tobacco ETS Workshop. May 1992est. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501237099. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33532.
25 . Pen Pictures of Guest Speakers. May 1992est. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501237101– 7103 at 7101. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33531.
S&H. Re: Dr. Furst-Review of Non-Smoker Problem CTR Special Pro}ect. 1976est. Lorillard Tobacco Company. 03747419. TDO Supersite at www.tobaccodocuments.org. UQ 33714.
From the record before Congress, the Case for Defeat of S. 772. 1983est. Tobacco Institute. TIMN 0353310–3320 at 3312. TDO Supersite at www.tobaccodocuments.org/. UQ 33729.
Purvis A, Johnson J. Privileged and confidential attorneyIclient connumications. Trial Report, SummaryITestimonyIPro}ection. April 21, 1988. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2025880540– 0543. Bliley Documents at www.tobaccodocuments.org. UQ 33730.
Tobacco Institute Newsletter. March 12, 1982. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 515841024. Bliley Documents at www.tobaccodocuments.org. UQ 98.
Hoel D. Confidential-For counsel only. July 10, 1979. Philip Morris Companies Inc.
Tobacco Institute Newsletter. March 12, 1982. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 515841024. Bliley Documents at www.tobaccodocuments.org. UQ 98.
Lyberopoulos H. ARISE 1994-95 Activities and Funding. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2024208096–8099. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33779.
Information on Associates for Research in Substance En}oyment Meeting in Venice. 1991est. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company. 508300651–0667 at 0652. http://www.rjrtdocs UQ 33749.
Wilhelmus J. WHO. April 18, 1995. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2063625254. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33541.
Luik J, Snel J, Warburton D. ARISE (Associates for Research into the Science of En}oyment): A Summary of the Workshop Held in April 1995. April 1995est. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company. 511818234–8241. www.rjrtdocs.com. UQ 33731.
The World Health Organization. December 1985est. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2023267436. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 46.
36 . Reif H. Continuation of the Vettorazzi Pro}ect. March 25, 1992. Philip Morris Companies Inc. PM 2025594741–4743 at 4742. http://www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33466.
Consultant to ICOSI on International Organisations. August 1980est. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2025049734. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 37.
Developing Countries Group (DCG). Progress report covering events since the ICOSI board of directors meeting October 5I8th, 1980. February 1981est. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2025049364–9374 at 9365. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 40.
Hauser. [Letter to AG Leeks]. April 20, 1983. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2023273908– 3909. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 42.
Secretariat Interim Report. December 28,1984. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2023272512– 2617 at 2514. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 43.
CASIN. January 11, 1991. British American Tobacco Company. 300557237–7259 at 7241. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33350.
CASIN. January 11, 1991. British American Tobacco Company. 300557237–7259 at 7240. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33350.
CASIN. January 11, 1991. British American Tobacco Company. 300557237–7259 at 7256. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33350.
Interviews with Neil Collishaw, Leanne Riley, and Barbara Zolty, all former employees of the WHO’s Tobacco or Health Program, Feb. 4, 2000.
Boca Raton Action Plan: WHOIIOCUIUICC: Strategies and Tactics. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501045143–5147 at 5146. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 32846.
E–mail communication from Neil Collishaw. March 29, 2000.
Interviews with Neil Collishaw, Barbara Zolty, and Leanne Riley, February 4, 2000.
E–mail communication from Barbara Zolty, March 2, 2000.
Sullivan J. IARC Study. September 2, 1993. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501117793– 7797 at 7795. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33603.
Von Maerestetten C. IARC. July 26, 1993. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2025493295. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33776.
IARC Study. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501347168–7173 at 7172. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33595.
Pages R. Update 2: IARC study of ETS and lung cancer. August 2, 1993. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 20232999819. http://www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33733.
Memo on vaccines for world health organization. October 25, 1971. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2012581044. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 4.
Boca Raton Action Plan: WHOIIOCUIUICC: Strategies and Tactics. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501045143–5147 at 5146. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 32846.
Flavor and Extract Manufacturers Association. Invoice. August 17, 1995. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2050761274. http://www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33546.
Schrankel K. Final Report to Contributors of Anethole Research Fund. August 25, 1998. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2063597040. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33548.
Minutes of Anethole Task Force. May 2, 1996. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2063616600. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33547.
Minutes of Anethole Task Force. May 2, 1996. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2063616600. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33547.
Schrankel. Final Report to Contributors of Anethole Research Fund. August 25, 1998. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2063597040. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33548
Hartogh JM. To all members of the ICOSI task force 4th world conference on smoking and health. [Memo by E. Brueckner.] June 26, 1979. British American Tobacco Company.
Oldman M. [Letter to G Pedlow]. March 13, 1991. British American Tobacco Company. 502555357–5363 at 5358. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33278.
Developing Countries Ad Hoc Group (DCG). Progress Report Covering Events Since the ICOSI Board of Directors Meeting on 19th February, 1980. August 1980est.
Philip Morris1987. British American Tobacco Company. 301760973–0979 at 0979. Guildford Document
Depository. UQ 33254
Appendix I, INFOTAB January 1989, Discussion Paper. January 30, 1989. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501045258–5268 at 5262. Minnesota Document Depository. UQ 33561.
Pro}ect Report Covering Pro}ects and Action Plans Since the Board of Directors Meeting on March 30, 1981. 1981est. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2025048077–8088 at 8077. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 41.
Pro}ect Report Covering Pro}ects and Action Plans Since the Board of Directors Meeting on March 30, 1981. 1981est. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2025048077–8088 at 8082. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 41.
Verkerk H. Fifth World Conference on Smoking and Health-Winnepeg. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501021564–1586 at 1577. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 32888.
Secretariat Interim Report. December 28, 1984. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2023272512– 2617 at 2594. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 43.
