Talk:Y1 (tobacco)/Sandefur2

Transcript
TESTIMONY JUNE 23, 1994 THOMAS E. SANDER CHAIRMAN AND CEO BROWN AND WILLIAMSON TOBACCO CORPORATION HOUSE ENERGY/HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT REGULATING TOBACCO PRODUCTS

SECTION: CAPITOL HILL HEARING TESTIMONY

LENGTH: 883 words

Statement of Thomas E. Sandefur, Jr.

Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation

before the

Subcommittee on Health and the Environment

House Energy and Commerce Committee

June 23, 1994

Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee. On behalf of Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation, I'm glad to have the opportunity to present our views on the issues raised by this panel and to set the record straight.

Mr. Chairman, if I may start by addressing several issues raised by this Subcommittee on April 14, 1994 and highly publicized by the news media following those proceedings.

First. . . my statement on the record of April 14 that I believe nicotine is not addictive.

In a letter following my testimony, you advised counsel to Brown & Williamson that I may have (Quote) knowingly deceived (Close Quote) this Subcommittee because I stated my belief.

I did not deceive this Subcommittee on April 14, and I have no intention of deceiving this Subcommittee today.

I repeat -- I do not believe nicotine is addictive. I am entitled to express that view even though it may differ from the opinions of others.

My opinion is based on my own common sense understanding of the major differences between tobacco and drugs in terms of the way people behave and how many people have been able to quit. People use the "addiction" term loosely, much as the Surgeon General did in the 1988 report addressing that subject. Based on that definition, enjoyment derived from drinking coffee or cola could be considered addictive.

In addition, if you were to rely on the scientific definition applied by the Surgeon General in the 1964 report, cigarettes would not be addictive. The Surgeon General at that time labeled cigarettes as a a habit" and I agree with that.

To put the enjoyment of cigarettes on the same level as addition to drugs defies common sense.

If cigarettes were addictive like cocaine and heroin, as is currently being asserted, there is no way that more than 40 million American smokers would have been able to quit smoking.

And almost 90 percent of them have done so without any professional help.

I might add that the mere existence of old documents in the files of a tobacco company doesn't prove addiction, either. Scientific advisors at Brown & Williamson have advised me that none of the research, which apparently prompted the allegation that I deceived the subcommittee, establishes that nicotine is addictive.

I have learned of nothing to change my own view.

One final point relating to nicotine -- and that is the allegation that the levels of nicotine in cigarettes are "manipulated" that cigarettes are somehow "spiked."

I want to assure this Subcommittee -- that we do not spike our products, nor do we manipulate nicotine in our cigarettes to keep people hooked" as the FDA alleges.

In fact, over the last 40 years, nicotine levels have been reduced substantially. Why? Because that's what the market place wanted. Unlike drug addicts, who require ever-higher "fixes" to attain satisfaction, consumers asked for less. And we responded. That's a fact.

Mr. Chairman I would like to briefly address the relationship of smoking to health, and regulation of the tobacco industry.

First, smoking and health. I and other chief executives of tobacco companies have somehow been cast as living in the "Dark Ages" when it comes to awareness of studies on smoking and health.

I state for the record that I believe there are health risks STATISTICALLY associated with smoking and that the same illnesses statistically associated to cigarette smoking also have been tied to other human conditions, including lifestyles, diet and heredity.

And the public has certainly been aware of the risks for a long time.

It has been contended that "tobacco products are this nation's least regulated consumer product, with tobacco products being exempt from every major health and safety law." It has also been contended that "no federal regulatory agency has the authority to regulate the manufacture, sale, distribution, labeling and promotion of these deadly products.

Nothing could be farther from the truth. In fact, our industry is probably the MOST REGULATED in U.S. commerce from the sowing of the seed to the sale at retail.

And -- given the fact that we're already heavily related have a concern that we're now headed down the road of putting the industry out of business. There's no doubt about it. That's clearly the intent of giving the FDA super-power jurisdiction The pathway to FDA regulation is the pathway to prohibition - and we need only look to the past to understand the consequences.

Over the course of 1895 to 1921, more than a dozen states enacted legislation banning cigarette sales. It was not until 1925 that the last of these prohibition laws against cigarettes was repealed.

Mr. Chairman, I'm here to answer the Committee's questions. I want to be cooperative. Please bear in mind, however, that my personal knowledge of company history and activities is somewhat limited, given the fact that I joined the company only 12 years ago and that my area of expertise is in sales and marketing.

Thank you.