“Everyone knew but no one had proof”: tobacco industry use of medical history expertise in US courts, 1990–2002
- 27 November 2006
- journal article
- review article
- Published by BMJ in Tobacco Control
- Vol. 15 (suppl 4) , iv117-iv125
- https://doi.org/10.1136/tc.2004.009928
Abstract
Historians have played an important role in recent tobacco litigation, helping the industry with its defence of "common knowledge" and "open controversy". Historians re-narrate the past, creating an account for judges and juries that makes it appear that "everyone has always known" that cigarettes are harmful, meaning that smokers have only themselves to blame for their illnesses. Medical historians are also employed to argue that "honest doubts" persisted in the medical community long past the 1950s, justifying as responsible the industry's longstanding claim of "no proof" of hazards. The industry's experts emphasise the "good science" supported by the industry, and ignore the industry's role in spreading doubts about the reality of tobacco hazards.Keywords
This publication has 8 references indexed in Scilit:
- The U.S. Public Health Service and Smoking in the 1950s: The Tale of Two More StatementsJournal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences, 2006
- Angel H Roffo: the forgotten father of experimental tobacco carcinogenesisPublished by WHO Press ,2006
- Lung cancer, chronic disease epidemiology, and medicine, 1948-1964.Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences, 2004
- Should medical historians be working for the tobacco industry?The Lancet, 2004
- The tobacco industry's political efforts to derail the EPA report on ETSAmerican Journal of Preventive Medicine, 2004
- LUNG CANCER IN THE 19TH CENTURY.1964
- Smoking and Lung Cancer: Recent Evidence and a Discussion of Some QuestionsJNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 1959
- ST. LOUIS INTERIM SESSIONJAMA, 1948