The Stanton A. Glantz Page

Fearless anti-tobacco warrier Stanton A. Glantz served on the Julius H. Comroe, Jr. Research Fellowship Committee at the University of California - San Francisco in 1985, a year after Comroe's death. As a member of the Council for Tobacco Research from 1954 to 1960, Comroe was supposedly an enemy. Glantz has purged all references to this from his official bios, but it can still be found on page 6 of his CV in the tobacco documents.

The Institute for Health Policy Studies

"The Institute for Health Policy Studies (IHPS) was established in 1972 within the University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine as the Health Policy Program, under the leadership of Philip R. Lee, MD and Lewis Butler, LLB. In 1977 IHPS was awarded a five-year grant as the national Health Services Policy Analysis Center by the National Center for Health Services Research, Department of Health, Education and Welfare.... IHPS activities are supported by University, government, and foundation funding." Its faculty includes the anti-smoking warhorses Lisa A. Bero and Stanton A. Glantz. Norton Simon and Elinor Raas Heller were Regents of the University of California when it was established.

"The Allied Social Science Associations Annual Meeting 12/28/83 in San Francisco included a session titled 'The Economics of Smoking: a Public Policy Issue,' presided over by A. Judson Wells, of the American Lung Association." Dorothy P. Rice, the "Mother of the Big Lie" that smoking is an economic burden to society, contributed 'Economic Costs of Smoking: An Analysis of Data for the United States;" and Stanton Glantz pariticipated as well. (Tobacco Merchants Association Issues Monitor 1984 Jan-Feb;5(1):7.)

Californians for Nonsmokers Rights

Glantz was a founder of Californians for Nonsmokers Rights. 1981. President - Peter Hanauer; Vice Presidents - Raymond L. Weisberg, M.D., President American Cancer Society, California Division. Daniel H. Lowenstein, Professor of Law, UCLA; Peter E. Pool, M.D., Immediate Past President, American Heart Association - California; Treasurer - Stanton Glantz, M.D.; Executive Director - Charles Mowson.

In 1984, Glantz was president of this psychopathic group, whose directors included Philip Lee. (Californians for Nonsmokers Rights "Update" 1984 Summer;3(2).) The newsletter boasts of the broadcast of the hate propaganda film, "Death in the West," by public broadcasting stations nationwide, including Maryland Public Broadcasting, Arkansas Educational Television, KNME; WQED in Pittsburgh; WHHY Philadelphia; Idaho Public Television; the South Dakota Network; and WTTW Chicago.

"A Curriculum for Death in the West," produced by the California Nonsmokers' Rights Foundation in cooperation with the Risk and Youth Smoking Project. It was intended to brainwash sixth graders with the insane delusion that if people don't smoke, they'll never die; and to incite them to be self-righteous little health nazis. It was supported by KRON-TV of San Francisco; Arthur Rock; Pacific Telephone Co.; Zellerbach Family Fund; Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation; American Lung Association of San Francisco; Pyramid Film and Video, in addition to CNR. The Risk and Youth Smoking Project was supported by a Public Health Service grant from the National Cancer Institute.

A sample of its 'profound teachings:' "Ask what the class thought about James Bowling and Dr. Helmut Wakeham, representatives of Philip Morris. Ask the class why Mr. Bowling and Dr. Wakeham probably want people to buy cigarettes. Stress the fact that cigarette companies make an enormous amount of money selling a product that is dangerous to people who smoke and even to people who are around them."

Children should be taught that Stanton Glantz and his friends are a little clique of lying, cheating, stealing, Wall Street-based totalitarian conspirators, who took over our government during World War II while their pals were distracting everyone with their tool, Adolph Hitler, and turned our health establishment into a propaganda mill for health fascism. They caused the deaths of millions because they purposely suppressed research on infection so they could falsely blame smoking and lifestyle, and use "health" as a pretext for global dictatorship. THEY are the enemy, not al-Qaida!