Marcotullio. INFOTAB Board of Director’s (BOD) Meeting-March 30, 1981. April 6, 1981. 502741855. Bliley Documents at www.tobaccodocuments.org. UQ 60.
Witt S. International Committee on Smoking Issues Lausanne-November 10-12, 1977.
Schlosser A, Mine K (Chadbourne, Parke). Representative Compilation of Literature Describing the Benefits of Tobacco. April 29, 1986. Brown & Williamson Company. 681870460–0654 at 0602. Bliley Documents at
International Organizations Monitoring Service. Industry Sectors and International Organizations-Tobacco Update and Outlook on World Health Organization Activities Affecting MNCs. March 5, 1986. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2024272808- 2814 at 2812. Bliley Documents at www.tobaccodocuments.org. UQ 33777.
Oldman M. [Letter to D. Bacon, enclosing “Agro-Tobacco Services (ATS), Proposal for a Consultancy Agreement”]. January 7, 1992. British American Tobacco Company. 502552644–2654 at 2650. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33302.
Oldman M. [Letter to D. Bacon, enclosing “Agro-Tobacco Services (ATS), Proposal for a Consultancy Agreement”]. January 7, 1992. British American Tobacco Company. 502552644–2654 at 2647. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33302.
Oldman M. [Letter to G. Pedlow]. March 13, 1991. British American Tobacco Company. 502555357–5363 at 5361. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33278.
Oldman M. [Letter to G. Pedlow]. March 13, 1991. British American Tobacco Company. 502555357–5363 at 5358. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33278.
Oldman M. [Letter to G. Pedlow]. March 13, 1991. British American Tobacco Company. 502555357–5363 at 5361. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33278.
Oldman M. [Letter to D Bacon enclosing Agro- tobacco Activity Report for January 1993]. February 10, 1993. British American Tobacco Company. 502552508–2513 at 2512–2513. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33296.
Oldman M. Paper for ITGA General Meeting, 1994. 1994est. British American Tobacco
Document Depository. UQ 33256.
Bacon D. Development Aid, Progress. November 28, 1991. British American Tobacco Company. 202049931–9932 at 9931. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33256.
Bacon D. Development Aid, Progress. November 28, 1991. British American Tobacco Company. 202049931–9932 at 9932. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33256.
Bible G. Corporate Affairs Conference I Action Plan. December 13, 1988. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2021596422–6432 at 6429. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 32834.
Boca Raton Action Plan: Status Report for the Period Ending January 31, 1989. January 31, 1989. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2500103969–4056 at 3989. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 32863.
Boyse S. [Letter to Peter Hazel, David Bacon, and JJ Mostyn]. August 8, 1991. British American Tobacco Company. 304004032. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33184
Dietrich P. WHO spends money on what? The Wall Street Journal, May 9, 1989. UQ 33662.
Oldman M. [Letter to D. Bacon enclosing Activity Report, September/October 1993]. November 1, 1993. British American Tobacco Company. 502555329–5331 at 5331. UQ 33276.
Boca Raton Action Plan: Status Report for the Period Ending May 31, 1989. May 31, 1989. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2021592752– 2764 at 2752. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 32859.
Boca Raton Action Plan: Status Report Ending July 31, 1989. July 31, 1989. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2023547120–7135 at 7121. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 32860.
Boca Raton Action Plan Summary Report December 3, 1988-October 30, 1989. October 30, 1989. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2503005015–5050. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 32862.
Oldman M. [Letter to D. Bacon enclosing Activity Report, September/October 1993]. November 1, 1993. British American Tobacco Company. 502555329–5331 at 5331. UQ 33276
Ntaba H. Letter to the Editor, International Health and Development, Vol. 1, No. 2, Summer, p. 31. UQ 33689.
Boca Raton Action Plan: Status Report for the Period Ending September 30, 1989. September 30, 1989. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501204997–5021 at 4998. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 32861.
Boyse S. [Letter to Paul Dietrich]. August 7, 1991. British American Tobacco Company. 300516113. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33571.
Rupp J. Statement, Philip Morris International (Latin America). November 30, 1992. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2023591405. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 32903.
Bacon D. Who Benefits from WHO? November 24, 1993. British American Tobacco Company.
UQ 33311.
Agenda: “Primer Encuentro de Periodistas Y la Industria Del Tabaco.” June 1991est. British American Tobacco Company. 300565679– 5681. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33675.
BAT Smoking Issues Briefing, Taiwan. September 6–8, 1992. British American
Agenda, Meeting of Social Communicators and the Tobacco Industry. November 1992est.
British American Tobacco Company. 300565668–5671. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33678.
Oldman M. [Letter to G. Pedlow]. March 13, 1991. British American Tobacco Company. 502555357–5363 at 5359. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33278.
Bloxidge JA. International Tobacco Growers’ Association (ITGA). October 11, 1988. British American Tobacco Company. 502555415– 5417. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33284.
Oldman M. [Letter to G. Pedlow]. March 13, 1991. British American Tobacco Company. 502555357–5363 at 5360. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33278.
Oldman M. Agro-Tobacco Services (ATS), Proposed Plan. November 1991. British American Tobacco Company. 502552655–2667 at 2659. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33303.
INFOTAB International Workshop, Brussels, October 13-16, 1986. October 16, 1986. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501446636–7080 at 6723–6724. www.pmdocs.com UQ 33566.
Boca Raton Action Plan: Appendix A, WHOIIOCUIUICC: Strategies and Tactics. January 31, 1989. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501045143–5147.www.pmdocs.com UQ 32846.
Wells JK. INFOTAB Advisory Council Meeting July 14 and 15, 1982. July 21, 1982. Brown &Williamson Company. 680002301–2307.
