Upcoming US DOJ Trial Against Tobacco Companies

[Elaine]

.S. Charges Tobacco Companies Misled Public on Smoking Risk

July 6, 2004

The U.S. Justice Department accuses tobacco companies of "using fraudulent means to recruit new smokers, misleading the public on the health dangers of secondhand smoke and violating the industry's landmark legal settlement in 1998."

In a 2,500-page giling, DOJ set forth the arguments it will present when its lawsuit against the tobacco companies goes to trial Sept. 13 in Washington, D.C.

The lawsuit seeks $289 billion from Brown & Williamson, Philip Morris USA, R.J. Reynolds, Lorillard Tobacco and the Liggett Group. Of the total, $280 billion represents revenue and interest from sales between 1971 and 2000 to smokers younger than age 21, as well as interest.

DOJ charges that the tobacco companies manipulated nicotine levels, misled consumers about the health risks of smoking and directed multibillion-dollar promotional campaigns at children. The lawsuit is an outgrowth of an action originally filed by the Clinton administration in 1999. The Clinton suit accuses the tobacco industry of conspiracy to mislead consumers about the dangers of smoking.

The government also charges that the companies' marketing of light and ultralight cigarettes provided "a false sense of reassurance to smokers," lessening "their resolve to quit smoking" and drawing "ex-smokers back into the market."

In its filing, DOJ said that cigarette companies worked to "financially reward scientists in every world market" with the "overarching goal" of downplaying the dangers of secondhand smoke in an effort to forestall smoking bans.

The filing said that the tobacco companies' conduct thus far indicates a "reasonable likelihood" of future violations.

The tobacco companies have denied the allegations

[Elaine]

By the way, the current administration, headed by George W. does not support the litigation and tried to stop it.

elaine

[twodogs]

Yesterday I read the "Oprah" thread and the different opinions on "smoker liability" versus "tobacco liability". This morning the wife and I had the old responsibility discussion again. One thing that continually stands out is the number of LC victims who never smoked. And along with that, the huge number of relatively young LC sufferers.

In my case I smoked for nearly fifty years before being dx'd with my lung cancer. Back then, when I was still smoking and in denial, I was convinced that heredity was the principle cause of the disease. Naturally, I didn't believe that a lot of things, including smoking, were healthy, just not the only factor involved. I also believed that the second hand smoke issue was pure myth. Now, of course, I'm not so convinced of anything.

Does anyone know or have an opinion on whether these younger and non-smoking victims are generally afflicted by second hand smoke or other environmental factors? I don't remember ever seeing the results of any such studies.

[BoBennett]

Since I was diagnosed I have done a considerable amount of reading to try and understand why some do and some don’t get cancer. I became an avid exerciser when I quit smoking in 1986 but made no attempt to clean up my diet and for the life of me I can’t understand why I got lung cancer because I thought I was healthy. Incidentally, I am physically fit even though I have cancer My mother died of lung cancer at my age, she was a long time smoker who smoked up until the five year survival point after loosing a lung and breast. Others in my family have also died of cancer I am the first and oldest of my generation to get lung cancer out of a bunch of smokers.

For two years I worked in an environment that was horribly smoke filled and while I believe that it had an undesirable effect its hard to say with certainty. Personally I believe that smoking and other environmental factors are only triggering factors in an already compromised immune system. I am putting my efforts into the belief that it is easy for and unhealthy body to be compromised by cancer and that you can not kill a healthy body and one can get a healthy body through diet, exercise and generally treating your body well. Statistics show over and over that athletes, peoples who diets lack fats and such, and groups such and religious organizations who treat their bodies as “a temple” have far less incidences of lung cancer, or cancers in general.

The young folks of today are coming of age with a media, and older genetation, that places emphasis on taste rather than good diet and marketers that put out misleading labels based on the latest fads for loosing weight. I certainly believe living with a constant bombardment of carcinogens play a role but I ultimately believe that we have taught the young and healthy that it is OK to mistreat your body and we further that thought by showing the aberrant statistic; uncle Charley smoked until he was 95 and he never got cancer.

Anyway this has become a sore spot with me because I have yet to find a group that is active in their own recovery and I don’t want to sit around a wait for someone to fix me as I don’t believe there is a someone.

[JaneC]

Bo,

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "a group that's active in their own recovery". Could you explain further what you mean?

I know that since I was diagnosed I have been reading everything I can get my hands on to learn about improving my health and recovering from this (as have most, if not all, of the people at this site).

Jane

[BoBennett]

I’m sure I’ve offended some folks with my less than diplomatic way of presenting my thoughts and I sincerely apologize.

