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:

• “If the use of such drugs [as marijuana] was legalized, one avenue for exploitation would be the augmentation of cigarettes with near subliminal levels of the drug.” (1976)
• “Nicotine is the addicting agent in cigarettes.” (1982)
• “Taken together, the evidence suggests that self-administration of nicotine may be the primary motivation for smoking.” (1984)
• “Very few customers are aware of the effects of nicotine, i.e. its addictive nature and that nicotine is a poison.” (1978)
• “We now possess a knowledge of the effects of nicotine far more extensive than exists in published scientific literature.” (1962)
• “Irrespective of the ethics involved, we should develop alternative designs which will allow the smoker to obtain significant enhanced deliveries [of nicotine] should he so wish .” (1984)
• “It may well be to remind you, however, that we have a research program in progress to obtain, by genetic means, any level of nicotine.” (1963)
• “The secret of Marlboro is ammonia.” (1989)
• RJR memo that says “Cigarette concept to assure RJR a larger segment of the youth market” «which states in part or in essence states in part “[A]ny desired additional nicotine ‘kick’ could be easily obtained through pH regulation .” (1973)
• “The need for nicotine is not a tangible benefit on its own – though it initiates a dependence for the confirmed smoker.”
• “Sweets or confectioneries containing nicotine carry the danger of over-dosage – nicotine is an acute poison.” (1980’s)
• “Smoking a cigarette for the beginner is a symbolic act… I am no longer my mother’s child. I’m tough, I am an adventurer. I’m not square… As the force from the psychological symbolism subsides, the pharmacological effect takes over to sustain the habit.” (1969)
• From one of Big Tobacco’s research directors: “An admission by the industry that excessive cigarette smoking is bad for you is tantamount to an admission of guilt with regard to the lung cancer problem. This could open the door to legal suits to which the industry would have no defense.”
• “… smoking mothers produce smaller babies” and “the position of the medical people is that smaller babies suffered detrimental effects all through life.” (1969)
• “We have gone to great pains to eliminate any written contact with INBIFO (Big Tobacco’s testing lab)… If this procedure is unacceptable to you, perhaps we should consider a ‘dummy’ mailing address in Koln for the receipt of samples .” (1977)

Big Tobacco now faces dozens and dozens of trials this year down here in sunny Florida. They have gotten caught in their own web of deception and Florida citizens see through their manipulations and deceit. Floridians are a cross section of pretty smart people and we do not think it is okay to hide for decades the dangers of a product that kills people; collect billions in profits; and then cry foul when you are brought to justice.

Hey, Big Tobacco, maybe you should bring the bags down here and bypass the bank; it will save you time.

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.

As reported by the Boston Globe, the Court said that a change is needed in legal thinking concerning foreseeable damages caused by exposure to dangerous chemicals and the negligence of those creating the exposure.  Justice Francis X. Spina, writing for the Court said:

“When competent medical testimony establishes that medical monitoring is necessary to detect the potential onset of a serious illness or disease due to physiological changes indicating a substantial increase in risk of harm from exposure to a known hazardous substance, the element of injury and damage will have been satisfied and the cost of that monitoring is recoverable in tort.”

Mark Gottlieb, Director of the Tobacco Products Liability Project (TPLP) at Northeastern University School of Law in Boston noted:

“Today’s decision is an important step in compelling cigarette companies to take responsibility for the enormous medical risk that their addictive and defective products create for their customers.  Whether through LDCT scans or other monitoring, smokers should have a specific program funded by cigarette companies to help reduce the grim odds that their products will cause terminal illness and premature death.”

The decision by the Massachusetts Supreme Court is a departure from those of other states’ Supreme Courts when facing this issue.

Below is a summary of upcoming tobacco trials:

In addition to the above trial settings, additional trials should be scheduled during the same time period in Broward, Hillsborough, Lee, Escambia, Duval, Volusia, Alachua, and Levy Counties.  Several judges have indicated a willingness to consider conducting multi-plaintiff or consolidated trials, over the strenuous objection of the tobacco defense lawyers, in hopes of giving every former member of the Engle class action the right to a jury trial during their lifetime.

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.