Bible G. Corporate Affairs Conference I Action Plan. December 13, 1988. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2021596422–6432 at 6429. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 32834.
Egawa E. April 25, 1986. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2021654119–4123 at 4121. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 66.
Egawa E. April 25, 1986. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2021654119–4123 at 4121. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 66.
INFOTAB International Workshop, Brussels, October 13-16, 1986. October 16, 1986. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501446636–7080 at 6677. www.pmdocs.com UQ 33566.
Egawa E. April 25, 1986. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2021654119–4123 at 4120. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 66.
Whitley C. Statement of Charles O. Whitley on behalf of the Tobacco Institute before the Subcommittee on Health and the Environment, Committee on Energy and Commerce, US House of Representatives [Draft]. July 9, 1990. Tobacco Institute TIMN 0032095–2141 at 2118. Bliley Documents. www.tobaccodocuments.org. UQ 32912.
Zhang M. [Attaching Press article in the China Daily on the CIAR’s GEP workshop in Guangzhou.] September 9, 1997. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2063608546–8547. http://www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33752.
Whitley C. Statement of Charles O. Whitley on behalf of the Tobacco Institute before the Subcommittee on Health and the Environment, Committee on Energy and Commerce, US House of Representatives [Draft]. July 9, 1990. Tobacco Institute TIMN 0032095–0032141 at 2118. Bliley Documents. www.tobaccodocuments.org. UQ 32912.
Press release by the organizers of the expert discussion of the “Physician’s View of Passive Smoking”: Health Danger through Passive Smoking Not Proven. April 1984. Philip Morris Companies. 1002965608–6509. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33770.
Masironi R. [Letter to W. Kloepfer]. December 2, 1986. Philip Morris Companies Inc.
Greenberg D. IARC. September 15, 1993. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2021184116–4121 at 4119. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33590.
Walk, R.A. IARC Multi-Center Case Control Study of ETS and Lung Cancer, Your memo dated 21 May 93. July 13, 1993. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2025493287. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33616.
IARC Study. 1994est. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501347168–7173 at 7169. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33595.
Pages R. IARC Study of ETS and Lung Cancer. May 21, 1993. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2500015757. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33617.
Walk, R.A. IARC Multi-Center Case Control Study of ETS and Lung Cancer: Update of information. July 30, 1993. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2029041838–1839. http://www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33618.
Interview with Paolo Boffetta, April 17, 2000.
Greenberg D. IARC. September 15, 1993. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2021184116–4121 at 4119. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33590.
IARC Study. 1994est. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501347168–7173 at 7169. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33595.
Greenberg D. IARC. September 15, 1993. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2021184116–4121 at 4118. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33590.
Boyse S. [Letter to Ron Tully.] April 18, 1990. British American Tobacco Company. 400099555. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33507.
Boyse S. [Letter to PN Lee.] December 19, 1989. British American Tobacco Company. 400099679. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33509.
Lee P. May 8, 1990. British American Tobacco Company. 502587275–7284 at 7275. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33236.
Winokur M. [FAX to H. Reif attaching “CIAR and IARC, Next Steps and Options.”] December 19, 1994. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2028381587–1588 at 1588. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33746.
Interview with Paulo Boffetta, April 17, 2000.
Matthews R, MacDonald V. Passive smokers inhale six cigarettes a year. Sunday Telegraph. August 16, 1998.
Lyberopoulos, H. Presentation on IARC [enclosing overheads]. April 19, 1994. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501355931–5944 at 5942. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33604.
Hockaday T, Cohen N. Thoughts on TASSC Europe. March 25, 1994. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2025492898–2905 at 2899. http://www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33758.
Lindheim J. Presentation on Scientist Pro}ect. May 5, 1994. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2025493201–3207 at 3205–3206. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33708.
Ong E, Glantz S. Tobacco industry efforts subverting International Agency for Research on Cancer’s second–hand smoke study. The Lancet. 2000; 355: 1253–59.
Mooney L. Smoking out bad science. Wall Street J. March 19, 1998; A18.
Boffetta P, Agudo A, Ahrens W, et al. Multicenter case–control study of exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and lung cancer in Europe. J Natl Cancer Inst 1998; 90: 1440– 50.
Hirayama T. Non–smoking wives of heavy smokers have a higher risk of lung cancer: A study from Japan. BMJ 1981; 282:183–85.
Repace JL, Lowery AH. A quantitative estimate of nonsmokers’ lung cancer risk from passive smoking. Environment Int. 1985;11:3–22.
US Environmental Protection Agency. Health effects of passive smoking: Assessment of lung cancer in adults and respiratory disorders in children. Office of Research and Development, Office of Health and Environmental Assessment. EPA/600/6–90/006F, 1992b.
Boffetta P, Agudo A, Ahrens W, et al. Multicenter case–control study of exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and lung cancer in Europe. J Natl Cancer Inst 1998; 90: 1440–50.
British American Tobacco. [ News release]. March 5, 1998. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2063594010–4240 at 4018. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33750.
World Watch: Protecting our Global ‘Next Generation’-A Proposed Conference on Children’s Health Issues. October 1989. 300516227–6285 at 6235. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33691.
World Watch: Protecting our Global ‘Next Generation’-A Proposed Conference on Children’s Health Issues. October 1989. British American Tobacco Company. 300516227–6285 at 6236. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33691.
INFOTAB . Item 2 Report From The Secretary General . January 1, 1982est. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2021594826–4836. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 32.
Background to the Structure and Operations of the Activist Movement. November 15, 1994.
Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501110753– 0775. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 68.
Seymour M. 6 September 1996 IARC European Response Plan Workshop. August 8, 1996.
Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2063604476– 4498. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 71.
