SI 



Mr. Wyden. Dr. Mele, can you confirm that these discussions 

 took place? 



Mr. Mele. Yes, they did. 



Mr. Wyden. All right. Let's turn, if we could now, to August of 

 1983. The company was involved in the Cipollone case, sued. One 

 of the claims, of course, was that cigarettes were dangerous be- 

 cause they were addictive. 



Now, to begin with, the self-administration paper that you sub- 

 mitted to pharmacology, I understand that in August of 1983, 

 about the time of the lawsuit, this paper was accepted for publica- 

 tion, but at essentially that time you were told that you could not 

 publish it? 



Mr. DeNoble. That is correct. I was told to withdraw it. 



Mr. Wyden. And let us now make sure we understand the status 

 of that paper because, you know, to me this is one of the kinds of 

 key concerns I have, because right at a time when the company has 

 some exposure, and there is independent science generated within 

 the company, the company is still trying to push it aside; and I'm 

 curious about the status of the paper. At that time, had the paper 

 gone through peer review at this particular journal? 



Mr. DeNoble. Yes. It had been reviewed by Dr. Barry and two 

 anonymous reviewers. 



Mr. Wyden. So it had been officially accepted for publication? 



Mr. DeNoble. Yes. 



Mr. Wyden. And were you told by management that you would 

 have to withdraw it? 



Mr. DeNoble. Yes, I was. 



Mr. Wyden. Did management say that it could help plaintiffs in 

 litigation, if it was published? 



Mr. DeNoble. I don't believe they said that. But they did say 

 that if it — actually they said, if it were published, it wouldn't be 

 good for litigation. 



Mr. Wyden. And you protested at that time? 



Mr. DeNoble. Oh, yeah, we both did, very much so. 



Mr. Wyden. You said that, in effect, you were a scientist and you 

 had an obligation to let science go forward unfettered, and it would 

 be embarrassing to retract the paper after acceptance? 



Mr. DeNoble. I would love to say I said it that way, but I basi- 

 cally protested 



Mr. Wyden. Don't let me characterize it. You say it. 



Mr. DeNoble. I basically protested and felt that the paper was 

 released. It had been approved, it should have been published, that 

 there was no doubt about that. We protested both to our immediate 

 manager, Jim Charles and also to the director of research. Dr. 

 Osdene. 



Mr. Wyden. And you wrote in August of 1983 to the Journal 

 withdrawing publication? You said you were withdrawing the 

 manuscript due to factors beyond your control? 



Mr. DeNoble. That is correct. 



Mr. Wyden. All right. Mr. Chairman, I would like that letter in- 

 troduced into the record as Exhibit 12, and note that my time has 

 expired. 



Mr. Waxman. Without objection, it will be in the record as Ex- 

 hibit 12. 



