412 



Hon. Henry A. Waxnan -10- September 27, 1994 



dozens of articles based on its Council-funded research. 

 Item H in the Appendix is a list of 89 publications or 

 abstracts that appear to have resulted from the Council's 

 support of MAI, at least 73 of which acknowledge support 

 from the Council. 



Council employees fTr. at p. 85) . We have pre- 

 pared a list setting forth the names, years of employment 

 and the current (or terminal) position of employees of the 

 Council and TIRC from 1954 to the present. I should advise 

 you that while our staff expended considerable time and 

 effort in trying to compile a list of all Council employees, 

 the list may not be complete or totally accurate because the 

 Council's records for this 40-year period are incomplete. 



In deference to the privacy interests of the per- 

 sons whose names appear on this list, we regard it as confi- 

 dential. We expect to provide this list to the Subcommittee 

 promptly after we have reached an understanding with the 

 Subcommittee staff with respect to procedures for the Sub- 

 committee's handling of materials provided by the Council. 

 In the interim, I respectfully request that this letter be 

 included at page 85 of the May 26 transcript. 



Studies associating smoking and diseases fTr. at 

 59) . At the hearing, I was asked about studies funded by 



the Council that found that tobacco use increased the like- 

 lihood of disease. With all due respect, this request is 

 extremely naive, and therefore very difficult to respond to 

 meaningfully. Modern scientific studies into the etiology 

 of chronic diseases typically focus on narrow questions, the 

 answers to which contribute to a broader understanding of 

 disease processes. However, as a general matter, each such 

 study, standing alone, does not state that smoking does or 

 does not make the chronic disease more likely. The reported 

 research findings have Implications for the relationship 

 between smoking and disease that are far more subtle, com- 

 plex and cumulative. 



Consequently, in many instances, it is difficult 

 to determine — and it ultimately is a subjective matter — 

 whether a publication Is deemed to have found an increased 

 likelihood of disease. Indeed, I believe that any two per- 

 sons who might review the full set of publications resulting 

 from the Council's grants in response to this request would 

 come up with different sets of documents. As I stated on 