Hauser N. Trip Report-RomeIFAO November 26-29, 1984. November 26, 1984. Philip Morris
Hartogh J. Report by Task Force 5th World Conference on Smoking and Health, Winnipeg, Canada, July 1983. February 26, 1981. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2025049376–9377. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33514.
The World Health Organization (WHO): Its Work Related to the Activities of the International Tobacco Industry. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501442830–2897 at 2501442889–2897. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 5.
Lojacono G. Research Group Informal Meeting On: Health Effects of ETS in Europe-Paris-P. Broussell Hospital (Ville}uif 13I14 March, 1991). March 1991est. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501356073–6076. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33534.
JMH–possibly Hartogh J. Action Plan proposed by ICOSI Task Force 4th World Conference on Smoking & Health. January 29, 1979. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501015212–5215. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33549.
The World Health Organization (WHO): Its Work Related to the Activities of the International Tobacco Industry. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501442830–2897 at 2834. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 5.
Tully R. 8th WCTH. January 29, 1992. British American Tobacco Company. 300504241– 4252. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33334.
The World Health Organization (WHO): Its Work Related to the Activities of the International Tobacco Industry. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501442830–2897 at 2889– 2890. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 5.
Informal Meeting of the IARC Research Group on ETS and Human Cancer. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501349504–9507. http://www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33636.
47th WHO World Assembly: Informal meeting of some members of the IARC study group “ETS and the Lung Cancer”. Geneva May 3-6, 1994. Philip Morris Companies Inc. May 5, 1994.
Wilhelmus J. WHO. April 18, 1995. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2063625254. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33541.
CECCM. IARC Study. April 4, 1995. British American Tobacco Company. 500804531– 4537. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33774.
Cerioli A. Report on my attendance to the Conference “Conoscenze Scientifiche, Seperi Popolari e Socita Umana alle Soglie del Duemile. Attualite del Pensiero di A. Maccacaro.” January 27, 1997. Philip Morris
Menchaca. January 25, 1990. British American Tobacco Company. 502587287. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33237.
Lojacono G. Research Group Informal Meeting On: Health Effects of ETS in Europe-Paris-P. Broussell Hospital (Ville}uif 13I14 March, 1991). March 14, 1991est. Philip Morris
Pages R. [Forwarding note from H. Reif: IARC Study]. July 19, 1993. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2025470098. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 32800.
Dietrich P. [Letter to Sharon Boyse, Enclosing Memo of Visit to Thailand and Philippines]. January 29, 1992. British American Tobacco Company. 300516024–37. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33682.
WHOIIOCUIUICC: Strategies and Tactics. January 31, 1989. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501045143–5147 at 5143. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 32846.
Appendix I, INFOTAB January 1989 Discussion Paper. January 30, 1989. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501045258–5268 at 5262. pmdocs.com. UQ 33561.
World Watch: Protecting our Global ‘Next Generation’-A Proposed Conference on Children’s Health Issues. October 1989. 300516227–6285 at 6235. Guildford Document Depository. UQ
WHOIIOCUIUICC: Strategies and Tactics. January 31, 1989. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501045143–5147 at 5143. pmdocs.com. UQ 32846.
Hartogh JM. To all members of the ICOSI task force 4th world conference on smoking and health. [Memo by E. Brueckner.] June 26, 1979. British American Tobacco Company. 100433043–3047 at 3046. Guildford Document Depository. UQ
WHOIIOCUIUICC: Strategies and Tactics. January 31, 1989. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501045143–5147 at 5146. pmdocs.com. UQ 32846.
Appendix I, INFOTAB January 1989 Discussion Paper. January 30, 1989. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501045258–5268. pmdocs.com. UQ 33561.
PMI Corporate Affairs Action Plan 1990. November 2, 1989est. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2500019979–9999 at 9980–9982. pmdocs.com. UQ 33558.
Sullivan J. IARC Study. September 2, 1993. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501117793– 7797 at 7795. pmdocs.com. UQ 33603
Egawa E. April 25, 1986. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2021654119–4123. pmdocs.com. UQ 66.
Bloxidge JA. International Tobacco Growers’ Association (ITGA). October 11, 1988. British American Tobacco Company. 502555415–5417 at 5417. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33284.
Boyse S. 8th World Conference on Tobacco and Health. August 28, 1991. British American Tobacco Company. 202019292–9293 at 9292. Guildford Document Depository. UQ
Bible G. Corporate Affairs Conference I Action Plan. December 13, 1986. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2021596422–6432 at 6429. pmdocs.com. UQ 32834.
Appendix I, INFOTAB January 1989 Discussion Paper. January 30, 1989. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501045258–5268. pmdocs.com. UQ 33561.
Interview with Alan Lopez, Coordinator, Epidemiology and Burden of Disease, World Health Organization, May 4,
Oldman M. [Letter to G Pedlow]. March 13, 1991. British American Tobacco Company. 502555357–5363 at 5363. Guildford Document Depository. UQ
Agro-Tobacco Services-Programme Review No1. British American Tobacco Company. 502552606–2611 at 2609. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33290.
Interview with Alan Lopez, May 4,
Lee PN. Helmut Schievelbein. August 9, 1979. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501159889–9891 at 9889. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33717.
Minutes of the Meeting of the Working Group of the E.E.C. Tobacco Manufacturers’ Associations, Held in Luxemburg on 4th and 5th October 1979. November 11, 1979. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501015083–5096 at 5088. pmdocs.com. UQ 33716.
Belcher P. Scientific Committee on Tobacco and Health (SCTH). February 9, 1994. Rothmans International. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2024188905–8907 at 8905. pmdocs.com. UQ 33715.
Independent Scientific Review of the Toxic Substances Board Report, May 1989, Summary, Commissioned by the Tobacco Institute of New Zealand. 1989est. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2504203558–3559. pmdocs.com. UQ 33535.
