The tobacco and oil industries use the same researchers to get rid of the public


The tobacco and oil industries use the same researchers to get rid of the public

The story was updated at 11am eastern time.

Oil and tobacco industry has long worried about climate change between the comparison between organizations, think that every organization has minimize operation public health damage of the products is not restricted.

Some have urged federal regulators to Sue oil companies for extortion, as it did in 1999 when the justice department filed a case against the company and other major tobacco brands.

Oil companies are bristly. But two industries have had overlapping new research details since the 1950s.

Located in the file at the university of California, San Francisco, in recent months by the center for international environmental law (CIEL) is analyzed, the center is a Washington, d.c., advocacy group, shows that oil and tobacco industry has been connected for decades. CIEL’s research paper has been published for years.

The anonymous author of a memo working for New Jersey’s Standard Oil, recommended that scientists form a advisory committee to study the health effects of smoking.

“I’m here you might think that is a potential that the tobacco industry medical advisory committee member names and related to its current medical problems,” the person wrote to tobacco research committee, alluding to establish evidence of smoking causes health problems.

Back in 1956, both companies hired an influential New York firm, weida pr, to promote it.

Theodore Stirling (Theodor Sterling) is a research with smoking and, a professor of mathematics, good for the industry, he was in the 1990 s for Philip Morris (Philip Morris) paid more than $20 research cost, and in 1962, studied the ethyl lead lead content in gasoline. Between general motors and standard oil.

“Since the 1950 s, oil and tobacco companies use the same pr company and the same research institution not only, but also used many of the same researchers,” chairman CIEL Carroll Muffett said in a statement.

“We’ve seen time and time again that public relations companies and researchers work first for oil and then for tobacco,” he says. “This is the pedigree that tobacco companies recognise and seek.”

CIEL issued a warning to ClimateWire and has been studying the oil industry’s understanding of climate change and its response.

CIEL’s review of tobacco documents has been more recent, with the project comparing tobacco and oil industry “smog” as a comparison project.

The group’s new study is part of an architectural debate over decades of knowledge about climate change by oil companies. It is environmental protection organizations to promote fossil energy company has for decades been lying in the part of the legal case in the risks of global warming, as tobacco companies lie as the link between smoking and cancer.

Last week, the house science, space and technology (R – Texas) Lamar Smith, chairman of the attorney general to New York and Massachusetts subpoenaed, they are investigating whether exxon mobil misled investors and the public of the threat of climate change, (ClimateWire, July 14).

Mr Smith and his colleagues argue that lawyers are colluding with environmentalists. They argue that such investigations violate the first amendment’s protection of free speech.

Stanford research institute link

Another link between oil and tobacco companies is the Stanford research institute, now known as SRI international, which was separated from Stanford in 1970, according to CIEL.

Founded in 1946, SRI has generally studied smog and pollution and received funding from tobacco and oil companies.

The SRI scientists also provided climate change research for the American petroleum institute in the 1960s and 1970s.

A spokesman for chevron, exxonmobil and royal Dutch shell PLC said they had not heard of Stanford research institute and declined to comment further. API spokesmen did not respond to requests for comment.

A blog post from the independent oil association of America called the document “desperate move” and coordinated efforts to hurt the latest product in the fossil fuel industry.

In 1968 in New York City API to prepare the report, the SRI scientists Elmer Robinson and RC Robbins acknowledges the carbon emissions and the temperature of the relationship between some uncertainty, but carbon dioxide is the most likely cause of the “greenhouse effect”.

They wrote: “if the earth’s temperature is significantly higher, some events are expected, including the melting of the Antarctic ice sheet, rising sea levels, and increasing ocean warming and photosynthesis.

Robinson was followed up in a 1971 commissioned study of the API.

“The potential damage to the global environment could be severe if the amount of particulate matter or carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has increased significantly in the long term,” he said.

Robinson added: “even if the likelihood of this happening is small, it’s worth worrying about.” Robinson was one of the first scientists to link fossil fuel combustion with global warming. He died earlier this year at the age of 91.

The documents show that oil companies tested the toxicity of cigarettes in the 1950s, including several patent cigarette filters, including exxon and shell, for decades. They also say that tobacco companies go to SRI to help create small test toolbox sizes to assess smog.

The smoke and smoke committee

In 1946, the API established its own organization to study the pollution of the oil industry. It’s called the smoke and smoke committee.

Wary of government regulation, in order to reduce the pollution of oil refineries and other business of the supply chain, and the public attention to the problems of cities like Los Angeles smog, member of the API and oil official offers an alternative theory about how to create smoke.

Smoke and smoke committee executive secretary Vance Jenkins (Vance Jenkins) in 1954, a trade magazine said: “in many cases, the worst thing is hastily passed a law or law to control the air pollution in a specific situation. An article on smog pollution.

Chevron and exxon and royal Dutch shell oil company’s predecessor, respectively by the original company and subsidiaries in flue gas committee, these companies and subsidiaries are often split units of the standard oil company empire.

Although the documents show the API as early as 1968 has learned that the potential risks of climate change, and soot pollution committee was established in the 1940 s, but exxon mobil CEO Lee Raymond said in November 1996, the climate science has not yet been solved.

“The scientific evidence is uncertain whether human activity will affect the global climate,” Raymond said at a news conference.

Documents from the university of California, San Francisco began to be cached in 2002 after the tobacco industry sued. The resources of weida company are very special.

1954 internal wei er wade memorandum describes an employee on the theory, “” cigarettes lung cancer to the doctor to distribute pamphlets, also shows the company founder, John Hill and colleagues Bert Goss, Richard bar-approved people sitting in the tobacco industry research council, an industry group meeting.

Hill also appeared in a meeting minutes of the 1950s manufacturing chemist association. A 1963 leaflet showed that at that time goss, then President of the company, presided over an event in November about the future of public relations.

An executive at the company’s predecessor, Socony Mobil Oil Co., coordinated a lecture at a new school in New York City.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here