196 



1962-r):). Ttic-y coiici-rii Pr(j,jecL liippo till ( Ihrt-c 

 (loCLimiMi ts ) . and Iwo further papers oiu- coiUH-rn ing "The 

 Fate or Nicotine in the Body" and the other on a 

 "Tentative Hypothesis on Nicotine Addiction". I have 

 also re-read the 1964 Surgeon General's report on 

 cigarette smoking. In preparing my report I have 

 considered two questions, viz:- 



1) Is there evidence contained in these papers which 

 demonstrates that nicotine is a drug of addiction 



and 



2) Was there evidence from the results of the studies 

 contained in these reports which was not also in the 

 current scientific literature on nicotine and/or 

 addiction in 1964. 



The Hippo I report is concerned with the regulation of 

 diuresis/stress/body weight and various neuro- 

 physiological functions in laboratory rats. While a wide 

 range of results were found, there was no evidence that 

 could be regarded as addressing nicotine addiction, and 

 there is nothing of relevance to either of the above 

 questions . 



The initial Hippo II report contained an essay on the 

 action of tranquil Using drugs and there is nothing to 

 suggest in this essay that nicotine has an effect in 

 promoting dependence. The final report on Project Hippo 

 II revisits much the same ground as presented in Hippo I. 

 and there is no evidence, either direct or implied, 

 supporting the claim that nicotine is addictive. The 

 report on the "Fate of Nicotine in the Body" does invoKe 



