HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER		Author Keyword(s) Vol Page [Advanced]

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this link to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Add article to my folders Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Neilsen, K Articles by Glantz, S A Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Neilsen, K Articles by Glantz, S A Related Collections Environmental tobacco smoke

A tobacco industry study of airline cabin air quality: dropping inconvenient findings

Kalmanovitz Library and Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA

Correspondence to:
Stanton A Glantz, PhD
Box 1390, University of California, San Francisco, CA 94143-1390, USA; glantz{at}medicine.ucsf.edu

Objective: To examine an industry funded and controlled study of in flight air quality (IFAQ).

Methods: Systematic search of internal tobacco industry documents available on the internet and at the British American Tobacco Guildford Depository.

Results: Individuals from several tobacco industry companies, led by Philip Morris, designed, funded, conducted, and controlled the presentation of results of a study of IFAQ for the Scandinavian airline SAS in 1988 while attempting to minimise the appearance of industry control. Industry lawyers and scientists deleted results unfavourable to the industry’s position from the study before delivering it to the airline. The published version of the study further downplayed the results, particularly with regard to respirable suspended particulates. The study ignored the health implications of the results and instead promoted the industry position that ventilation could solve problems posed by secondhand smoke.

Conclusions: Sponsoring IFAQ studies was one of several tactics the tobacco industry employed in attempts to reverse or delay implementation of in-flight smoking restrictions. As a result, airline patrons and employees, particularly flight attendants, continued to be exposed to pollution from secondhand smoke, especially particulates, which the industry’s own consultants had noted exceeded international standards. This case adds to the growing body of evidence that scientific studies associated with the tobacco industry cannot be taken at face value.

Keywords: tobacco smoke pollution; airlines; flight attendant; particulates; tobacco industry documents; public policy; lawyers

Abbreviations: CAB, Civil Aeronautics Board; CIAR, Center for Indoor Air Research; ETS, environmental tobacco smoke; FAA, Federal Aviation Administration; IAQ, indoor air quality; IFAA, International Flight Attendants Association; IFAQ, in flight air quality; NAS, National Academy of Sciences; PM, Philip Morris; RSP, respirable suspended particles; TNO, Nederlandse Organisatie voor Toegepast-Natuurwetenschappelijk Onderzoek (Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research)

This article has been cited by other articles:

				P. Lopipero and L. A Bero Tobacco interests or the public interest: 20 years of industry strategies to undermine airline smoking restrictions. Tob. Control, August 1, 2006; 15(4): 323 - 332. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S Schick and S Glantz Philip Morris toxicological experiments with fresh sidestream smoke: more toxic than mainstream smoke Tob. Control, December 1, 2005; 14(6): 396 - 404. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P M Ling and S A Glantz Tobacco industry consumer research on socially acceptable cigarettes Tob. Control, October 1, 2005; 14(5): e3 - e3. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E M Barbeau, G Kelder, S Ahmed, V Mantuefel, and E D Balbach From strange bedfellows to natural allies: the shifting allegiance of fire service organisations in the push for federal fire-safe cigarette legislation Tob. Control, October 1, 2005; 14(5): 338 - 345. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Pan, E. M. Barbeau, C. Levenstein, and E. D. Balbach Smoke-Free Airlines and the Role of Organized Labor: A Case Study Am J Public Health, March 1, 2005; 95(3): 398 - 404. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J B Richmond, D M Burns, and K M Cummings Public health and the power of individual action Tob. Control, March 1, 2004; 13(90001): i1 - 2. [Full Text] [PDF]

				A L Holm and R M Davis Clearing the airways: advocacy and regulation for smoke-free airlines Tob. Control, March 1, 2004; 13(90001): i30 - 36. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J Drope, S A Bialous, and S A Glantz Tobacco industry efforts to present ventilation as an alternative to smoke-free environments in North America Tob. Control, March 1, 2004; 13(90001): i41 - 47. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]