I guess the softest way I can put this is if a person sits back and waits for someone to help them they are not being active in their recovery, or for that matter blaming the drug dealer for their ails. If we have an option to; lesson the severity, (exercise), learn about the disease through many sources, ( because as we know cures and causes are economically driven so it is tough to find truths) eat natural foods instead of processed and enriched junk, and in general take part in our treatment and we don’t, then we are not being active in our recovery. Every person on this board may well be active in their treatment I wouldn’t know by reading one way or the other. I can tell you that out of the many I have watched succumb to this disease not one not one has got off their *ss or changed their diet. Something goes wrong and a change is in order. No change, no change.

I did not just gather my opinions from this board and I have not heard anyone on this board talk about not being active in their recovery and I realize that some can only be as active as they can. The last one, (who died in April), to do so was a tough as nails underground minor who rode his ATV up to the point of his last days, being ingenious and mounting an ashtray on his ATV as well as his wheel chair. Unfortunately his idea being active in his recovery was accepting that chemo and other drugs were his only part, or hope and blaming an unhealthy work environment. This is not my only example this is the rule that I have seen. I have yet to find a group that talks about and practices exercise and diet. I looked for months, contacting the major hospitals and such for a group, haven’t found on yet. You can’t tell me that the majority are infirmed to the point that they can’t attempt to exercise. Most won’t address it or just say they can’t do it. And it’s a fact that exercise and diet are condusive to good health, and good health is far preferable in stressful situation to bad health..

I kind of lost perspective on who I’m talking to so I need to back out for a while.

Hope no one is too hurt by my thoughts.

[Guest bean_si (Not Active)]

If we have an option to; lesson the severity, (exercise), learn about the disease through many sources, ( because as we know cures and causes are economically driven so it is tough to find truths) eat natural foods instead of processed and enriched junk, and in general take part in our treatment and we don’t, then we are not being active in our recovery. .................... And it’s a fact that exercise and diet are condusive to good health, and good health is far preferable in stressful situation to bad health..

.

Bo, I agree on that. Did you check into our Alternative Forum? A number of us are on healthy diets. I'm on Macrobiotics. Nope, not that old one from the 60's but the newer very healthy version. Many of us are exploring exercise, Chi Kung, meditation, imagery, and other alternatives. If you haven't yet, please check it out.

Cat

[Snowflake]

Exercise, eat right....die anyway. That's not to say OF lung cancer, just that NO MATTER WHAT, we are all going to die some day.

Personally, I'd rather choke to death on a piece of rich chocolate cake than a sprig of broccoli...

Just a Monday morning editorial from one that didn't sleep much last night...

As for the great smoking debate, I think it may be cosmic rays coming out of the sky that gets us....

Here's my take: I grew up in a household with a smoker, in substandard military housing in other countries. So did my brother - and my brother also smoked. I have lung cancer, he doesn't.

I worked in an oil refinery in Alaska with other young women (and men), some smokers, some not. I have lung cancer, they don't.

I currently work in a chemical factory - a big one. Many employees are long time smokers. I have lung cancer, they don't.

How do you tie strings when the ends don't even seem to be related?

Bottom line is that I have lung cancer, and from here on out, I choose how I deal with it. I can go on a strict diet and MAYBE curb the cancer, or I can indulge in chocolate cake when I get the urge and the cancer STILL may stay away... Life has no do-overs, might as well enjoy it the first time around, it's not a trial run!

Becky

[BoBennett]

I would politely disagree with your take, for the reason that the reality is that smokers are far more likely to acquire LC than non smokers. Who knows why some non smokers get LC, but it is past odd that 85% of those who are LC victims, do smoke. Of all the data it is amazing that some still say smoking and LC are not tied together.

Its also peculiar how different people have different attitudes towards how they will approach the disease, when the alternative is what it is. I’ve watched enough folks pass that traded their life for cigarettes and continued excesses, after DX, to know that they are not in the group that somehow squeaks by and survives.

I agree that curbing excesses may not help the cancer go away. However curbing excesses will lead to a healthier body and cancer has a harder time taking down a healthy body. Anyone that would argue that logic would also argue that smoking doesn’t lead to cancer.

I completely believe that going back to nuts and berries and living in the forest would boost my chances. Knowing that won’t happen I believe it better to hedge my bet where feasible than to say, oh what the heck.

Good luck in your fight

[Elaine]

Many a young healty person has succombed to lc. In fact, a large majority of the cancers in younger people are more agressive than the cancers that strike older people. In the past months, just on this board, we have lost 4 people in their 40s and one in her 30s. It's hard for me to believe they had unhealthy bodies.

Bo you seem angry. I don't doubt you are angry--who isn't at some time or another who faces this disease. You quit smoking many years ago. And still got LC. Now you seem angry at yourself for not eating properly. You also post that others in your family have had cancer. The latest research shows a correlation between lc and genetics, with smokers with the gene to be at a much higher risk than smokers without the gene.

