190 



- g . 



where generally speaking competition is met by advertising and labelmg rather 

 than by pnce or even perhaps by substantial differences ui quality, such contlicts 

 [between the FDA and tobacco companies] are almost inevitable as 

 manufacturers tread near the statutory boundary. " (113 F. Supp. at 337.) 



In ruling that the cigarette products were drugs, the court concluded that, contrary 

 to the claimant's assertions that the leaflets were intended only to promote and 

 increase ones smoking pleasure, "if there be an indication of intent to use the 

 anicle for the cure or mitigation or treatment or prevention of disease in man 

 then clearly the subject matter of the libel is to be considered a drug within the 

 meaning of the act." (Id. at 337.) Similarly, the manufacture, promotion, and sale 

 of today's cigarettes mislead the public "by a subtle appeal to a natural and 

 powerful desire on the part of all of us to avoid" disease and addiction to a deadly 

 product. (Id. at 337.) 



In the Trim cigarette case the court held that cigarettes "promoted as weight 

 reducing cigarettes and which contained combustible taitacic acid, constituted an 

 article intended to affect, and contained a component which affected structure or 

 functions of the body, and therefore, constituted 'drugs' within the meaning of the 

 Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. " Petitioners will establish that the tobacco 

 industry research, knowledge, and deliberate manipulation of nicotine and other 

 components in tobacco products constitutes "an article intended to affect" and 

 contains a component intended to "affect structure and functions of the body." 



Materials released as a result of discoveries in the CipoUone case, as well as other 

 newly discovered industry documents, etc., provide an extensive record of the 

 tobacco industry's research activities and recognition of the effects of nicotine as 

 part of the smoking habit. Documents also show the industry's intended purpose 



