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 Read responses to this article 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 Henningfield, J. E Articles by Zeller, M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Henningfield, J. E Articles by Zeller, M. Related Collections Health effects of tobacco use

Tobacco industry litigation position on addiction: continued dependence on past views

¹ Pinney Associates, Bethesda Maryland and The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
² Pinney Associates, Bethesda Maryland and Harvard University School of Public Health, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA

Correspondence to:
Dr Jack E Henningfield
3 Bethesda Metro Center, Suite 1400, Bethesda, MD 20814, USA; jhenning{at}pinneyassociates.com

This paper reviews the tobacco industry’s litigation strategy for addressing the addiction issue through trial testimony by its experts, and opening and closing statements by its lawyers. Despite the fact that several companies now claim to accept, in varying degrees, the conclusions of the Surgeon General concerning tobacco addiction, the tobacco industry litigation strategy pertaining to addiction is essentially unchanged since that of the early 1980s when the issue emerged as crucial. The industry uses its experts and the process of cross-examination of plaintiff’s experts to imply that the addictiveness of tobacco and nicotine are more comparable to substances such as caffeine, chocolate, and even milk, than to heroin, cocaine and alcohol. Furthermore, the tobacco industry contends that the definition of addiction has now become so broadened as to include carrots and caffeine and hence that any concurrence that smoking is addictive, does not imply that cigarettes are addictive to the standards that drugs such as heroin and cocaine are addictive. Finally, the industry has continuously asserted that tobacco users assumed the risks of tobacco since they understood that quitting could be difficult when they began to use, and moreover, that the main barrier to cessation is lack of desire or motivation to quit and not physical addiction. These positions have been maintained through the 2004–2005 US Government litigation that was ongoing as the time of this writing.

Abbreviations: DATTA, Tobacco Deposition and Trial Testimony Archive; FDA, Food and Drug Administration; FTC, Federal Trade Commission; ISO, International Standards Organization; WHO, World Health Organization

Keywords: addiction; DATTA; litigation; testimony

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D D. Blanke and H. H Humphrey III Putting truth into action: using the evidence for justice Tob. Control, December 1, 2006; 15(suppl_4): iv1 - iv3. [Full Text] [PDF]

eLetters: