Tobacco Control

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
[Advanced]

Tobacco Control 2006;15(Supplement 4 ):iv117-iv125; doi:10.1136/tc.2004.009928
Copyright © 2006 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this link to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Add article to my folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Proctor, R. N
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Proctor, R. N

COMMENTARY

"Everyone knew but no one had proof": tobacco industry use of medical history expertise in US courts, 1990–2002

Robert N Proctor

Correspondence to:
Professor Robert N Proctor
History Department, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA; rproctor{at}stanford.edu


ABSTRACT
Historians have played an important role in recent tobacco litigation, helping the industry with its defence of "common knowledge" and "open controversy". Historians re-narrate the past, creating an account for judges and juries that makes it appear that "everyone has always known" that cigarettes are harmful, meaning that smokers have only themselves to blame for their illnesses. Medical historians are also employed to argue that "honest doubts" persisted in the medical community long past the 1950s, justifying as responsible the industry’s longstanding claim of "no proof" of hazards. The industry’s experts emphasise the "good science" supported by the industry, and ignore the industry’s role in spreading doubts about the reality of tobacco hazards.


Abbreviations: TRIC, Tobacco Industry Research Council

Keywords: open controversy; medical history; expert witnesses; tobacco litigation; agnotology




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am. J. Public HealthHome page
T. Stevenson and R. N. Proctor
The SECRET and SOUL of Marlboro: Phillip Morris and the Origins, Spread, and Denial of Nicotine Freebasing
Am J Public Health, July 1, 2008; 98(7): 1184 - 1194.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Tobacco ControlHome page
J. E Henningfield, C. A Rose, and M. Zeller
Tobacco industry litigation position on addiction: continued dependence on past views
Tob. Control, December 1, 2006; 15(suppl_4): iv27 - iv36.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
Terms and conditions relating to subscriptions purchased online  ¦  Website terms and conditions  ¦  Privacy policy
Copyright © 2006 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.