Edição do Cachimbo Clube de Portugal
|
Edição do Cachimbo Clube de Portugal |
| The official smokescreen | ||||||||||||||||
|
O artigo que abaixo vos deixamos, ainda no inglês original, é um artigo enviado numa mensagem de e-mail de uma lista de fumadores de cachimbo americana e dá-nos conta, a par da análise de Lauren Colbi que já figura neste sitio, do escamotear da verdade científica acerca dos efeitos do fumo ao serviço dos interesses de outra industria. Enquanto não tratamos de vos oferecer a tradução completa aqui fica o texto para vossa análise critica. |
|||||||||||||||
Pipes Digest Article: 162.011 PIPES, CIGARS AND PUBLIC POLICY THE OFFICIAL SMOKESCREEN By Stephen Johnson
Things are tough for smokers these days, and they're getting tougher all the time. The case against cigarettes has been well documented. But are Americans getting the complete, factual story about the health effects of pipe and cigar smoking? The answer to this question is quite revealing, not only because of what's in the medical literature, but also because of what it says about how the war on tobacco is being waged. A BRIEF HISTORY The first U.S. Government report on smoking and health was issued in 1964 by then-Surgeon General Luther Terry. This document was the first public disclosure about the dangers inherent in cigarette smoking. What the report said about pipes and cigars was, however a different story. In fact, Dr. Terry concluded: "For smokers of cigars only or of pipes only, three of the studies [examined] show small increases in over-all death rates, ranging from 5% to 11%. The [American Cancer Society] study of men in 25 states, however, gives slight decreases for both types, as does the study of British doctors for the two types combined." Incidentally, it should be mentioned that a risk increase of up to 11% is considered by researchers to be within the parameters of statistical error. The Surgeon General's report of 1964 is notable for its reasonably unbiased presentation of data. 16 years later we had C. Everett Koop as Surgeon General, and things were very much different. In fact Koop's 1982-83 reports on smoking and health set the tone for all subsequent reports by unconditionally blasting all forms of smoking. An examination of three particular studies raises some disturbing implications about how official advocacy has interfered with what the public has been told since that time. THE NUMBERS GAME Two of the studies in question were cited in both the 1964 and 1982-83 reports. Both were done by the American Cancer Society, one being a study of men in 9 states, the other being the above-mentioned 25-State study. Let's examine the 25-State study first. This study began in 1958, so it was still under way at the time of the 1964 Surgeon General's report. It concluded in 1978. Here are the mortality ratios from that study as cited by both Surgeons General: |
||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Since the 25-State study ended in 1978, the 1982-83 report quoted the final result. What Dr. Koop failed to mention was that the mortality ratios he reported for pipe and cigar smokers represented an increase over findings made earlier in the study. In the world of research, this is a critical omission, and certainly one which deserves scrutiny. C. Everett Koop's belligerent anti-tobacco advocacy has been legendary, and provides two very plausible reasons for what might seem to be merely a small oversight. The first, and most obvious, is the fact that in 1964 the American Cancer Society found pipe and cigar smokers to be outliving nonsmokers - something which Dr. Koop no doubt would have found inconvenient in touting his cause. The second reason relates directly to the sponsor of the study itself. In the mid-1960s the ACS began taking a more activist anti-smoking stance. By the late '70s it had become one of the most prominent forces in the anti-tobacco crusade. This being the case, an examination of the inconsistencies in the 25-State study would suggest the possibility of agenda-driven bias in the final outcome of that study. Is it possible that Koop's treatment of the 25-State study was designed to keep inquiring minds from reaching their own conclusions? We will probably never know the answer to that question, but one thing is clear - Koop was at best guilty of professional, and perhaps even deliberate ignorance in this case. The real eye-opener comes with the American Cancer Society's 9-State study. This study was concluded in 1958. Once again, here are the numbers reported by both Surgeons General: |
