422 



- 15 - 



Medical School aw Q^ pecialist in diseases of the chcsl since 1931, said: • 



I* is "iRni^H^fect to say that any attempt to determine causal 

 relalionaip fVIncidence, occurrence, or death rate of emphysem 

 Is based 4^r (\g»ms so inaccurate that even the trend is im- 

 possible to »^ure. Consequently, when the question Is raised 

 whether any prr^cultf ificnl may be responsible for an increase 

 in emphysema onjn deaths attributable to emphysema. It must 

 be answered by sa^fnA that there is no way of determining how 

 many of these cases^iCre truly emphysema. It Is not possible to 

 y say, on the available esj^nce, whether there is an Increase in 



";_ either incidence or death fV^fii this disease. " 



- ^- It would thus appear that there u reason to Question not only the 

 -<j y— i i 



Blgnificafrce of a statistical relationship bctwc'eri emphysi^ma and smoking 



but also the Qgnlficance of the statistics thcmsglvg^ as well. 



With remrd to the possible relationship of orfgarette smoking to 



emphysema. Dip., JomTE. Wyatt, Professor and Chairman £h the D«partmenl 



of Patholog>-, University (i^Manitoba. told Congress: "V 



There is no evident of which I am aware that constituents 

 of cigarette smoke ha^pthe capacity to produce dissolution . . 



of lung tissue (err\^jrscm^." "V*- 



rie went on: '//i 



"Most authorities agree that eniph^ema presents a complex 

 problem which awaits a scientific e.ifelanalion. " 



EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE? "^^ 



J ^ 



What about experimental evidence, which again derives from anir.al 



testing' Some scientists have reportedly succeeded in Inducing emphysem* gi 



"->.■ *■ 



experimentally In some animals. However, horses and cattle are tt^.only g 



. , <;' o 



Known animals besides man which spontaneously develop and suffer from this ^ 



o 



d;sease. This is interesting, because medical authorities say that th^ hors* 



