As thousands of Post-Engle cases wind their way through the Florida court system, Philip Morris, R. J. Reynolds, Lorillard and Liggett & Myers are facing daily challenges.  After years of priding themselves on winning most of  the lawsuits filed against them through historic “scorched earth” tactics, it appears that those days are over (and perhaps it is time for Big Tobacco to rewrite that old playbook).

Here are just a few of the highlights for the past week:

(more…)

A recent study out of UCLA, published in the January issue of the “American Journal of Ophthalmology,” has found that Age-Related Macular Degeneration (AMD) occurs more than five times more often among female smokers over 80-years-old compared to non-smoking women of the same age. Although this recent study was gender and age specific, this study was the first I had read that causally related smoking cigarettes and potential blindness. It also made me wonder if there is any ailment to which smoking cigarettes will not eventually be linked.

AMD is a disease that causes blurring of one’s central vision, resulting from damage to the nerve cells contained in a small area in the back of the eye. That small area in the back of the eye, known as the macula, enables one to see the fine detail in things that the eyes are focusing on. Macular degeneration makes it harder to do things that require central vision; life activities such as driving, reading and facial recognition become monumental tasks. Smoking cigarettes, according to a 2005 study published in the Eye journal contributes to this damage and subsequent degeneration by decreasing blood and oxygen flow to the eye, resulting in mini-clots in the macula.

If challenged, cigarette advocates would surely refute such findings, citing age as the cause of AMD rather than cigarettes. Certainly, as its name would suggest, age is a risk factor for AMD; but experts believe that the risk begins as early as age 50. And what is undeniable is, like the effects of age on the body, the damage from smoking is likewise cumulative over time. Put another way, according to Michael Rosenberg, M.D., chairman of ophthalmology at Hackensack University Medical Center in New Jersey, “the older you get, the higher the risk for AMD itself, regardless of smoking, that age combined with more time smoking increases your risk.” And according to the UCLA study the increased risk can eventually be as much as five-fold.

Not that smokers need another disease caused by cigarette addiction, but add potential blindness to the laundry list of injuries suffered by them. I wonder how long tobacco companies have known this?

You just have to love Big Tobacco.

Produce a product you know kills people; hide or deflect all the information that would alert the public of the totality of the dangers; engineer nicotine delivery in a way that maximizes addiction and write memos talking about the whole scheme as if you are immune from being held responsible. Then, when you get caught, you rewrite history and hide behind “freedom of choice”.

In an undated memo, Colin Greig, a research and development gentleman for Big Tobacco discusses marketing scenarios which, at least in part, involved his unscientific testing of the way in which his mother-in-law smoked and enjoyed cigarettes; together with her level of addiction. Clearly this must have been the classic “hate your in-law” scenario.

Colin Greig Document

Let me hit the high points of good ‘ol Colin’s memo:

• Cigarettes deliver their drug (think nicotine here) to the brain faster than “other drugs” such as “marijuana, amphetamines, and alcohol”.
• Nicotine “is about the lowest dose” drug available (that still succeeds with addiction).
• Cigarettes are a cheap drug.
• Cigarettes are “a relatively cheap and efficient delivery system…” (think drug delivery here).

Mr. Greig includes in his analysis a quote from Oscar Wilde’s “The Picture of Dorian Gray”:

“A cigarette is the perfect type of a perfect pleasure.

It is exquisite, and it leaves one unsatisfied. What more can one want?”

And, then, Colin concludes with a statement that could not better illustrate Big Tobacco’s methods of operation all along:

“Let us provide the exquisiteness, and hope that they, our consumers, continue to remain unsatisfied. All we would want then is a larger bag to carry the money to the bank.”

Translation: Let’s continue to keep smokers hopelessly addicted and our only problem will be what to do with all that money!

Previous litigation has disclosed other writings by Big Tobacco with which they must now be seen with in the Florida sunshine:

(more…)

“What is called resignation is confirmed desperation.” Henry Thoreau.

Things must be tough for Big Tobacco; 8000 plaintiffs, so much truth, so little defense. As I have previously written, I felt Florida would be a little too hot for those boardroom lawyers representing Big Tobacco and it appears I may have been correct.

You expect them to come after you in the courtroom or in deposition. You expect Big Tobacco’s lawyers to be aggressive, take no prisoner types of lawyers. You expect Big Tobacco to want to delay cases going to trial; after all, in some cases, they face dying plaintiffs. What, at least, I did not expect is that Big Tobacco would try and hijack the Florida litigation to California.

