Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: FRIDAY, April 29, 1994 TAG: 9404290141
SECTION: NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL PAGE: A1 EDITION: NEW RIVER VALLEY
SOURCE: Knight-Ridder/Tribune Note: below
DATELINE: WASHINGTON LENGTH: Medium
Victor DeNoble, who worked on the company's research project, told a House subcommittee Thursday that the ultimate goal was to replace nicotine with a substitute that would not have harmful side effects on the heart.
Thursday's hearing before the House subcommittee on health and the environment also focused on Philip Morris' cloak-and-dagger attempts to keep the details of the research secret - from bringing research animals into the lab under cover of darkness to threatening lawsuits if research findings were published.
A 1980 internal Philip Morris memo - stamped ``confidential'' - explains why the company wanted to pursue a substitute for nicotine.
Philip Morris scientist J.L. Charles wrote that ``Nicotine is known to have effects on the central and peripheral nervous system as well as influencing memory, learning, pain perception, response to stress and level of arousal.
"Nicotine is known to have effects on the central and peripheral nervous system as well as influencing memory, learning, pain perception, response to stress and level of arousal," he said.
``The nicotine program ... is justified in my view as a defensive response to the anti-smoking forces' criticisms of nicotine,'' he wrote.
Anti-smoking critics were contending that nicotine had harmful effects on the cardiovascular system, caused chest pains in some smokers and increased the risk of heart disease.
William Campbell, Philip Morris' president and chief executive officer, testified under oath this month that DeNoble's work was part of an effort to find a nicotine substitute that could keep people coming back for more, as nicotine does.
DeNoble said Thursday that company researchers found some synthetic chemicals similar to nicotine that could have been used as substitutes for nicotine. But DeNoble said these chemicals were never used and he did not know why.
Leo Abood, a University of Rochester professor who did consulting work for Philip Morris, said that it would not have made sense for the company to pursue substitutes for nicotine in cigarettes, since any substitutes would have been regulated by the Food and Drug Administration.
DeNoble suggested at the hearing that the company might have been able to avoid FDA regulation if it could develop a strain of tobacco that would contain the nicotine substitute.
The FDA is now considering regulating cigarettes as a drug, partly because FDA Commissioner David Kessler says tobacco companies may be manipulating the level of nicotine in their cigarettes.
Rep. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., said Philip Morris' search for a nicotine substitute provides additional proof that cigarette companies control how much nicotine is in cigarettes.
Rep. Mike Synar, D-Okla., said that most of the ill effects of cigarettes would have remained despite any industry efforts to get rid of the nicotine.
``If they think they can come to the public and say we've taken the nicotine out of the product and love us again, they're sadly mistaken,'' Synar said.
Steve Parrish, senior vice president of Philip Morris USA, said Thursday that the nicotine research made sense because the company wanted to know more about its own products. But he said he could not comment further on the goals of the nicotine program or its results until he reviewed documents that the company is preparing to turn over to the subcommittee.
DeNoble and his former research colleague at Philip Morris, Paul Mele, described to the subcommittee how they were instructed to go to great lengths to keep their work secret. DeNoble said research animals were brought into the lab at night or in the early morning hours, so that details of the research would remain hidden from other Philip Morris employees.
The two researchers said Philip Morris officials hounded them after they left the company. They said company representatives warned them not to discuss their work and even took pictures of one of them speaking at a professional conference. The two, as did other company researchers, had to sign confidentiality agreements binding them to silence.
``It's sort of like a spy novel, with all this cloak-and-dagger activity,'' Wyden said.
Philip Morris' Parrish said, ``Any industrial research lab is treated with secrecy for competitive reasons. ... It's not unique to the tobacco industry.''
Memo: shorter version ran in the Metro edition.