A.C. Douglas wonders at the relative lack of coverage given a study claiming that secondhand smoke is not as dangerous as, say, Mike Bloomberg says it is (via InstaPundit.)
This paragraph probably has something to do with it: “In recent years JEE [researcher James E. Enstrom] has received funds originating from the tobacco industry for his tobacco related epidemiological research because it has been impossible for him to obtain equivalent funds from other sources. GCK [Geoffrey C. Kabat] never received funds originating from the tobacco industry until last year, when he conducted an epidemiological review for a law firm which has several tobacco companies as clients” (emphasis added).
Douglas dismisses this concern in passing, and certainly it’s tempting to push back at the health police whenever possible. However dangerous or obnoxious smoke may be, adults should be allowed to make their own decisions, and businesses should be able to cater to the desires of their customers.
Here in Greensboro, where the pleasant aroma of the Lorillard cigarette plant hangs over East Market Street, the tobacco story has some texture. Farmers still grow tobacco in those fields of Guilford County not yet burdened with tract houses. People send their kids to tobacco-funded universities Duke and Wake Forest, the latter not named “Reynolds” only because everything else in Winston-Salem (yes) already was.
But anyone paying any attention at all knows that the tobacco industry has no credibility whatsoever when it comes to discussing the health effects of its product. None. I’ve interviewed top execs at RJ Reynolds in their opulent W-S headquarters, and it’s a through-the-looking-glass experience.
The secondhand smoke report may be accurate, and I’d like to see the issues it raises discussed intelligently. One of the issues it raises is the credibility of its sponsors, and that should be discussed, too.
11:58:04 AM
|