"Legislative Approaches to a Smoke-Free Society," by Peter Hanauer, Glenn Barr, and Stanton A. Glantz, with a foreword by Jesse L. Steinfeld; and "Legislative Approaches to a Smoke-Free Society," Appendix, by Peter Hanauer, Glenn Barr, and Stanton A. Glantz. Americans for Nonsmokers Rights Foundation, 1986.

Glantz participated in the Advocacy Institute's workshop, "Media Strategies for Smoking Control," for the National Cancer Institute's Smoking, Tobacco, and Cancer Program, in January 1988. Other participants included Alan Blum of DOC; Karen Menichelli and Carolyn Sachs of the Benton Foundation; and American Health Foundation Chairman Humphrey Taylor (who was also affiliated with Louis Harris and Associates opinion polling firm).

Glantz and Parmley Lie About "53,000 Passive Smoking Heart Disease Deaths"

Chapter 11: Background Paper prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Passive Smoking and Heart Disease: Epidemiology, Physiology, and Biochemistry. SA Glantz, WW Parmley. (Circulation 1991 manuscript)

Comments of the Tobacco Institute on Chapter 11 by Glantz and Parmley, April 6, 1990: The Tobacco Institute had been invited to review the chapter on March 13, 1990, a mere three weeks earlier. The reviewers were Drs. Lawrence Wexler, W. Gary Flamm, James A. Will, and Joseph M. Wu. "Because of the complexity of the material contained in Chapter Eleven and other time commitments, several additional scientists were not in a position to complete their reviews in the very short period that was provided." This is a standard operating procedure of the anti-smokers, which they also used on the EPA scientists who reviewed the chapters on lung cancer. Also note that neither the Tobacco Institute nor any of the individual reviewers criticized the absence of research on the role of infection in heart disease.

Highlights of Dr. Joseph M. Wu's critique of Glantz & Parmley

Tobacco Institute reviewer Joseph M. Wu, PhD, of the New York Medical College, panned it: "In this chapter, the authors give a superficial review of the data from ten epidemiological studies concerning incidences of heart disease and exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), then proceed to offer some discussion of physiological and biochemical mechanisms in an effort to show how ETS may conceivably contribute to increasing the risk of heart disease. Changes in platelet functions, alterations in the pattern of blood flow resulting from chemicals present in ETS, the suppression of mitochondrial activity based on animal studies, and the presence of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in ETS, are all cited by these authors as purported evidence to link ETS exposure to weakened heart function, leading ultimately to the initiation and establishment of atherosclerotic lesions. Alternate mechanisms unrelated to ETS exposure which would lead to the same set of physiological and biochemical changes are not considered or eliminated by these authors. Moreover, based on circumstantial information, they postulate the existence of a different platelet sensitivity to ETS between smokers and nonsmokers, and imply that the latter group is at greater risk because of a lower threshold characteristic of their platelets. The authors also briefly discuss several animal studies involving the use of benzo(a]pyrene. Some recent experiments showing that DNA extracted from human atherosclerotic plaques is able to induce transformation in transferred mouse 3T3 cells are used to support the concept that plaque-derived human cells possess the unique ability to trigger arterial smooth muscle cell proliferation, a key event associated with the initiation, progression, and establishment of atherosclerotic plaques. The chapter closes with a brief description of a report showing the selective localization of adducts containing benzo(a)pyrene-derived moieties in heart and lung DNA."

"Following their limited analysis of data from epidemiological studies, Glantz and Parmley go on to review several published reports describing selective physiological reactions observed in human subjects exposed to ETS in an artificial laboratory setting. The first paper examined is the work of Aronow (1978). The scientific artefacts of Aronow's study have been repeatedly addressed in the past. The Surgeon General's Report of 1986 summarized its findings as follows: "This study was criticized because the endpoint angina was based on subjective evaluation, and because other factors such as stress were not controlled for .... More important, the validity of Aronow's work has been questioned." (USPHS, 1986, P.106)."

