TALK TO 'CONFERENCE
MARKETING LOW DELIVERY PRODUCTS
19.1.82
THE TOBACCO INDUSTRY 6 ITS IMPACT ON
SCIENTIFIC & MEDICAL ATTITUDES AND OPINION
Low delivery products have origin in S&H.
Two subjects inextricably linked.
Started in 1950's - now very active.
But despite unprecedented research
And the publication of much statistical evidence
Causation has not been established.
Mainly as a result, Industry has successfully defended lo C) +
law suits in the USA.
But throughout this period Industry has remained essentially
silent on the basic issue.
This silence has been widely interpreted as an
admission or sign of guilt:
But in reality, much of the published statistical
evidence produced in this period, and indeed
subsequently, has been and is still contributory
- and merely serves to continue the general
controversy on the smoking and health issue.
The statistical data from epidemiological studies covers a
wide range of groups of individuals - but the conflicting
nature of the evidence has given rise to a growing controversy.
Despite this controversy, certain views have been
advanced that there is a risk that is related
to the number of cigarettes smoked per day.
As a result of these, views (albeit challenged in
certain medical/scientific circles) many Government
and health authorities have advocated that cigarettes
should be modified to give lower deliveries of
tar, nicotine and other smoke components. co
BAT Co LTD MINNESOTATOBACCOLITIGATION

-2-
The public have heard these views and have also shown an
interest in lower smoke deliveries.
Accordingly, Industry has developed and marketed
an expanding range of low delivery Products in
response to the views of Governments and consumers.
Now, after some 10-20 years of increasing use of low delivery
products
Many Governments and health authorities believe
that there is strong evidence that such products
are indeed associated with reduced risk. SLIDE ELC 8
;ut one should note that only future prospective
epidemiological studies can give evidence about present day
products.- SLIDE ELC 23
One must repeat, however, that neither this evidence, nor the
basic link of smoking and health, is universally accepted.
A number of eminent scientists, past and present,
believe that at worst the association is secondary
to, eg
-genetic predisposition
-personality type
-environment SLIDES ELC 7
ELC 24
;ome US and UK researchers even predicted in the 1950 1 and
1960 1 that lung cancer would start to fall in the 1970 , -
irrespective of any change in smoking habit.
But the anti-smoking protagonists have - in a highly
orchestrated/professional way - developed the proposition
that every smoker is seriously damaging his health/shortening
his life.
They see the 'Smoking Controversy' as merely
an artefact of the Tobacco Industry.
Lung cancer has clearly been the major/emotive concern.
But heart disease is, if anything, now being given
greater emphasis. co
BAT Co LTD - MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION

-3-
Let us briefly compare and contrast the
evidence - using the pioneering BHA Doctors
20 year study. SLIDE ELC 27
There is also the fact that incidence of lung canc, er and
heart disease does not show a simple relationship with smoking
incidence:
Continent to continent SLIDE B 2
Country to country - eg WHO re Europe
State to state in USA
Also QUOTE latest Norwegian study.
Interesting to quote recent statement by Dr Gio Gori SLIDE ELC 21
Despite such well-documented (controversial) evidence the
fervent anti-smokers are prepared to make almost any claim
no matter how fatuous:
- Times Health Supplement re Heart SLIDE H 7
- Comments re CO SLIDE CO 5
- Lancet/Times re CO SLIDE CO 7
- Medical encyclopedia QUOTE
- Sunday Observer - PaSsive/35 Cigs SLIDE M 2&3
With this background, what should be the approach of the
Tobacco Industry?
Is there now a need to try to influence the medical and
scientific attitudes and opinion?
NOTE: the recent UICC statement SLIDE BS 3
C=
BAT Co LTD - MINNESOTATOBACCOLITIGATION

- 4 -
RAT has given very serious thought to the above questions.
Starting at CAC Conferences
Then the combined thinking and efforts of Legal
(Millbank and B&W) I PA and R&D Departments.
Conclusions have been:
(1) Yes - we must try to develop a different approach.
(2) That approach should be based on an increased
dialogue with Governments, doctors, employees on:
- the lower delivery cigarettes
- the high level of research
- the opinions of third party authorities
- the S&H issue itself.
I must stress that our approach has been dictated by the
views of Governments and by the demands of consumers in the
many countries in which we operate.
I must also emphasise that we have been careful not to be
selective as to the statistical evidence we discuss.
Finally I and others believe we must be free to communicate
product modifications to our consumers
- and certainly that we should act while we still have
the chance.
Mention extreme of the US and UK ads SLIDES Al, A2
Now I indicate the two key points: SLIDE SS 4
(1) the products have changed
(2) third party opinions which
industry does not and must not.
adopt for itself.
co
BAT Co LTD MINNESOTATOBACCOLITIGATION

-5-
Wh at then have we done to date?
Blue Book plus video
Employees booklet
UK Parliamentary brochures and film
Film on passive smoking
........ 0 and many talks SLIDE ES I
Bob Ely will already have indicated the general outline of
our approach. SLIDE BS 2
The basic approach can be summarised SLIDE BS 5
The reaction has been consistently positive
QUOTE; SMA Letter
Royal College of General Practitioners letter
Pe tch letter
Competitor Industry reaction has been varied:
- PM, Rothmans, Rentsma, Imperial - seem interested
to find a way
- Reynolds seem still 'flat Earth'
Clearly the legal position - especially USA - Is the key concern.
We believe it is possible to discuss the issues and
the facts without jeopodising the Industry.
The US law firms who defend the industry
in law suits have yet to agree the way,
and it is essential that we have their
approval before proceeding in any public
sense.
Latest position
December 1981 New York SHB/JNF/PW/B&W/BAT
Follow up this Friday
Repeated statements that our objectives are the same, but the =p
method of achievement must be cautious. %-0
co
-CDs.
BAT Co LTD - MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION

-6-
Two main points were requested:
(1) Stress 'other interpretations'
(2) Link Industry action to Government
evidence/pressurer and to consumer demand
but not to medical opinion.
IN CONCLUSION
Low delivery products will surely continue to assume
increasing importance.
QUOTE: Prof Cain SLIDE SB
Alan Heard - and later other GR&DC staff - will give you some
idea of the way GR&DC is supporting the development of low
delivery products.
%O
co
Jhft
r*j
-PAN.
BAT Co LTD MINNESOTATOBACCOLITIGATION