Collett C. Memo to Ted Sterling re: International Symposium on Environmental Tobacco Smoke, November 3-4, 1989.
November 1989est. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2062856942. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33536.
Rothman’s International Tobacco ETS Workshop. May 1992est. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501237099. pmdocs.com. UQ 33532.
25 . Pen Pictures of Guest Speakers. May 1992est. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501237101– 7103 at 7101. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33531.
S&H. Re: Dr. Furst-Review of Non-Smoker Problem CTR Special Pro}ect. 1976est. Lorillard Tobacco Company. 03747419. TDO Supersite at tobaccodocuments.org. UQ 33714.
From the record before Congress, the Case for Defeat of S. 772. 1983est. Tobacco Institute. TIMN 0353310–3320 at 3312. TDO Supersite at tobaccodocuments.org/. UQ 33729.
Purvis A, Johnson J. Privileged and confidential attorneyIclient connumications. Trial Report, SummaryITestimonyIPro}ection. April 21, 1988. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2025880540– 0543. Bliley Documents at tobaccodocuments.org. UQ 33730.
Tobacco Institute Newsletter. March 12, 1982. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 515841024. Bliley Documents at tobaccodocuments.org. UQ 98.
Hoel D. Confidential-For counsel only. July 10, 1979. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 6267450002. Bliley Documents at www.tobaccodocuments.org. UQ 99.
Tobacco Institute Newsletter. March 12, 1982. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 515841024. Bliley Documents at tobaccodocuments.org. UQ 98.
Lyberopoulos H. ARISE 1994-95 Activities and Funding. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2024208096–8099. pmdocs.com. UQ 33779.
Information on Associates for Research in Substance En}oyment Meeting in Venice. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company. 508300651–0667 at 0652. http://www.rjrtdocs UQ 33749.
Wilhelmus J. WHO. April 18, 1995. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2063625254. pmdocs.com. UQ 33541.
Luik J, Snel J, Warburton D. ARISE (Associates for Research into the Science of En}oyment): A Summary of the Workshop Held in April 1995. April 1995est. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company. 511818234–8241. rjrtdocs.com. UQ 33731.
The World Health Organization. December 1985est. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2023267436. pmdocs.com. UQ 46.
36 . Reif H. Continuation of the Vettorazzi Pro}ect. March 25, 1992. Philip Morris Companies Inc. PM 2025594741–4743 at 4742. http://www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33466.
Consultant to ICOSI on International Organisations. August 1980est. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2025049734. pmdocs.com. UQ 37.
Developing Countries Group (DCG). Progress report covering events since the ICOSI board of directors meeting October 5I8th, 1980. February 1981est. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2025049364–9374 at 9365. pmdocs.com. UQ 40.
Hauser. [Letter to AG Leeks]. April 20, 1983. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2023273908– 3909. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 42.
Secretariat Interim Report. December 28,1984. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2023272512– 2617 at 2514. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 43.
January 11, 1991. British American Tobacco Company. 300557237–7259 at 7241. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33350.
January 11, 1991. British American Tobacco Company. 300557237–7259 at 7240. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33350.
January 11, 1991. British American Tobacco Company. 300557237–7259 at 7256. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33350.
Interviews with Neil Collishaw, Leanne Riley, and Barbara Zolty, all former employees of the WHO’s Tobacco or Health Program, Feb. 4, 2000.
Boca Raton Action Plan: WHOIIOCUIUICC: Strategies and Tactics. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501045143–5147 at 5146. pmdocs.com. UQ 32846.
E–mail communication from Neil Collishaw. March 29,
Interviews with Neil Collishaw, Barbara Zolty, and Leanne Riley, February 4,
E–mail communication from Barbara Zolty, March 2,
Sullivan J. IARC Study. September 2, 1993. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501117793– 7797 at 7795. pmdocs.com. UQ 33603.
Von Maerestetten C. IARC. July 26, 1993. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2025493295. pmdocs.com. UQ 33776.
IARC Study. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501347168–7173 at 7172. pmdocs.com. UQ 33595.
Pages R. Update 2: IARC study of ETS and lung cancer. August 2, 1993. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 20232999819. http://www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33733.
Memo on vaccines for world health organization. October 25, 1971. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2012581044. pmdocs.com. UQ 4.
Boca Raton Action Plan: WHOIIOCUIUICC: Strategies and Tactics. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501045143–5147 at 5146. pmdocs.com. UQ 32846.
Flavor and Extract Manufacturers Association. Invoice. August 17, 1995. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2050761274. pmdocs.com. UQ 33546.
Schrankel K. Final Report to Contributors of Anethole Research Fund. August 25, 1998. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2063597040. pmdocs.com. UQ 33548.
Minutes of Anethole Task Force. May 2, 1996. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2063616600. pmdocs.com. UQ 33547.
Minutes of Anethole Task Force. May 2, 1996. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2063616600. pmdocs.com. UQ 33547.
Schrankel. Final Report to Contributors of Anethole Research Fund. August 25, 1998. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2063597040. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33548 TIMN270055–0059 at 0058. http://www.tobaccoinstitute.com. UQ 32904.
Hartogh JM. To all members of the ICOSI task force 4th world conference on smoking and health. [Memo by E. Brueckner.] June 26, 1979. British American Tobacco Company. 100433043–3047. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33162.
Oldman M. [Letter to G Pedlow]. March 13, 1991. British American Tobacco Company. 502555357–5363 at 5358. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33278.
Action Plan proposed by ICOSI Task Force on 4th World Conference On Smoking & Health Stockholm, June 18-22,1979. January 30, 1979. Council for Tobacco Research. 10395689–5695.
62.
Observations on the Fifth World Conference on Smoking and Health by a Consultant, Winnipeg, July 1983. July 1983est. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501021685–1709 at 1685. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 32890.
