Letter
Passive smoking
Tobacco industry publishes disinformation
Cite this as:
BMJ
2003;327:502.4
- Epidemiologic studies
- Epidemiology
- Health education
- Health promotion
- Oncology
- Prevention
- Public health
- Smoking
- Smoking and tobacco
More topics 
Fewer topics
- Michael J Thun, vice president, epidemiology and surveillance research (mthun@cancer.org)
- American Cancer Society, 1599 Clifton Road, Atlanta, GA 30329-4251, USA
Editor–The American Cancer Society does not agree with the conclusions of Enstrom and Kabat in their analysis of environmental tobacco smoke in the cancer prevention study I (CPS-I).1 Their study is fatally flawed because of misclassification of exposure. The cancer prevention study was started by the society in 1959 to measure the effects of active smoking, …
Sign in
Article access
Article access for 1 day
Purchase this article for £20 $30 €32*
The PDF version can be downloaded as your personal record
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mendeley
Reddit
Technorati
Twitter
Stumbleupon
Rapid responses
Latest Responses
The word parameter is almost always wrong.
Published 25 May 2012
Re: Television shows and education about sexually transmitted infections: no laughing matter
Published 25 May 2012
Re: David Morrell
Published 25 May 2012
Re: Time to end the distinction between mental and neurological illnesses
Published 25 May 2012
Re: Are we nearly there with tranexamic acid?
Published 25 May 2012
Most responses
Venous thrombosis in users of non-oral hormonal contraception: follow-up study, Denmark 2001-10 (12 responses)
Published 10 May 2012 - 23:32
The psychiatric oligarchs who medicalise normality (8 responses)
Published 2 May 2012
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? No (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? Yes (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21
The hardest thing: admitting error (7 responses)
Published 2 May 2012 - 12:27