26 th August 1977
SUGGESTED OUESTIONS FOR CAC.III
U In the face of the evidence would Governments In
relevant countries be failing in their duty if they
took no action on cigarette smoking?
2. Should the action of B.A.T* be based on the premise
that cigarette smoking involves risk that can be
reduced or increased by product modification and
smoker behaviour?
3, How far should B. A. T. go in attempting to decrease
the risk of smoking, both generally and specifically
by product modifications?
4, Should we market cigarettes intended to re-assure
the smoker that they are safer without assuring
ourselves that Indeed they are so or are not less
safe? For example should we 'cheat' smokers by $cheating'
League Tables? If we are prepared to accept that
government has created league tables to encourage
lower delivery cigarette smoking and further if we
make league table claims as implied health claims - or
allow health claims to be so implied - should we use
our superior knowledge of our products to design them
so that they give low league table positions but higher
deliveries on human smoking?
Are smokers entitled to expect that cigarettes shown as
lower delivery in league tables will in fact deliver less
to their lungs than cigarettes shown higher?
SJG:NW
c-n.
BATCO document for Province of British Columbia 22 April `1999