Literature DB >> 17130618

Historians' testimony on "common knowledge" of the risks of tobacco use: a review and analysis of experts testifying on behalf of cigarette manufacturers in civil litigation.

Louis M Kyriakoudes1.   

Abstract

A qualitative analysis of the trial and deposition testimony of professional historians who have testified on behalf of the tobacco industry shows that defence historians present a view of past knowledge about tobacco in which the public was frequently warned that cigarettes were both deadly and addictive over the broad historical period. While defence historians testify to conducting significant levels of independent research, they also draw upon a common body of research conducted by industry counsel to support its litigation efforts. Defence historians unduly limit their research materials, ignoring industry records and, therefore, critically undermine their ability to evaluate industry activity in the smoking and health controversy as it unfolded in historical time. A consequence is that defence historians present a skewed history of the cigarette in which the tobacco industry all but ceases to exist.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17130618      PMCID: PMC2563592          DOI: 10.1136/tc.2005.014076

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Tob Control        ISSN: 0964-4563            Impact factor:   7.552


  6 in total

1.  Inventing conflicts of interest: a history of tobacco industry tactics.

Authors:  Allan M Brandt
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2011-11-28       Impact factor: 9.308

2.  Tobacco industry use of personal responsibility rhetoric in public relations and litigation: disguising freedom to blame as freedom of choice.

Authors:  Lissy C Friedman; Andrew Cheyne; Daniel Givelber; Mark A Gottlieb; Richard A Daynard
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 9.308

3.  Tobacco manufacturers' defence against plaintiffs' claims of cancer causation: throwing mud at the wall and hoping some of it will stick.

Authors:  Sharon Milberger; Ronald M Davis; Clifford E Douglas; John K Beasley; David Burns; Thomas Houston; Donald Shopland
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 7.552

Review 4.  Tobacco industry litigation position on addiction: continued dependence on past views.

Authors:  Jack E Henningfield; Christine A Rose; Mitch Zeller
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 7.552

5.  Food as harm reduction during a drinking session: reducing the harm or normalising harmful use of alcohol? A qualitative comparative analysis of alcohol industry and non-alcohol industry-funded guidance.

Authors:  Anna Ramsbottom; May C I van Schalkwyk; Lauren Carters-White; Yasmine Benylles; Mark Petticrew
Journal:  Harm Reduct J       Date:  2022-06-25

6.  Big tobacco focuses on the facts to hide the truth: an algorithmic exploration of courtroom tropes and taboos.

Authors:  Stephan Risi; Robert N Proctor
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2019-09-13       Impact factor: 7.552

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.