The Aronow study: Effect of passive smoking on angina pectoris. WS Aronow. N Engl J Med 1978 Jul 6;299(1):21-24. "Patients exposed to 15 cigarettes smoked within two hours in a well ventilated room or an unventilated room increased their resting heart rate, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and venous carboxyhemoglobin and decreased their heart rate and systolic blood pressure at angina. Patients exposed to passive smoking in an unventilated room had a larger increase in resting heart rate, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and venous carboxyhemoglobin and a greater reduction in heart rate and systolic blood pressure at angina. The duration of exercise until angina was decreased 22 per cent after passive smoking in a well ventilated room (P less than 0.001), and decreased 38 per cent after passive smoking in an unventilated room (P less than 0.001). Passive smoking aggravates angina pectoris."

Wu discredited Glantz and Parmley's claim that secondhand smoke exposure impairs exercise tolerance: "By far the most significant increase in the study by McMurray et al. is in the concentration of post exercise venous blood lactate, which 'averaged 6.8 mM during the smoke trials, significantly greater than the controls (5.5 mM).' From a biochemical viewpoint, it is well established that lactate is generated from pyruvate by the enzyme lactate dehydrogenase. The heart and skeletal muscles, however, exhibit marked differences in their ability to oxidize glucose anaerobically. Lactate dehydrogenase in the heart muscle, because of its unique structural composition (H4), is allosterically inhibited by pyruvate and is thus unable to convert pyruvate to lactate. In contrast, the same enzyme in the skeletal muscle having a structure of M4 effectively catalyzes the enzymatic conversion of pyruvate to lactate. Lactate is expelled into the bloodstream, where it is taken up by the liver to be resynthesized into glucose via the enzymes in the gluconeogenic pathway. Since exercising muscles typically oxidize glucose anaerobically to generate ATP during periods of severe exercise, and because lactate is released into the blood stream, concentration of lactate in venous blood post exercise may be viewed as a biochemical marker for the severity of exercise to which the skeletal muscles were subjected. Accordingly, the 24% rise in lactate concentration during the smoke trials (6.8 mM versus 5.5 mM) is a strong indication that the subjects (for some unknown reason) are 'exercising' harder during the 'smoke trial' than the 'control' periods. It may then be deduced that the increased level of exercise by the 'smoke-trial' group could conceivably account for the 'significant reduction in time to exhaustion,' as well as the 'increased perceived level of exertion during exercise.'"

The McMurray study: The effects of passive inhalation of cigarette smoke on exercise performance. RG McMurray, LL Hicks, DL Thompson. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 1985;54(2):196-200. "Eight female subjects ran on a motor driven treadmill for 20 min at 70% VO2max followed by an incremental change in grade until maximal work capacity was obtained. Each subject completed the exercise trial with and without the presence of residual cigarette smoke. Compared to the smokeless trials, the passive inhalation of smoke significantly reduced maximal oxygen uptake by 0.25 l X min-1 and time to exhaustion by 2.1 min. The presence of sidestream smoke also elevated maximal R value (1.01 vs 0.93), maximal blood lactate (6.8 vs 5.5 mM), and ratings of perceived exertion (17.4 vs 16.5 units). Passive inhalation of smoke during submaximal exercise significantly elevated the CO2 output (1.68 vs 1.58 l X min-1), R values (0.91 vs 0.86), heart rate (178 vs 172 bts X min-1) and rating of perceived exertion (13.8 vs 11.8 units). These findings suggest that passive inhalation of sidestream smoke adversely affects exercise performance."