In a couple of cases here in Florida, Big Tobacco has actually changed their focus of attack from the plaintiffs to a lone professor from Stanford University. Yes, that is correct, Big Tobacco is bringing its entire, massive power down upon the head of a historian, Dr. Robert Proctor, who apparently had the temerity to testify for injured smokers and against Big Tobacco.

Big Tobacco’s lawyers have filed motions trying to force Dr. Proctor to disclose his notes, his unfinished notes and any other papers remotely connected to a book he has been researching – a book not yet even published.

Let’s think about this. Dr. Proctor is an historian. So, that would mean that Dr. Proctor testifies about things that have occurred in the past; discussions that have occurred in the past; publications published in the past; and Big Tobacco’s advertising, again, in the past.

Could it be that Big Tobacco has difficulty with Dr. Proctor’s testimony? Can they not read the history just as Dr. Proctor does and can they not hold his feet to the fire based on the history? Could it be that Big Tobacco does not like the title of Dr. Proctor’s proposed book: “Golden Holocaust – A History of global Tobacco”?

Yep, it can get hot down here.

Phillip Morris was found to be 38% at fault in the death of a smoker. This is the verdict delivered by a jury of good citizens on August 14, 2009, in Broward County, Florida.

Philip Morris and their lawyers, presumably, blame the judge and bad rulings made by him. Altria’s (Philip Morris’ owner) senior vice-president, Murray Garrick said that “Today’s verdict is the result of a severely prejudicial trial plan. From beginning to end, this case was marked by legal rulings that should be reversed on appeal”
Imagine a cigarette company denying their product had anything at all to do with the death of a smoker. Apparently, Philip Morris and Altria do not believe they shared even 38% of the blame. It seems that Big Tobacco is not going to ever accept responsibility for producing a product, which they have manipulated and adulterated to an extent that it really has little connection with original tobacco.

But why change your conduct if you are a multi-billion dollar empire that has produced a drug for 75 years that the FDA would never allow to be marketed today? Why change your concern for billions in profits over dead victims of your product?
In 1958, The Tobacco Institute (a propaganda organization created by Big Tobacco) spewed a press release that, in part, said the following:

“It is the position of the Tobacco Institute (and so Big Tobacco) that the health of the American people is more important than dividends for the tobacco or any other industry.”

Apparently, that was as false as their claims for the last 70 years that cigarettes are not addictive and cigarettes do not cause lung cancer, COPD or any of the other dozens of diseases we know they cause.

To be fair, this statement was made by Big Tobacco before they knew, that we knew, that they knew for a long time that cigarettes would make people sick and kill them. So, sure they were not really on a search for the truth; in fact, they were lying, but hey, the health of the American people was what was important to them. Billions of dollars in profit was not what was driving this industry. Greed was in the back seat to charity and compassion for Big Tobacco.

When the CEO’s of all Big Tobacco stood before congress and stated the following where was the charity?:

(more…)

The first tobacco trial of what is termed the “Engle” plaintiffs has resulted in a total verdict for Mrs. Hess and her son in th eamount of $8 million.

Big Tobacco’s lawyers, once again, attempted to shift all the blame away from themselves and against Mr. Hess. The jury apparently saw it otherwise.

The jury deliberated approximately 2 1/2 hours. Mrs. Hess reportedly wept, undoubtedly happy to have had this grueling fight reach a close.

Unfortunately, if Big Tobacco takes its normal approach, they will search for every grain upon which to base an appeal. It is unlikely that Big Tobacco will ever own up to its mid-twentieth century manipulation of smokers.

Today a jury in Fort Lauderdale, Florida found that a long time smoker, Stuart Hess, really was addicted to cigarettes. If you can imagine, Big Tobacco’s lawyers marched into the courtroom and argued that cigarettes were not addictive or, in the alternative, cigarettes were not addictive to Mr. Hess.

Mr. Hess had smoked cigarettes for 40 years and had tried numerous methods to quit, without success. Ultimately, Mr. Hess died from cancer and his addiction to nicotine endured throughout his chemotherapy.

Big Tobacco’s lawyers apparently argued that because Mr. Hess appeared to be “able to quit from time to time”, he was not addicted to cigarettes. Mrs. Hess attorney, Gary Paige, put it about as plainly as you can: “People smoke because they’re addicted, not because they choose to,” Paige said. “Nobody wants to be addicted to cigarettes. It’s as addictive as cocaine and heroin.”

What is it with an industry who can not even be honest enough to admit that cigarettes are and always have been addictive!

Finally, Mrs. Hess has found some vindication from Big Tobacco.