Examination of Witnesses (Questions 420
- 439)
THURSDAY 13 JANUARY 2000
MR MARTIN
BROUGHTON, MR
PETER WILSON,
MR GARETH
DAVIS, MR
DAVID DAVIES
AND DR
AXEL GIETZ
Dr Stoate
420. I would just like to pick up very briefly
on the point you made, Mr Davies. You presumably accept Mrs Wise's
figures that smokers are much less likely to reach 85 than non-smokers.
Do you accept that that evidence exists?
(Mr Gareth Davis) I think I have said already that
we accept that smokers are more likely to develop those diseases
and that is why I would not seek to challenge Mrs Wise's figures.
421. Presumably your company, as a responsible
company, employs scientists and doctors to help advise you?
(Mr Gareth Davis) We have some scientists.
422. So what have those doctors and scientists
concluded from the evidence such as that Mrs Wise has set out?
If it can be shown categorically that those who smoke seem to
die younger than those who do not, and you are saying there is
no such evidence, how are your experts interpreting that data?
(Mr Gareth Davis) Our people within the company have
obviously reviewed the vast body of literature and studies that
have taken place. They have sought expert advice from outside
the company also. The judgment—and it is a judgment—that
they have come to, and that I endorse, is we do not agree that
smoking has been shown. We accept that smokers are more likely
to develop diseases but we do not believe that it has been shown.
423. So the other companies are happy to accept
that smoking has been shown to cause disease but your company
stands alone and says "no, it has not been shown to cause
disease".
(Mr Gareth Davis) I am really not qualified to speak
for the other companies, only for my own company.
424. I must say I find that surprising. Can
I also say that we accept there are certain risk taking behaviours
in society. You said in your earlier statements that it is a risky
business, that there are risks in society and everyone accepts
there are risks. Is that fair, would you all agree that there
are risks in society in many things that we do?
(Mr Gareth Davis) Yes.
(Mr Wilson) Yes.
425. Would you also all accept that the magnitude
of the risk does have some bearing on whether that is a sensible
behaviour or not? I want to pick up on something which Mr Wilson
said which was as we do not know which smokers are going to get
which diseases then somehow it does not seem to be quite so important.
I do not want to misquote you, Mr Wilson, but my understanding
is you said that it is impossible to say which smokers will develop
disease and, therefore, you have to argue with some of the statistics.
Is that a fair statement of your position?
(Mr Wilson) No, that is not what I was trying to say.
I was saying as a matter of fact that it is impossible to know
which smokers will contract disease. To me the important thing
is to recognise that smoking is risky, is dangerous. We market
our product on the clear premise, as Mr Broughton as already said,
that everyone who chooses to smoke is aware of the risks. That
is extremely important. I would not want to underestimate or undermine
the risks and if I gave that impression I would like that to be
corrected. I do believe that the degree of publicity going back
over the last 50 years is such that there cannot be an adult smoker
or an adult in this country today who is not aware of the risks.
People will choose to smoke having informed themselves of the
risk, being aware of the risks.
426. Clearly as policy makers and as people
who seek to inform policy makers the management of risk is of
great importance to us. Would you agree or disagree with Professor
Richard Peto that one in two long-term smokers die prematurely
of smoking related disease and that one in four die before the
age of 70? Would you accept or refute those figures? I know it
is epidemiological research but he is a very well respected person
in his field.
(Mr Wilson) I am just not in a position to argue with
those figures, they are probably right, but what has caused those
deaths is what we do not know. Just become someone is a smoker
does not necessarily mean that smoking has caused their death.
It may well have done but it may not have done, we do not know
the actual causal mechanism.
427. No, but clearly the excess number of deaths
is an acceptable scientific method of measuring whether smoking
is related to those deaths.
(Mr Wilson) I have accepted that, yes.
428. So you accept at least the principle that
there is a vast excess of deaths of smokers over non-smokers?
(Mr Wilson) I accept that smoking is damaging to health,
yes.
