362 



However, you must understand that our review process and the 

 selection of grantees to be supported is a very critical mechanism. 

 We receive well over 1,000, close to 1,200, inquiries and applica- 

 tions per year. We are able to fund only a minute portion of those 

 total inquiries and applications. So we are really — we really are 

 picking the cream of the crop it would seem. I think our judgment 

 has been borne out by the succession of the investigators. 



Mr. Bliley. What is the publication policy of CTR? 



Mr. Glenn. We encourage all investigators to publish ever3d;hing 

 that they wish to publish. We have never discouraged publication. 

 I would cite as an example the fact that we were approached by 

 Dr. Edward Campbell of the University of Utah recently. Dr. 

 Campbell is one of our grantees and he is working on the problem 

 of emphysema. 



He has identified a genetic defect that leads to an alpha 1 

 antitrypsin deficiency and in those individuals perhaps represent- 

 ing some 3 to 5 percent of patients with emphysema, this enzjrme 

 deficiency predisposes them to emphysema. 



He inquired of us whether he should publish these results, and 

 we said, most certainly you should publish those results. Those are 

 the individuals who are most susceptible to emphysema and cer- 

 tainly those who should be kept away from the risk factors such 

 as smoking. 



Mr. Bliley. There has been recent criticism that the research 

 funded by CTR doesn't have anjrthing to do with cigarette smoking 

 and health. Does your experience support this criticism? 



Mr. Glenn. No, sir, we are supporting very fundamental re- 

 search into molecular and cellular biology, genetics and immunol- 

 ogy which are the fundamental questions that must be answered 

 before we can address questions of therapy and social habits. 



Mr. Bliley. It has been claimed that research has been chan- 

 neled or funneled into CTR special projects so that adverse results 

 could be suppressed from publication by claiming that they were 

 subject to the attorney-client privilege. 



I understand that many publications resulted from CTR special 

 projects. I also understand that all of the privileged documents 

 were reviewed by special master Joel A. Persono who was ap- 

 pointed by Judge Sarokin and who later became a United States 

 magistrate judge. In the special masters report he states, and I 

 quote, "The research projects themselves were conducted by inde- 

 pendent scientists affiliated with a variety of academic and re- 

 search institutions who were not applied by or related to the to- 

 bacco industry. These researchers were permitted to publish the re- 

 sults of their research with credit given to the CTR." 



Is that consistent with your understanding? 



Mr. Glenn. Yes, sir. 



Mr. Bliley. I also understand that some researchers who re- 

 ceived CTR special projects funding were co-funded by other fund- 

 ing agencies and that a lot of this research was published in peer 

 review journals and acknowledgment to special project support was 

 requested; is that right? 



Mr. Glenn. Yes, sir. I would point out that special projects were 

 projects that were desirable for our sponsors. However, our sci- 

 entific director reviewed these projects for scientific accuracy, for 



