[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.146.179.146. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
January 24, 1996

The Tobacco Industry and the Brown and Williamson Documents-Reply

Author Affiliations

University of California, San Francisco
Robert Wood Johnson Medical School New Brunswick, NJ

JAMA. 1996;275(4):280. doi:10.1001/jama.1996.03530280031028
Abstract

In Reply.  —As discussed in our article, Mantel's1 criticisms (published some months later) were used by the Tobacco Institute to conduct a massive public relations campaign criticizing Hirayama's article.2 The point made in our article was that the Tobacco Institute launched this campaign even though some of its consultants, including Dr Lee, had stated that they disagreed with Mantel's analysis. Lee confirms in his letter that he did not agree with Mantel's criticisms of the statistics used in Hirayama's article, which is consistent with our interpretation of the historical record.We did not mean to suggest that Dr Sterling's advisory group was designed to influence the content of the 1967 DHEW report, "Cigarette Smoking and Health Characteristics." The advisory group was established to influence future government reports. Sterling's statement, "No attempts were or could be made to influence the publication of the government public policy document," misses the

×