Corti A. Director of Information Services, INFOTAB. Latin American Meetings-
Group. December 7, 1978. Tobacco Institute.
GenevaIRome, March 9-15, 1987. January 15,
Developing Countries Ad Hoc Group (DCG). Progress Report Covering Events Since the ICOSI Board of Directors Meeting on 19th February, 1980. August 1980est. Philip Morris 1987. British American Tobacco Company. 301760973–0979 at 0979. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33254
Appendix I, INFOTAB January 1989, Discussion Paper. January 30, 1989. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501045258–5268 at 5262. Minnesota Document Depository. UQ 33561.
Pro}ect Report Covering Pro}ects and Action Plans Since the Board of Directors Meeting on March 30, 1981. 1981est. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2025048077–8088 at 8077. pmdocs.com. UQ 41.
Pro}ect Report Covering Pro}ects and Action Plans Since the Board of Directors Meeting on March 30, 1981. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2025048077–8088 at 8082. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 41.
Verkerk H. Fifth World Conference on Smoking and Health-Winnepeg. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501021564–1586 at 1577. pmdocs.com. UQ 32888.
Secretariat Interim Report. December 28, 1984. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2023272512– 2617 at 2594. pmdocs.com. UQ 43.
INFOTAB Board of Director’s (BOD) Meeting-March 30, 1981. April 6, 1981. 502741855. Bliley Documents at www.tobaccodocuments.org. UQ 60.
Witt S. International Committee on Smoking Issues Lausanne-November 10-12, 1977.
Schlosser A, Mine K (Chadbourne, Parke). Representative Compilation of Literature Describing the Benefits of Tobacco. April 29, 1986. Brown & Williamson Company.
International Organizations Monitoring Service. Industry Sectors and International Organizations-Tobacco Update and Outlook on World Health Organization Activities Affecting MNCs. March 5, 1986. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2024272808- 2814 at 2812. Bliley Documents at tobaccodocuments.org. UQ 33777.
Oldman M. [Letter to D. Bacon, enclosing “Agro-Tobacco Services (ATS), Proposal for a Consultancy Agreement”]. January 7, 1992. British American Tobacco Company. 502552644–2654 at 2650. Guildford Document Depository. UQ
Oldman M. [Letter to D. Bacon, enclosing “Agro-Tobacco Services (ATS), Proposal for a Consultancy Agreement”]. January 7, 1992. British American Tobacco Company. 502552644–2654 at 2647. Guildford Document Depository. UQ
Oldman M. [Letter to G. Pedlow]. March 13, 1991. British American Tobacco Company. 502555357–5363 at 5361. Guildford Document Depository. UQ
Oldman M. [Letter to G. Pedlow]. March 13, 1991. British American Tobacco Company. 502555357–5363 at 5358. Guildford Document Depository. UQ
Oldman M. [Letter to G. Pedlow]. March 13, 1991. British American Tobacco Company. 502555357–5363 at 5361. Guildford Document Depository. UQ
Oldman M. [Letter to D Bacon enclosing Agro- tobacco Activity Report for January 1993]. February 10, 1993. British American Tobacco Company. 502552508–2513 at 2512–2513. Guildford Document Depository. UQ
Oldman M. Paper for ITGA General Meeting, 1994. British American Tobacco
80.
Company. 502552280–2293 at 2288. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33286.
Opukah S. ECOSOCIFAO Positions on Tobacco. August 18, 1994. British American
88.
89.
Brady B. March 3, 1992. British American Tobacco Company. 202049846–9847 at 9847. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33255.
Brady B. March 3, 1992. British American
Tobacco Company. 502570804. Guildford
Tobacco Company. 202049846–9847 at 9847.
Document Depository. UQ 33304.
Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33255.
81.
May R. The World Bank Position Towards Tobacco. October 17, 1992. Philip Morris
90.
Hartley R. [Note to Mr. B.D. Bramley].June 28, 1993. British American Tobacco Company.
Oldman M. Paper for ITGA General Meeting, 1994. 1994est. British American Tobacco
American Tobacco Company. 202049970–9973
Company. 502552280–2293 at 2289. Guildford
at 9971. Guildford Document Depository. UQ
Document Depository. UQ 33286.
85.
33257.
Bacon D. Development Aid, Progress.
96.
The ITGA 1996 Work Programme. Tobacco Courier. December 1, 1995est. British American
November 28, 1991. British American Tobacco
Tobacco Company. 601030389–0413 at 0395.
Company. 202049931–9932 at 9931. Guildford
Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33319.
Document Depository. UQ 33256.
Bacon D. Development Aid, Progress. November 28, 1991. British American Tobacco Company. 202049931–9932 at 9931. Guildford Document Depository. UQ
Bacon D. Development Aid, Progress. November 28, 1991. British American Tobacco Company. 202049931–9932 at 9932. Guildford Document Depository. UQ
Interview with Neil Collishaw, Feb. 4,
Bible G. Corporate Affairs Conference I Action Plan. December 13, 1988. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2021596422–6432 at 6429. pmdocs.com. UQ 32834.
Boca Raton Action Plan: Status Report for the Period Ending January 31, 1989. January 31, 1989. Philip Morris Companies Inc.2500103969–4056 at 3989. www.pmdocs.com.
UQ 32863.
Boyse S. [Letter to Peter Hazel, David Bacon, and JJ Mostyn]. August 8, 1991. British American Tobacco Company. 304004032. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33184
Dietrich P. WHO spends money on what? The Wall Street Journal, May 9, 1989. UQ
Oldman M. [Letter to D. Bacon enclosing Activity Report, September/October 1993]. November 1, 1993. British American Tobacco Company. 502555329–5331 at 5331. UQ 33276.