In the Moskowitz study, in which it was pretended that "adolescent children of parents who smoked may suffer from chronic tissue hypoxia such as that observed in anemia, chronic pulmonary disease, cyanotic heart disease or high altitude. These children had significantly elevated levels of 2,3-diphosphoglycerate (DPG), which suggests that the body is attempting to compensate for hypoxia by increasing DPG level in blood to meet tissue oxygen requirements," Wu pointed out that the hematocrit values for the ETS-exposed and non-ETS exposed children were identical, and also that they had used a purported test for DPG which was not specific for DPG.

The Moskowitz study: Lipoprotein and oxygen transport alterations in passive smoking preadolescent children. The MCV Twin Study. WB Moskowitz, M Mosteller, RM Schieken, R Bossano, JK Hewitt, JN Bodurtha, JP Segrest. Circulation 1990 Feb;81(2):586-592.

"PLATELET FUNCTION The next area surveyed by Glantz and Parmley concerns the asserted action of ETS on platelet function. The authors maintain that ETS exposure promotes platelet hyperaggregability and 'so increases the likelihood of thrombus formation.' In contrast to this assertion, there is quite an extensive literature to show that smoking actually has no influence on the development of venous thrombosis and in certain situations appears to exert a protective effect..."

Wu concluded that "The existing evidence is inadequate to establish a causal link between ETS and cardiovascular disease.... Moreover, the interpretations of many of the findings cited therein are quite subjective and give the appearance of being seriously biased." (Comments on Environmental Tobacco Smoke. A Compendium of Technical Information. Chapter 11, Passive Smoking and Heart Disease, Epidemiology, Physiology and Biochemistry. Prepared by Joseph M. Wu, PhD.)

Other Reviewers

TI reviewer James A. Will, DVM, PhD, of the University of Wisconsin, also reviewed Glantz and Parmley: "The basic conclusions of my review can be summarized in two statements: (1) The validity of much of the cited literature is inherently weak and Chapter 11 often overstates the conclusions of the original authors. (2) The scientific objectivity which one would expect from a document from a regulatory agency, which should be a concise and critical review of the subject, providing both positive and negative viewpoints, is absent." "Several statements by the authors which serve as an introduction to this section are either totally wrong or are so overstated that they cannot be supported by the current scientific evidence. The mechanism of how chronic exposure to ETS assertedly causes cancer is not demonstrated; if Glantz and Parmley feel it has been demonstrated, they must document this and provide approriate references...."

TI reviewer Lawrence M. Wexler, PhD, of New York Medical College: "In my view, the studies conducted thus far do not demonstrate that ETS increases the risk of cardiovascular disease."

Reviewer Maurice E. LeVois, PhD, of Environmental Health Resources, San Francisco.

(EPA Concludes Secondhand Smoke Causes Cancer. ABC World News Tonight. Station WJLA-TV, Washington DC, ABC Network, May 9, 1990 6:30 P.M.) PETER JENNINGS: It looks like the Environmental Protection Agency is gearing up for another damning report on smoking. A preliminary version has this to say to nonsmokers: Just being exposed to other smokers can kill you. Here's ABC's Bettina Gregory. BETTINA GREGORY: The EPA has concluded that inhaling someone else's cigarette smoke causes 3800 Americans to die of lung cancer each year. And the draft report on passive smoking proposes that tobacco smoke be labeled a carcinogen. That could lead to more severe restrictions on where people can smoke. Anti-smoking advocates say it's about time the EPA declared tobacco smoke the most hazardous pollutant in the air. JOHN BANZHAF [Action on Smoking and Health]: Going in a room where anybody is smoking is more dangerous than going in a room with asbestos, going in a room with radon or any other air pollutant. GREGORY: The tobacco industry does not acknowledge that cigarette smoking causes cancer, much less passive smoking. WALKER MERRYMAN [The Tobacco Institute]: Well, there really isn't a scientific consensus on whether or not passive smoking is in fact harmful to those who don't smoke.

Those lying maggots have systematically covered up the fact that the EPA's own scientists, the real scientists who got their jobs on merit instead of political connections, were against labelling secondhand smoke a carcinogen!

