The Cigarette Papers "d0e19343"

Montebello Research Conference, 1982

The summary of BAT's 1982 research conference, held in Montebello, Canada, notes that the bulk of the conference was devoted to discussing topics of major importance to the group {1179.01}. One of the five topics discussed was environmental tobacco smoke. The summary of the meeting reflects the growing awareness that the passive smoking issue represented an opportunity for new product development. Under the topic of environmental tobacco smoke, the summary states:

14.	The strong growth of medical, scientific and media concern and comment in this area was acknowledged. The subject is extremely complex and it is essential to keep separate in our thinking:
	(a)	health issues
	(b)	social issues
	(c)	new commercial product opportunities.

― 402 ―

(a) and (b) represent constraints on the tobacco industry as a whole, but within them lies the opportunity for commercial exploitation (c). {1179.01, p. 6}

The next item in the summary is very vague. It appears to suggest that BAT had determined that sidestream smoke had different biological effects than mainstream smoke, but also that BAT may have found a way to reduce the toxicity of sidestream smoke:

15. Sidestream has long been known to be different chemically from mainstream, but only very recently have there been signs from GR&DC inhalation studies that the biological activity of sidestream may also be significantly different from mainstream .

An early design of reduced sidestream product developed at GR&DC has recently been screened [emphasis added]. {1179.01, p. 6}

Sidestream smoke contains higher levels of toxic substances—such as carbon monoxide, benzo(a)pyrene, and nitrosamines—than mainstream smoke (24). The item above confirms that BAT's inhalation experiments had shown that sidestream smoke is "biologically active" and that researchers were actively seeking designs that reduced sidestream emissions.

The summary of the 1982 Montebello conference also mentions a paper written by Dr. Ian Ayres of BAT GR&DC, which apparently was presented or discussed at the conference:

The personal paper by Dr Ian Ayres was regarded as a useful contribution in that it highlighted our need for better knowledge and understanding of the key chemical and biological aspects of environmental smoke. Much further thought is clearly required but specifically it was recommended that:

(a)	We must get hard data both to help counter anti-smoking attacks, and to support the design of future products. ...
(b)	We should keep within BAT :
	i )	animal results on sidestream activity
	ii )	thoughts on the biological activity of sidestream
	iii)	research findings on the consumer annoyance aspects of environmental smoke—since these have potential commercial value.
(c)	Dr. Ayres' paper should be discussed in confidence with Peter Lee [a British statistician and tobacco industry consultant] and Francis Roe [another British scientist and tobacco industry consultant] with the aim of guiding the research under (i).

It was also recommended that BAT should be prepared to share on an industry basis the development of techniques for monitoring chemicals in environmental smoke [emphasis added]. {1179.01, pp. 7–8}

This item demonstrates that BAT was attempting to develop a sophisticated understanding of the health effects of passive smoking and the pub-

― 403 ―

lic's attitude toward environmental tobacco smoke. BAT planned to use some of its data to "counter anti-smoking attacks," while data supporting the evidence that ETS is dangerous would be withheld from the public. This is the same strategy that the tobacco industry has employed regarding active smoking.