Boca Raton Action Plan: Status Report for the Period Ending May 31, 1989. May 31, 1989. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2021592752– 2764 at 2752. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 32859.
Boca Raton Action Plan: Status Report Ending July 31, 1989. July 31, 1989. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2023547120–7135 at 7121. pmdocs.com. UQ 32860.
Boca Raton Action Plan Summary Report December 3, 1988-October 30, 1989. October 30, 1989. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2503005015–5050. pmdocs.com. UQ 32862.
Oldman M. [Letter to D. Bacon enclosing Activity Report, September/October 1993]. November 1, 1993. British American Tobacco Company. 502555329–5331 at 5331. UQ 33276
Ntaba H. Letter to the Editor, International Health and Development, Vol. 1, No. 2, Summer, p. 31. UQ
Boca Raton Action Plan: Status Report for the Period Ending September 30, 1989. September 30, 1989. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501204997–5021 at 4998. pmdocs.com. UQ 32861.
Boyse S. [Letter to Paul Dietrich]. August 7, 1991. British American Tobacco Company. 300516113. Guildford Document Depository. UQ
Rupp J. Statement, Philip Morris International (Latin America). November 30, 1992. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2023591405. pmdocs.com. UQ 32903.
Bacon D. Who Benefits from WHO? November 24, 1993. British American Tobacco Company.
UQ 33311.
Agenda: “Primer Encuentro de Periodistas Y la Industria Del Tabaco.” June 1991est. British American Tobacco Company. 300565679– 5681. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33675.
BAT Smoking Issues Briefing, Taiwan. September 6–8, 1992. British American
Agenda, Meeting of Social Communicators and the Tobacco Industry. November 1992est.
British American Tobacco Company. 300565668–5671. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33678.
Oldman M. [Letter to G. Pedlow]. March 13, 1991. British American Tobacco Company. 502555357–5363 at 5359. Guildford Document Depository. UQ
Bloxidge JA. International Tobacco Growers’ Association (ITGA). October 11, 1988. British American Tobacco Company. 502555415– 5417. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33284.
Oldman M. [Letter to G. Pedlow]. March 13, 1991. British American Tobacco Company. 502555357–5363 at 5360. Guildford Document Depository. UQ
Oldman M. Agro-Tobacco Services (ATS), Proposed Plan. November 1991. British American Tobacco Company. 502552655–2667 at 2659. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33303.
INFOTAB International Workshop, Brussels, October 13-16, 1986. October 16, 1986. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501446636–7080 at 6723–6724. pmdocs.com UQ 33566.
Boca Raton Action Plan: Appendix A, WHOIIOCUIUICC: Strategies and Tactics. January 31, 1989. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501045143–5147.pmdocs.com UQ 32846.
Wells JK. INFOTAB Advisory Council Meeting July 14 and 15, 1982. July 21, 1982. Brown &Williamson Company. 680002301–2307.
Bible G. Corporate Affairs Conference I Action Plan. December 13, 1988. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2021596422–6432 at 6429. pmdocs.com. UQ 32834.
Egawa E. April 25, 1986. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2021654119–4123 at 4121. pmdocs.com. UQ 66.
Egawa E. April 25, 1986. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2021654119–4123 at 4121. pmdocs.com. UQ 66.
INFOTAB International Workshop, Brussels, October 13-16, 1986. October 16, 1986. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501446636–7080 at 6677. pmdocs.com UQ 33566.
Egawa E. April 25, 1986. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2021654119–4123 at 4120. pmdocs.com. UQ 66.
Whitley C. Statement of Charles O. Whitley on behalf of the Tobacco Institute before the Subcommittee on Health and the Environment, Committee on Energy and Commerce, US House of Representatives [Draft]. July 9, 1990. Tobacco Institute TIMN 0032095–2141 at 2118. Bliley Documents. tobaccodocuments.org. UQ 32912.
Zhang M. [Attaching Press article in the China Daily on the CIAR’s GEP workshop in Guangzhou.] September 9, 1997. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2063608546–8547. http://www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33752.
Whitley C. Statement of Charles O. Whitley on behalf of the Tobacco Institute before the Subcommittee on Health and the Environment, Committee on Energy and Commerce, US House of Representatives [Draft]. July 9, 1990. Tobacco Institute TIMN 0032095–0032141 at 2118. Bliley Documents. tobaccodocuments.org. UQ 32912.
Press release by the organizers of the expert discussion of the “Physician’s View of Passive Smoking”: Health Danger through Passive Smoking Not Proven. April 1984. Philip Morris Companies. 1002965608–6509. pmdocs.com. UQ 33770.
Masironi R. [Letter to W. Kloepfer]. December 2, 1986. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2025816621–6624. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33771.
Greenberg D. September 15, 1993. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2021184116–4121 at 4119. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33590.
Walk, R.A. IARC Multi-Center Case Control Study of ETS and Lung Cancer, Your memo dated 21 May 93. July 13, 1993. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2025493287. pmdocs.com. UQ 33616.
IARC Study. 1994est. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501347168–7173 at 7169. pmdocs.com. UQ 33595.
Pages R. IARC Study of ETS and Lung Cancer. May 21, 1993. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2500015757. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33617.
Walk, R.A. IARC Multi-Center Case Control Study of ETS and Lung Cancer: Update of information. July 30, 1993. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2029041838–1839. http://www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33618.
Interview with Paolo Boffetta, April 17, 2000.
Greenberg D. September 15, 1993. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2021184116–4121 at 4119. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33590.
IARC Study. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501347168–7173 at 7169. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33595.
Greenberg D. September 15, 1993. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2021184116–4121 at 4118. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33590.
Boyse S. [Letter to Ron Tully.] April 18, 1990. British American Tobacco Company. 400099555. Guildford Document Depository. UQ
Boyse S. [Letter to PN Lee.] December 19, 1989. British American Tobacco Company. 400099679. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33509.