||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Since the 9-State study ended in 1958 the results reported by Koop should have been the same as those in the 1964 report. BUT THEY ARE NOT. Yet another - and more blatant - inconsistency had been served up to the American public, and again without an explanation. MISSING DATA The third study in question was released by Northwestern Pennsylvania University in 1975. It was conducted by a group called "No Other World," with the assistance of regional chapters of the American Cancer Society, American Heart association, and American Lung Association. The study involved longevity, and while the results did not bode well for cigarette smokers, its findings on pipe and cigar smoking are very interesting. The study found that moderate cigar smokers live as long as nonsmokers, while those cigar smokers who smoke more than three cigars a day experience a slight decrease in longevity. The results for pipe smokers were surprising: According to the study, pipe smokers outlive nonsmokers by an average of two years! Even more surprising were the findings that heavy pipe smoking did not change this, and that pipe smokers don't seem to gain any longevity benefit by quitting. While the study was good news for pipe and cigar smokers, its data never appeared in the reports made by Surgeon General C. Everett Koop. Incidentally, a similar longevity study was done in 1985 by the University of Dublin, Ireland. Its findings echoed those of the 1975 study. Given official reluctance to report anything positive related to smoking, it is likely that the 1985 study has similarly been ignored. PERSPECTIVES To better understand what pipe and cigar smokers face in the war on tobacco, we need to not only examine the official handling of data, but also have an overview on the medical literature itself. First, it should be stated that the medical studies dealing in a substantive manner with pipe and cigar smoking are few in number compared to those on cigarette smoking. And many of the studies which do examine the health effects of pipes and cigars contain serious flaws. A major oversight common to many pipe and cigar studies is failure on the part of researchers to take some important variables into account. One such variable, for example, is the effect of differing amounts of tobacco consumption. Another is whether or not the study subjects practice inhaled smoking. This variable is quite significant since there are a fair number of pipe and cigar smokers who inhale their smoke, primarily among former or concurrent cigarette smokers. There is yet another factor to consider in examining the medical literature on pipes and cigars: How large the studies are in terms of the number of subjects. One problem with research done since the '70s is that pipe and cigar studies typically have been done with small numbers of subjects. In fact, over the last 10 years or so some researchers have commented that the low percentage of pipe and cigar smokers among the overall population puts limitations on the number of subjects available, and may therefore affect the validity of the conclusions reached in their studies. Although scientific research is a complex field, we can still critically examine it if we know what to look for. With this knowledge a review of the existing medical data on the health effects of pipe and cigar smoking provides ample reason for being skeptical of the position that all forms of tobacco use are dangerous. Unfortunately we cannot count on any objectivity from official sources. Our situation is further complicated by the media's partisanship in dealing with smoking-related issues. It is therefore crucial for us to remain skeptical, and examine things for ourselves. SETTING AGENDAS In the thirty years following the first Surgeon General's report on smoking and health, tobacco has come under increasing attack as a major threat to the public. Under the leadership of C. Everett Koop in the 1980s a vigorous anti-tobacco agenda became official Government policy. There is solid evidence to suggest that Koop bolstered his advocacy by altering the facts to fit his view of tobacco as being universally evil. Some of that evidence was cited earlier in this article, and we can only wonder if there has been other misreporting of data, and more suppressed information since 1983. We must also question whether or not we can truly count on the objectivity of health research, especially that which is government-sponsored. The annual budget of the National Institutes of Health is larger than that for our national defense. Much of the health research in this country is, and has been done under the auspices of the NIH. Can we really believe that our government hasn't interfered with the integrity of the research process? One thing is certain - since Koop's tenure, pipe and cigar smokers have a right to question whether any positive information about their pastime will be fairly reported and disseminated. Given the militant anti-tobacco stance of the present administration, it doesn't seem likely. Pipe and cigar smokers are in an unfortunate situation, being a small group and therefore an easy target. We do, however have something going for us: We have a factual basis for challenging the campaign being waged against us. And we have enough in our favor to continue enjoying our pastime without guilt or fear. The best we can do now is to remember that, be informed, and do what we can to tear down the official smokescreen. |
||||||||||||||||