The Dishonest Legacy of Big Tobacco Companies - Essay Example

Conor Corken Ms. Fore English 8 17 Apr. 2008 Big Tobacco Companies’ Dishonest Legacy Few can dispute the negative impact on national health that the products manufactured by the tobacco industry have had. The largest of these companies, known collectively as “Big Tobacco,” have made billions of dollars over the past half-century by aggressively selling items that, by many accounts they knew to be addictive and dangerous. Accusations against the tobacco companies include lying about the health consequences of smoking; using deceptive advertising to mislead people into believing that low-nicotine and low-tar cigarettes might be less harmful; publicly minimizing the dangers posed by second-hand smoke; loading cigarette products with substances known to encourage addiction; and dishonestly claming to exclude young people from their marketing efforts. Volumes of documents in a number of court cases have strengthened the very viable claim that tobacco firms, seeking their own profits above all else, are guilty of wrecking millions of lives while making obscene amounts of money. Although some lawsuits involving the responsibility of cigarette makers for their products have been successful, many have not, increasing the amount of public anger directed toward the industry. The term “Big Tobacco” is most often applied to multinational companies Philip Morris (now Atria), R. J. Reynolds, British American Tobacco, Brown & Williamson and Lorillard. It is an uncomplimentary term, used in similar ways to the “Big Oil” label, indicating a large, powerful corporate group that operates under a different set of rules and regulations then most others. Ironically, while tobacco has rightfully acquired a bad reputation, it has been one of the leading American industries for a very long time. It was in the 17th century that tobacco was found to be a locally grown product that could be exported to Europe for healthy profits (Gewertz). By the early 1900s, cigarettes were being prominently featured in the mainstream media, especially by movie stars in the most popular productions of the era. Icons like Humphrey Bogart puffed away while reciting some of the most memorable lines in cinematic history. This national love affair with tobacco products predictably led to a huge increase in lung cancer, which was almost unknown in America before their introduction. Big Tobacco did its best to obscure any link between smoking cigarettes and cancer, but the truth continues to be revealed. One of the first big breaks by anti-smoking forces came in 1994 when internal documents from Brown & Williamson Tobacco Company revealed that since at least 1963 the company had acknowledged that cigarettes were addictive, despite congressional testimony by its executives to the contrary (Gewertz). This led to the Clinton administration directing the FDA to regulate tobacco as an addictive drug. Also in 1994, before the congressional subcommittee on Health and the Environment chaired by California Democrat Henry Waxman, it was shown that Philip Morris deliberately suppressed a study that graphically demonstrated the additive nature of nicotine. The study, which involved rats, demonstrated the tendency to require more nicotine doses with the passage of time, inferring that a similar pattern existed in humans. The tobacco company, and industry as a whole, continued to maintain that because nicotine was not intoxicating, it could not be classified as addictive, favorably comparing it to known intoxicants like alcohol, cocaine and heroin (Kleiner). Perhaps the most damaging allegation against tobacco companies was their deceptive drive to target young people with “cool” advertising. Using iconic images like Joe Camel and the Marlboro Man, an image was successfully created that smoking was fun, and a completely acceptable social pastime with no negative repercussions. Since research has shown that younger smokers tend to maintain the habit for longer periods of time, while those who don’t start smoking until adulthood find it easier to quit, that the ultimate industry goal to addict as many adolescents as possible is unsurprising. The damage caused by smoking is by no means limited to America, but is a global problem. A 2005 court case in England demonstrated the difficulties many have experienced when going up against well-financed tobacco companies. In the case, a widow whose husband died from lung cancer failed to win any monetary damages from Imperial Tobacco, one of the world’s largest manufacturers. Her claim, originally filed by her husband two months before he died, was that the tobacco company did not provide any health warnings back in 1964 when he began to smoke at age 19. By the time warning labels did appear seven