Lee P. May 8, 1990. British American Tobacco Company. 502587275–7284 at 7275. Guildford Document Depository. UQ
Winokur M. [FAX to H. Reif attaching “CIAR and IARC, Next Steps and Options.”] December 19, 1994. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2028381587–1588 at 1588. pmdocs.com. UQ 33746.
Interview with Paulo Boffetta, April 17,
Matthews R, MacDonald V. Passive smokers inhale six cigarettes a year. Sunday Telegraph. August 16,
Lyberopoulos, H. Presentation on IARC [enclosing overheads]. April 19, 1994. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501355931–5944 at 5942. pmdocs.com. UQ 33604.
Hockaday T, Cohen N. Thoughts on TASSC Europe. March 25, 1994. Philip Morris
Lindheim J. Presentation on Scientist Pro}ect. May 5, 1994. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2025493201–3207 at 3205–3206. pmdocs.com. UQ 33708.
Ong E, Glantz S. Tobacco industry efforts subverting International Agency for Research on Cancer’s second–hand smoke study. The Lancet. 2000; 355: 1253–59.
Mooney L. Smoking out bad science. Wall Street J. March 19, 1998;
Boffetta P, Agudo A, Ahrens W, et al. Multicenter case–control study of exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and lung cancer in Europe. J Natl Cancer Inst 1998; 90: 1440– 50.
Hirayama T. Non–smoking wives of heavy smokers have a higher risk of lung cancer: A study from Japan. BMJ 1981; 282:183–85.
Repace JL, Lowery AH. A quantitative estimate of nonsmokers’ lung cancer risk from passive smoking. Environment Int. 1985;11:3–22.
US Environmental Protection Agency. Health effects of passive smoking: Assessment of lung cancer in adults and respiratory disorders in children. Office of Research and Development, Office of Health and Environmental Assessment. EPA/600/6–90/006F, 1992b.
Boffetta P, Agudo A, Ahrens W, et al. Multicenter case–control study of exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and lung cancer in Europe. J Natl Cancer Inst 1998; 90: 1440–50.
British American Tobacco. [ News release]. March 5, 1998. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2063594010–4240 at 4018. pmdocs.com. UQ 33750.
World Watch: Protecting our Global ‘Next Generation’-A Proposed Conference on Children’s Health Issues. October 1989. 300516227–6285 at 6235. Guildford Document Depository. UQ
World Watch: Protecting our Global ‘Next Generation’-A Proposed Conference on Children’s Health Issues. October 1989. British American Tobacco Company. 300516227–6285 at 6236. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33691.
INFOTAB . Item 2 Report From The Secretary General . January 1, 1982est. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2021594826–4836. pmdocs.com. UQ 32.
Background to the Structure and Operations of the Activist Movement. November 15, 1994.
Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501110753– 0775. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 68.
Seymour M. 6 September 1996 IARC European Response Plan Workshop. August 8, 1996.
Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2063604476– 4498. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 71.
Hauser N. Trip Report-RomeIFAO November 26-29, 1984. November 26, 1984. Philip Morris
Hartogh J. Report by Task Force 5th World Conference on Smoking and Health, Winnipeg, Canada, July 1983. February 26, 1981. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2025049376–9377. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33514.
The World Health Organization (WHO): Its Work Related to the Activities of the International Tobacco Industry. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501442830–2897 at 2501442889–2897. pmdocs.com. UQ 5.
Lojacono G. Research Group Informal Meeting On: Health Effects of ETS in Europe-Paris-P. Broussell Hospital (Ville}uif 13I14 March, 1991). March 1991est. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501356073–6076. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33534.
JMH–possibly Hartogh J. Action Plan proposed by ICOSI Task Force 4th World Conference on Smoking & Health. January 29, 1979. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501015212–5215. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33549.
The World Health Organization (WHO): Its Work Related to the Activities of the International Tobacco Industry. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501442830–2897 at 2834. pmdocs.com. UQ 5.
Tully R. 8th WCTH. January 29, 1992. British American Tobacco Company. 300504241– 4252. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33334.
The World Health Organization (WHO): Its Work Related to the Activities of the International Tobacco Industry. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501442830–2897 at 2889– 2890. pmdocs.com. UQ 5.
Informal Meeting of the IARC Research Group on ETS and Human Cancer. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2501349504–9507.
47th WHO World Assembly: Informal meeting of some members of the IARC study group “ETS and the Lung Cancer”. Geneva May 3-6, 1994. Philip Morris Companies Inc. May 5, 1994.
Wilhelmus J. WHO. April 18, 1995. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2063625254. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 33541.
CECCM. IARC Study. April 4, 1995. British American Tobacco Company. 500804531– 4537. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33774.
Cerioli A. Report on my attendance to the Conference “Conoscenze Scientifiche, Seperi Popolari e Socita Umana alle Soglie del Duemile. Attualite del Pensiero di A. Maccacaro.” January 27, 1997. Philip Morris
Menchaca. January 25, 1990. British American Tobacco Company. 502587287. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33237.
Lojacono G. Research Group Informal Meeting On: Health Effects of ETS in Europe-Paris-P. Broussell Hospital (Ville}uif 13I14 March, 1991). March 14, 1991est. Philip Morris
Pages R. [Forwarding note from H. Reif: IARC Study]. July 19, 1993. Philip Morris Companies Inc. 2025470098. www.pmdocs.com. UQ 32800.
Dietrich P. [Letter to Sharon Boyse, Enclosing Memo of Visit to Thailand and Philippines]. January 29, 1992. British American Tobacco Company. 300516024–37. Guildford Document Depository. UQ 33682.
Basic Clinical Pharmacological Toxicology
