Advertisement
AJPH
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow purchase articles
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Right arrow Get other permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Parascandola, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Parascandola, M.
Related Collections
Right arrow Epidemiology
Right arrow History
Right arrow Other Tobacco
Right arrow Cancer

American Journal of Public Health, Vol 91, Issue 2 196-205, Copyright © 2001 by American Public Health Association

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Cigarettes and the US Public Health Service in the 1950s

M Parascandola
Museum of Medical Research, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md., USA. mparas@erols.com

The conclusion of the United States Surgeon General's Advisory Committee on Smoking and Health in 1964 that excessive cigarette smoking causes lung cancer is cited as the major turning point for public health action against cigarettes. But the surgeon general and US Public Health Service (PHS) scientists had concluded as early as 1957 that smoking was a cause of lung cancer, indeed, "the principal etiologic factor in the increased incidence of lung cancer." Throughout the 1950s, however, the PHS rejected further tobacco-related public health actions, such as placing warning labels on cigarettes or creating educational programs for schools. Instead, the agency continued to gather information and provided occasional assessments of the evidence as it came available. It was not until pressure mounted from outside the PHS in the early 1960s that more substantive action was taken. Earlier action was not taken because of the way in which PHS scientists (particularly those within the National Institutes of Health) and administrators viewed their roles in relation to science and public health.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 JCOHome page
M. Parascandola
A Turning Point for Conflicts of Interest: The Controversy Over the National Academy of Sciences' First Conflicts of Interest Disclosure Policy
J. Clin. Oncol., August 20, 2007; 25(24): 3774 - 3779.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Am Board Fam MedHome page
T. L. Albright and S. K. Burge
Improving Firearm Storage Habits: Impact of Brief Office Counseling by Family Physicians
J Am Board Fam Med, January 1, 2003; 16(1): 40 - 46.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 AJPHHome page
D. Brugge and R. Goble
The History of Uranium Mining and the Navajo People
Am J Public Health, September 1, 2002; 92(9): 1410 - 1419.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 AJPHHome page
L. Bergner
CIGARETTES AND THE SURGEON GENERAL'S REPORT
Am J Public Health, September 1, 2001; 91(9): 1345 - 1345.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 AJPHHome page
M. Parascandola
PARASCANDOLA RESPONDS
Am J Public Health, September 1, 2001; 91 (9): 1345 - 1345.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 AJPHHome page
V. Berridge and K. Loughlin
Smoking and the New Health Education in Britain 1950s-1970s
Am J Public Health, June 1, 2005; 95(6): 956 - 964.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2001 by the American Public Health Association