Literature DB >> 9777818

Prying open the door to the tobacco industry's secrets about nicotine: the Minnesota Tobacco Trial.

R D Hurt1, C R Robertson.   

Abstract

In 1994 the state of Minnesota filed suit against the tobacco industry. This trial is now history, but its legacy will carry on into the 21st century because of the revelations contained in the millions of pages of previously secret internal tobacco industry documents made public in the trial. In this article, we review representative documents relating to nicotine addiction, low-tar, low-nicotine cigarettes, and cigarette design and nicotine manipulation in cigarette manufacture. These documents reveal that for decades, the industry knew and internally acknowledged that nicotine is an addictive drug and cigarettes are the ultimate nicotine delivery device; that nicotine addiction can be perpetuated and even enhanced through cigarette design alterations and manipulations; and that "health-conscious" smokers could be captured by low-tar, low-nicotine products, all the while ensuring the marketplace viability of their products. Appreciation of tobacco industry strategies over the past decades is essential to formulate an appropriate legislative and public policy response. We propose key elements for such legislation and urge no legal or financial immunity for the tobacco industry.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Health Care and Public Health; Legal Approach

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9777818     DOI: 10.1001/jama.280.13.1173

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  52 in total

1.  Test of "Light" cigarette counter-advertising using a standard test of advertising effectiveness.

Authors:  S Shiffman; S L Burton; J L Pillitteri; J G Gitchell; M E Di Marino; C T Sweeney; P A Wardle; G L Koehler
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 7.552

2.  Smokers' beliefs about "Light" and "Ultra Light" cigarettes.

Authors:  S Shiffman; J L Pillitteri; S L Burton; J M Rohay; J G Gitchell
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 7.552

3.  Concluding remarks.

Authors:  J Wilkenfield
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 7.552

Review 4.  Cigarette filter ventilation is a defective design because of misleading taste, bigger puffs, and blocked vents.

Authors:  L T Kozlowski; R J O'Connor
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 7.552

5.  Why Britain needs a nicotine regulation authority. To bring consistency and regulation to tobacco and alternative nicotine products.

Authors:  J Britton; A McNeill
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-05-05

6.  Response to Dar and Frenk (2004), "Do smokers self-administer pure nicotine? A review of the evidence".

Authors:  K A Perkins
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2004-08-10       Impact factor: 4.530

7.  Smoker and ex-smoker reactions to cigarettes claiming reduced risk.

Authors:  S Shiffman; J L Pillitteri; S L Burton; M E Di Marino
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 7.552

8.  The most important and influential papers in tobacco control: results of an online poll.

Authors:  S Chapman
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 7.552

9.  The perils of ignoring history: Big Tobacco played dirty and millions died. How similar is Big Food?

Authors:  Kelly D Brownell; Kenneth E Warner
Journal:  Milbank Q       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 4.911

Review 10.  Surveillance methods for identifying, characterizing, and monitoring tobacco products: potential reduced exposure products as an example.

Authors:  Richard J O'Connor; K Michael Cummings; Vaughan W Rees; Gregory N Connolly; Kaila J Norton; David Sweanor; Mark Parascandola; Dorothy K Hatsukami; Peter G Shields
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 4.254

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.