I applaud your commitment to improving your health. I also pray you be knider to yourself and let go of the past--you are not to blame. There are many factors at work, which is what Becky was saying. I happen to think that two of the factors are tobacco companies and the US Government policies in regards to tobacco companies and tobacco farmers.

[BoBennett]

I have to say you said it all in your response, you made my point.

Yes I am angry, because the school of thought is we,( individually and as a society) are not responsible for our diseases, therefore, not responsible for our recovery. Worse the folks I see and hear blame others for their ails.

I choose to hold myself accountable for my recovery because the best minds and billions of dollars, over many years, can’t come up with a pill that will cure cancer. There are thousands of treatments, ( alternative and mainstream) and thousands of trials that show only promise, yet the magic pill remains illusive. I believe that steams from the fact that we as a society are unhealthy, and an unhealthy body deteriorates. ( today’s health standard is an absence of disease).

And what is up with “I also pray you be knider to yourself and let go of the past--you are not” to blame. If I go by that thought I'd give up and wait for a cure, cause I'm not to blame.

Good luck in your fight.

[Debi]

I believe that steams from the fact that we as a society are unhealthy, and an unhealthy body deteriorates.

Bo,

Hope you don't mind me adding the bold in your quote, but I think that this was an important part of your sentence.

Someone once told me, opinions are like noses (okay, it wasn't noses, but it will do), everyone has one. Personally, I think that YOUR opinion has merit, and that others opinions do also.

If I can add my 2 cents to this post: I believe that it is important that we all do what we think we need to do, individually, to keep the cancer at bay. If I honestly believe that hopping on one foot and doing the chicken dance is helping me, then that works for me. After all, are there any conclusive results that rule out that my mind does not have some sort of control over my immune system? (disclaimer: I actually do NOT believe this, okay? ) I think it is important to share our beliefs..I think the problem comes in when someone feels SO strongly that their's are right, that they almost sound like they are forcing their beliefs on others. I think you only need to look in history books to see the danger of that.

I applaud the strength of other's convictions while admittedly, still being an occasional willing hostage to Ben & Jerry's....

[BoBennett]

Debi,

Ok time to stop arguing. As an off subject matter, I used to have an approach like yours, wonderfully disarming, ( OK not quit so wonderfully), ( I mean my not so wonderfully). Somewhere along the road I moved out of the box and to change anything one must work within, certainly not be forceful in approach.

I graciously accept you comments.

Bo

[kimblanchard]

Bo,

I absolutely agree with what you are saying about taking charge of one's own health! I have always believed in eating healthy and exercising!

Everyone needs to do what they feel is right for them, especially if they suffer with cancer. I do not have cancer and could not even imagine what people have to live with after seeing my mother die from the terrible disease.

It's nice to hear someone talk about the importance of good nutrition and exercise.

Kim

[MayFrog]

Personally, I'd rather choke to death on a piece of rich chocolate cake than a sprig of broccoli/... Snowflake, I'll second and third that!!!

Bo,

I don't think there's a right and wrong answer here...people deal with their disease in very individual ways...whatever seems to work for them. I admit, I'm not into severe diet changes or herbal/organic supplements; and I believe that any type of exercise is important no matter what you're state of health is.

I'm a strong believer in mind over matter.....and that positive energy and outlook are a BIG factor in my disease process. That's MY way of dealing with it. I'm not blaming anyone for my disease, and I'm not sitting back and waiting for someone to "cure" me, either. I'm just living my life as best I can while this monkey's on my back.

I grew up in a household of smokers.....and our diets were sinfully rich in butter, eggs, red meat, refined sugar, etc., etc. Not ONE of my close relatives ever developed any type of cancer or heart disease.....except for me.....why???....I have no clue, but I do believe that there is an LC gene, and I was (lucky?) enough to get the dominant gene.

One thing that struck me in one of your posts was the mention of younger people and LC....and the possible cause. It made me think of just how many children these days have asthma, especially those in urban areas....seems like every other kid has an inhaler these days. Seems an easy jump to look at environmental causes.....not just second hand smoke, but pollution, etc.

Sorry to ramble, but this was a thought provoking thread.....had to get some of my thoughts out of this chemo-raddled brain of mine.

Good luck in your fight.....no matter what the cause, we're in this together.

Mary

[MayFrog]

Sorry for not doing the quote thing right......duhhhhh......I just wanted to highlight Snowflake's quote....It made me laugh

Mary

[BoBennett]

Personnaly I liked "and stop poking me with that d*mn stick", not that the cake thing wasn't funny.

[mhutch1366]

I'll toss in my nickel's worth:

Did you know Euell Gibbons ( the eat healthy nuts and berries guy)

died from stomach cancer?

I thought that was ironic.

XOXOXOX

MaryAnn