Reviewer Carr Joseph Smith, PhD, Senior Scientist, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, May 10, 1990.

The paper by Glantz and Parmley claiming that secondhand smoke caused 53,000 deaths in nonsmokers. (Passive Smoking and Heart Disease. By Stanton A. Glantz and William W. Parmley. Circulation 1991 Jan;83(1):1-12.)

Glantz also began falsely claiming that his claims were to be included in the US EPA's report on secondhand smoke. (Unreleased Report Says Secondhand Smoke Kills 53,000 Non-Smokers Annually. By Paul Raeburn. Associated Press, May 29, 1991; Igniting A Dispute; passive smoking kills 53,000, draft report says. Newsday, May 30, 1991; Second Hand Smoke Kills 53,000, Mostly From Heart Disease, Study Says. Bureau of National Affairs, June 7, 1991.)

The lie-spewing media scum deliberately prolonged the propaganda for over two months by recycling the same swill over and over again. (Second-Hand Smoke Report Moves Closer to Final Approval. By Paul Raeburn. Associated Press, July 26, 1991.)

Stanton Glantz lied when he claimed that the US Environmental Protection Agency had endorsed his claims. Robert Axelrad, director of the Indoor Air Division of the EPA, in a cover letter releasing the May 1991 "compendium of technical perspectives" to John Banzhaf's group, Action on Smoking and Health, specifically told them "to take note of the admonition on the draft that it should not be cited or quoted and that it is not intended to represent Agency views. It is being transmitted to EPA's Science Advisory Board (SAB) with a request that they conduct an appropriate review." Axelrad also said: "As you know, this document has been the subject of considerable confusion as a result of the fact that it has been written solely by individual authors with the expectation that it would represent only the opinions and views of the individuals who participated. It was never intended to be representative of EPA policies and views, or those of the other participating organizations, but simply to compile information on the state of knowledge in several areas of scientific interest on the issue of environmental tobacco smoke (ETS). In particular, it is important to note that the chapter reviewing the literature on hearts disease written by Stan Glantz and William Parmley, a variation of which was published in January 1991 in Circulation, the journal of the American Heart Association, contains material not endorsed by EPA. EPA has not undertaken its own review of the heart disease literature nor that of the literature relating ETS to cancer at sites other than the lung." (Robert Axelrad to John F. Banzhaf, date stamped June 12, 1991.)

Later, to the media, Axelrad added that "It was totally inappropriate for these numbers to be linked to the EPA in any way." In addition, Glantz's claims had been distributed to scientific reviewers and tobacco industry officials with misleading EPA markings. Axelrad claimed it was merely a mistake on the part of one of his staff members. "Basically, he put a cover on it that wasn't really right. He didn't put the proper disclaimers on it... He called it a final clearance draft and basically just screwed up." But Glantz just cynically pretended that putting a cover on his paper was good enough to make it official. (Secondhand Smoke Study Challenged at UK. By Clint Riley. Lexington Herald-Leader, June 10, 1991.)

In the May 1991 draft, the chapter on passive smoking and heart disease had been changed from Chapter 11 to Chapter 6. (Memo from Susan Stuntz and Bob Lewis to Kay Packett, June 18, 1991.)

The May, 1991 draft of Environmental Tobacco Smoke: A Compendium of Technical Information.

The Politics of Local Tobacco Control. By Bruce Samuels and Stanton A. Glantz. JAMA 1991 Oct 16;266(15):2110-2117.

The CTR supported a favorite author of Stanton Glantz

The CTR supported one of Stanton Glantz's favorite authors, Arthur Penn of the NYU Medical Center, whose studies purported to show transformation of atherosclerotic plaques by chemical carcinogens (Transforming potential is detectable in arteriosclerotic plaques of young animals. A Penn, FC Hubbard Jr, JL Parkes. Arteriosclerosis and Thrombosis 1991;11:1053-1058). This study was also funded by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences and the American Heart Association.