years later, he was already addicted, ending up with a 60-a-day cigarette habit. The judge ruled not only that the deceased husband knew of the associated dangers when he began smoking, but that his addiction should not have prevented him from stopping. It was also noted in the judgment that other brands of cigarettes had also been smoked, therefore providing no proof that it was Imperial Tobacco products that caused his cancer (English). However, using the same legal reasoning, in February 1999 Patricia Henley of Los Angeles County won a $51 million lawsuit against Philip Morris. She accused the company of targeting young people, as well as concealing the dangers associated with smoking. Ms. Henley started smoking at 15 years old -- before health warnings were provided -- and continued for another 35 years, as a result contracting small-cell lung cancer. Philip Morris ultimately agreed to pay a reduced sum of $10.5 million (English). In America the tide has decidedly turned against the tobacco companies, with more and more anti-smoking legislation being signed into law, particularly to curb the dangers associated with second-hand smoke. In many places where smoking had been permissible, such inside of an airplane, it is now against the law to light up a cigarette. Due to these types of difficulties, Big Tobacco has now turned its attention to the world marketplace. The World Health Organization (WHO) has accused tobacco manufacturers of sponsoring a “Tobacco Holocaust” throughout Asia, where smoking rates are alarmingly high. Currently Asian women and children are prime targets for multinational tobacco companies. They are both easy prey, as anti-smoking laws in the majority of Asian countries either do not exist or are poorly enforced. In the Philippines, for example, where there is no tobacco control 50% of boys between the ages of ten and fourteen smoke (Rabinoff 145). Collectively, the countries on the African continent have the lowest smoking rates in the world, a situation that international tobacco companies naturally see it as holding great potential for future industry growth (Rabinoff 160). In conclusion, it is clear that the tobacco industry continues to spread death and personal destruction around the planet. One of the globe’s most profitable industries, it has made its money by making a product that is responsible for causing millions of people to die in agony, with such painful, lethal conditions as lung cancer. Not only has it been shown that tobacco executives knew for decades exactly how dangerous cigarettes were, but that they actively attempted to discredit independent studies that pointed out the health risks associated with smoking. By specifically targeting young people, hoping to make them life-long consumers, the tobacco companies created entire generations of hard-core smokers, many ending up as cancer patients. Even after admitting that smoking did involve health risks, Big Tobacco continued to deceive customers by providing products labeled “light” and “low-tar,” implying that they were safer to smoke. Their many deceptions would take up thousands of pages if all were documented, and the overall picture is of an industry that willfully harmed the public health by not providing explicit warnings, then proceeded to repackage their products to minimize any financial losses sustained due to consumer awareness of how dangerous their products were. Recently, it was announced that Philip Morris International has begun to operate as a completely independent company, and is no longer affiliated with the American company it sprang from. Now, U.S. law will not govern the company, and it will be free to operate in legal environments that are far weaker in regard to anti-smoking enforcement. The WHO estimates that by 2030, 80% of tobacco-related deaths will be in the third world and will equal around 6 million every year (Weissman). It is a truly horrifying legacy, but the tobacco industry shows no signs of stopping the use of such methods as false advertising to attract new smokers, particularly young ones. Works Cited English, Shirley. “Widow loses battle with tobacco company over husbands cancer.” Times Online 1 Jun. 2005. 16 Apr. 2008 . Gewertz, Ken. “Smoke screen: Philip Hilts reveals abuses by tobacco companies.” Harvard University Gazette 3 Oct. 1996. 16 Apr. 2008 . Kleiner, Kurt. “Nicotine research suppressed by tobacco company.” New Scientist 9 Apr. 1994. 16 Apr. 2008 . Rabinoff, Michael. Ending the Tobacco Holocaust: How Big Tobacco Affects Our Health, Pocketbook, and Political Freedom, and What We Can Do About It. Fulton, CA: Elite Books, 2007. Weissman, Robert. “Philip Morris Intl Commences New Plans to Spread Death and Disease.” Multinational Monitor Editor’s Blog 31 Mar. 2008. 17 Apr. 2008 . Read More