429. I think it is important for the record
that we do bring these figures up. The Government's contention
in the White Paper is that there are 120,000 premature smoking
related deaths every year in this country which actually equates,
according to my figures, to one every four minutes which actually
means that during the length of this session something like 30
people will have died in this country from smoking related diseases.
Do those figures accord with your view or are they totally wrong?
(Mr Wilson) I am not in a position to comment on this.
I am aware of the figures and I have said what I have said, that
smoking can cause serious damage to health, I acknowledge that,
but I do not know how many. The important thing to me is the choice
that an individual will make. Being aware of the risks an individual
will decide whether he or she wishes to smoke.
430. Just one final question to any of the witnesses
really. If we cannot agree on the numbers, is it acceptable to
say that if there were no tobacco smoking in this country there
would actually be fewer deaths from cancer, from heart disease,
from lung disease? If there was no smoking hypothetically, would
there be fewer deaths?
(Mr Wilson) That is probably the corollary of what
you have said.
431. Would that be an acceptable thing to say,
that there would be fewer premature deaths if there was no smoking?
(Mr David Davies) I think it is highly likely, yes.
432. Would you say yes?
(Mr Broughton) Yes.
(Mr Gareth Davis) I think the majority of people in
society would conclude that. The straight answer at the end of
the day is we do not know.
433. So even though you are not accepting the
cause between smoking, you are saying that you would not accept
there would be fewer deaths if people did not smoke?
(Mr Gareth Davis) What I am saying is I do not know,
I could not say yes or no to that.
(Dr Gietz) That is an hypothetical question. Public
health authorities have decided that smoking causes these diseases
and it is not for us to dispute or debate that, there are other
contributing factors to these diseases maybe so you would need
to eliminate other lifestyle choices in order to reduce it further.
434. If we eliminate smoking would we reduce
the number of premature deaths?
(Dr Gietz) A number but I cannot say how many.
435. The number would go down?
(Dr Gietz) Based on the evidence available from the
health authorities, yes.
Mr Hesford
436. This is my first question as a new Member
of the Health Committee and I hope it is helpful. Mr Gareth Davis,
if I may, would you be prepared to send to the Committee your
internal document or documents from your scientists, your doctors,
which review the field that the Committee has been asking you
about in the last five or ten minutes which leads you and the
company to have the conclusions that you have been giving to us
today?
(Mr Gareth Davis) We have received a letter from the
Clerk of the Committee requesting documents and we have responded
to that request and we have supplied details of the indices of
our documents in the organised form they are in at this moment
in time. There are very many documents.
437. With respect, Mr Davis, that is not an
answer to my question. Will you be prepared to give this Committee
the specific document which is prepared by your scientists which
enables you to come out with your conclusion that they have reviewed
the evidence in terms of smoking and smoking related illnesses
so that we can form a judgment on what it is that you are basing
your evidence on today?
(Mr Gareth Davis) Although I am not massively familiar
with our archive I am certainly willing to provide you with copies
of our non-privileged documents for the purposes of assisting
you with your inquiries.
438. Is the answer yes or no?
(Mr Gareth Davis) The answer is the one I have just
given. We are prepared to provide you with copies of our non-privileged
documents for the purposes of assisting you.
Audrey Wise
439. I am following on from Mr Stephen Hesford
because there is a list in your written evidence on page nine,
paragraph 17, "Consultation with external independent scientists".
You say that you have consulted and taken advice and then you
provide a list of distinguished people there, about eight of them.
We have no means of knowing what advice you were given. The implication
of including these names is that somehow or other they concur
with the conclusions that you have come to or they have guided
you in coming to those conclusions. I wondered whether you would
make available to us any written interchange between yourselves
and these distinguished scientists. You have used their names
so surely you would be prepared to follow that up with what the
result of the consultation was?
(Mr Gareth Davis) As I say, I am not totally familiar
with all that is in the archives and the way it is classified
and categorised. Certainly we are willing to provide you with
copies of all non-privileged documents that would assist you.
If they are in that category, yes.
| 
