- Mi-Kyung Hong, public administration analyst,
- Lisa A Bero, professor (Bero@medicine.ucsf.edu)
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California, Box 0613, San Francisco, CA 94143-0613, USA
- Correspondence to: L A Bero
In 1981 an influential Japanese study showed an association between passive smoking and lung cancer. This article documents the tobacco industry's attempts to refute this study by producing a credible alternative study
In 1981 Japanese investigator Takeshi Hirayama published a cohort study examining the association of passive smoking and lung cancer among non-smoking wives of smokers in Japan.1 The study concluded that wives of heavy smokers had up to twice the risk of developing lung cancer as wives of non-smokers and that the risk was dose related. The Hirayama study was influential because it launched an extraordinary amount of critical debate 2 3 and has been one of the most frequently cited studies in regulatory proceedings, 4 5 risk assessments,6 and the media.7
The tobacco industry has used a variety of tactics to maintain scientific debate about whether secondhand smoke has any harmful effects. 5 6 8–14 We identify and analyse internal tobacco industry documents that describe the industry's response to the Hirayama study.
Summary points
The tobacco industry generated a study, the “Japanese spousal study,” in an attempt to refute the findings of a 1981 cohort study showing an association between secondhand exposure to tobacco smoke and lung cancer
Internal tobacco industry documents describe how the tobacco industry considered multiple strategies to conceal its involvement in the Japanese spousal study
The tobacco industry considered funding the study through the Center for Indoor Air Research, a research organisation supported by the tobacco industry, in order to hide industry involvement
The parties involved in conducting the study included a tobacco industry scientist, a tobacco industry consultant, an industry law firm, and two Japanese investigators. The consultant was the sole author of the final publication
Methods
We retrieved documents from the Legacy Tobacco Documents Library (www.legacy.library.ucsf.edu/) and tobacco industry websites …
Sign in
Personal subscribers, sign in here:
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
Reddit
Technorati
Twitter
Stumbleupon
Rapid responses
Latest Responses
Ethical considerations
Published 14 February 2012
Re: Diagnosis and management of Raynaud’s phenomenon
Published 14 February 2012
Re: Raised inflammatory markers
Published 14 February 2012
Re: Physical activity for cancer survivors: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
Published 14 February 2012
Smokefree cars in Wales: Laws are better
Published 14 February 2012
Most responses
Does anyone understand the government’s plan for the NHS? (17 responses)
Published 17 Jan 2012
Bad medicine: medical nutrition (15 responses)
Published 18 Jan 2012
Shared decision making: really putting patients at the centre of healthcare (8 responses)
Published 27 Jan 2012
Why legislation is necessary for my health reforms (8 responses)
Published 1 Feb 2012
How much of a social media profile can doctors have? (7 responses)
Published 23 Jan 2012