Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2006 Sep-Oct;121(5):501-8.
doi: 10.1177/003335490612100504.

The tobacco industry's response to the COMMIT Trial: an analysis of legacy tobacco documents

Affiliations

The tobacco industry's response to the COMMIT Trial: an analysis of legacy tobacco documents

Beatriz H Carlini et al. Public Health Rep. 2006 Sep-Oct.

Abstract

We analyzed internal tobacco industry documents that describe the industry's response to the Community Intervention Trial for Smoking Cessation (COMMIT), a multi-center community-based tobacco intervention project funded by the National Cancer Institute from 1988 to 1992. Our analysis of documents from the Legacy Tobacco Documents Library (www.legacy.library.ucsf.edu) suggests that the tobacco industry reacted to COMMIT by (1) closely monitoring trial activities, (2) confronting COMMIT in communities where it was most active, (3) distorting COMMIT findings on underage smoking data reported in the media, and (4) using COMMIT activities as practice to strengthen their attack against the subsequent ASSIST trial, falsely accusing both studies of illegal political lobbying with taxpayers' money. The tobacco industry closely monitored COMMIT activities and organized local responses to findings and activities perceived as threatening to the industry's public image or interests. Although we could not document a concerted attack by the tobacco industry that impacted the results of the COMMIT trial, data suggest that the industry used COMMIT as a learning opportunity to mount a well orchestrated and potentially damaging response to the larger American Stop Smoking Intervention Study for Cancer Prevention Trial.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Trochim WM, Stillman FA, Clark PI, Schmitt CL. Development of a model of the tobacco industry's interference with tobacco control programmes. Tob Control. 2003;12:140–7. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Chapman S. “We are anxious to remain anonymous”: the use of third party scientific and medical consultants by the Australian tobacco industry, 1969 to 1979. Tob Control. 2003;12(Suppl 3):iii31–7. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ong EK, Glantz SA. Constructing “sound science” and “good epidemiology”: tobacco, lawyers, and public relations firms. Am J Public Health. 2001;91:1749–57. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bryan-Jones K, Bero LA. Tobacco industry efforts to defeat the occupational safety and health administration indoor air quality rule. Am J Public Health. 2003;93:585–92. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bero LA, Galbraith A, Rennie D. Sponsored symposia on environmental tobacco smoke. JAMA. 1994;271:612–7. - PubMed

Publication types