34 



kept? Was there periodic destruction of those documents? Is there 

 a master index of those studies and working papers? 



Mr. DeNoble. The laboratory would write annual reports every 

 year. They were fairly extensive. Paul and I would put them to- 

 gether. All data, all original data would be archived in an annual 

 report and sent to — would be distributed throughout the research 

 center and then sent to central file. We kept all our original data 

 in notebooks which would also go to a central filing unit. 



I know of no instance in which data had been destroyed, at least 

 not while I was there, up until April of 1984. We also gave interim 

 reports which would be considered pharmacology reports, or, were 

 we to publish — ^trv to write a manuscript, that manuscript would 

 also be distributed throughout the research center. 



Mr. Synar. Now, did any other researchers at Philip Morris con- 

 duct research on humans while you were there? 



Mr. DeNoble. On humans? 



Mr. Synar. On humans. 



Mr. DeNoble. Yes. There was one laboratory that conducted 

 electrophysiological studies in humans, looking at the effects of cig- 

 arette smoke on electrical brain activity, and also looking at the ef- 

 fect of flavorants added to the nasal cavity, and looking at the ef- 

 fects on brain activity. 



Mr. Synar. OK. Let's talk about the article which has been really 

 the focus of the controversy. Did Philip Morris orally request that 

 you pull your article from the magazine, or did they send you cor- 

 respondence requesting that? 



Mr. DeNoble. I never received a correspondence. I just was 

 asked to remove it by our manager. We tried very hard to convince 

 him that we shouldn't remove it from publication, but we lost that 

 battle, so we were told to pull it from the journal. 



I immediately called Herb, Herb Barry, up and told him of the 

 situation and sent him off a note, as an official record, that we 

 needed to withdraw the paper. 



Mr. Synar. OK. Just for the record, Dr. DeNoble, once again, 

 why did you leave Philip Morris? 



Mr. DeNoble. I left because the lab was closed down. It was 

 abruptly closed down in April of 1984. 



Mr. Synar. Did they give you a reason that they couldn't find an- 

 other position for you? 



Mr. DeNoble. Actually they never said that they couldn't. They 

 just said that it would never be to the caliber of the position that 

 we had, that clearly it would be a step down in pay as well as visi- 

 bility. I think that clearly we needed to leave. 



Mr. Synar. Did you look for other jobs in the tobacco industry? 



Mr. DeNoble. No. We're not allowed to do that. Part of your con- 

 tractual agreement with Philip Morris is that you cannot work for 

 a competitor. And I don't remember the time frame, and I think it 

 was 7 years or something like that. 



Mr. Synar. OK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 



Mr. Waxman. Thank you, Mr. Synar. Mr. Greenwood? 



Mr. Greenwood. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Back to the purpose 

 of this study. Congressman Synar mentioned that in your testi- 

 mony you referenced the goal of this program was to identify a nic- 

 otine analogue that would have central nervous system effects 



