Lawyer: Some scientists willing to forfeit possible cancer breakthrough
By Trac Fields, Associated Press writer
Copyright 1998 Associated Press
December 1, 1998
A cancer researcher got testy Tuesday when a tobacco lawyer suggested some scientists
were willing to forfeit a possible
cancer breakthrough by refusing tobacco funding for their work.
"That's ridiculous. That's absolutely absurd," K. Michael Cummings snapped during his second day of testimony
at the first class-action lawsuit by smokers to reach trial.
Cummings, director of tobacco control at Roswell Park
Cancer Institute in Buffalo, N.Y., said funds can be found elsewhere for promising
research. He said
"a handful" of researchers at Roswell had accepted funds from the Council for Tobacco
Research over the years, but
Roswell scientists have since voted to stop taking tobacco money.
The council, an industry group named as a defendant in the lawsuit, was formed
under another name in 1954.
A spokeswoman for Roswell was not immediately able to say when it took money
from the council or when
it abandoned the practice.
Circuit Judge Robert Kaye has forbidden attorneys and parties to the case from
discussing it with reporters.
Cummings, who says he'd love to eliminate smoking, appeared on behalf of at
least 500,000 sick Florida smokers who want at least $ 200
billion in damages from six tobacco companies and two industry groups.
Attorney Joseph Moodhe, who represents the council, questioned Cummings about a
survey Roswell sent to other scientists receiving research money from the
council. Moodhe wanted an explanation for how the study was
conducted.
One question asked survey respondents to indicate the degree to which they
believed scientific evidence suggests a causal relationship between smoking and
lung
cancer.
"I didn't have you to help me word the question," Cummings told Moodhe.
"I thought it was a fairly straightforward question."
"My
number's in the phone book," Moodhe replied.
Later in the day, jurors heard sporadic testimony from Dr. Alan Blum, who
founded the preventive medicine organization DOC, or Doctors Ought to Care, in
1977.
The organization was founded after Blum lost a Miami radio
debate over smoking and health to representatives of the Tobacco Institute, the
other industry group named as a defendant.
"I was beaten to a pulp by these very calm and very soft-spoken debaters" who insisted more research was necessary
to establish any link between smoking
and disease, said Blum,
a professor at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston.
Rather than get angry, Blum said, he decided to work harder to educate the
public, especially young people, about the leading
causes of preventable illness, such as smoking, alcohol abuse and poor nutrition.
Kaye refused to allow jurors to
see an anti-smoking video called
"Medicine vs. Madison Avenue" and cautioned plaintiffs' attorney Stanley Rosenblatt about the doctor, who is
featured in the video.
"I don't want him to come in here and testify as an anti-tobacco acitivist,
using this witness chair as a
platform," Kaye said.
The witness and jurors were shuttled in and out of the courtroom as tobacco
lawyers repeatedly objected to Blum's statements and called for conferences
with the judge.
In addition to the two industry groups, Lorillard Tobacco Co., Philip Morris
Inc., R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., Brown
&
Williamson Tobacco Corp., Liggett Group Inc. and Miami's Dosal Tobacco Corp.
are also named as defendants.
They contend smoking is a matter of choice and all who start are well aware of
the
risks.
Comments on this posting?
Click here to post a public comment on the Trash Talk
Bulletin Board.
Click here to send a private comment to the Junkman.
Material presented on this home page constitutes opinion of Steven J. Milloy.
Copyright © 1998 Steven
J. Milloy. All rights reserved on original material. Material copyrighted by others is used either with permission or under a claim of "fair
use." Site developed and hosted by WestLake
Solutions, Inc.