Penn was also funded by the Center for Indoor Air Research and the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences in a later study: Inhalation of Sidestream Cigarette Smoke Accelerates Development of Arteriosclerotic Placques. A Penn, CA Snyder. Circulation 1993 Oct;88(4 Pt 1):1820-1825.

"Tobacco Control in California Cities," 1992

Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights, the Western Consortium for Public Health ("a nonprofit corporation sponsored by the Schools of Public Health and University Extensions, University of California at Berkeley and University of California at Los Angeles," also the San Diego State University School of Public Health), League of California Cities, and Health Officers Association of California, concocted "Tobacco Control in California Cities: A Guide For Action," 1992.

Another Free Ride From ABC "News," 1993

ABC News Show: World News Tonight With Peter Jennings, Sep. 21,1993. PETER JENNINGS. Still on the subject of where the money will come from, the President says that $105 billion, as Brit reported, will be raised through what everyone calls "sin taxes," which in the case of health care leads right to cigarettes. Much of the public appears to think that cigarette smokers should really be pressured. But the guessing is that 75 cents more a pack is all that they'll have to pay. Here's ABC's Jim Angle. JIM ANGLE: When California raised its cigarette tax by 25 cents a pack back in 1989, it dedicated 20 percent of the revenues to an anti- tobacco campaign. ACTOR: [Public Awareness Commercial] Here's a picture of Lisa before she started smoking. Here she is now. JIM ANGLE: Over three and a half years, public-awareness programs helped cut cigarette consumption by 8.5 percent. Though California wanted new revenues, it also wanted to discourage smoking. Now Massachusetts is following suit. It will spend $52 million - a fourth of its recent tax increase - for anti-smoking programs. Such efforts are important because a tax increase alone isn't enough to reduce smoking. DR. GREGORY CONNOLLY, MASSACHUSE'IT'S DEPT: OF PUBLIC HEALTH: You get an, initial drop in consumption from the tax increase, but that you lose over time unless you come back in with a hard-hitting campaign. JIM ANGLE: Such as this one in California. While some smokers quit, when taxes go up, others.need more persuasion. ANTI-SMOKING ADVOCATE: Cigarette smoking is as bad as crack. JIM ANGLE: But redemption isn't the goal of the administration; it's more interested in revenue and in, getting the support of tobacco -state lawmakers. The White House isnrt setting aside a single penny from the new tax for anti-smoking efforts. Health.advocates say that's a mistake. STANTON GLANTZ, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-SAN FRANCISCO: They would be absolute idiots to not include a reasonable tobacco -control campaign as a component of their overall health care proposal. JIM ANGLE: But for now the administration is only after the tax money, passing up the chance to actively discourage smoking and save tens:of billions in future medical costs. Jim Angle, ABC News, Washington.

The 1994 OSHA Hearings

Stanton Glantz's testimony to OSHA on secondhand smoke, Aug. 11, 1994.

Background report on the OSHA hearings by Allen R. Purvis of Shook, Hardy & Bacon, Sep. 19, 1994. Glantz is on page 19.

United States Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Public Hearing, Proposed Standard for Indoor Air Quality, pages 279-634. Sep. 21, 1994.

Passive Smoking and Heart Disease Mechanisms and Risk. SA Glantz, WW Parmley. JAMA 1995 Apr 5;273(13):1047-1053.

The 1995 JAMA Stanton Glantz Hatefest

The July 19, 1995 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association was dedicated to providing Glantz and his cronies with a forum to splatter their vile.

Looking Through A Keyhole At the Tobacco Industry. Stanton A. Glantz, Deborah E. Barnes, Lisa Bero, Peter Hanauer, and John Slade. JAMA 1995 Jul 19;274(3):219-224.

Nicotine and Addiction. By John Slade, Lisa A. Bero, Peter Hanauer, Deborah E. Barnes, Stanton A. Glantz. JAMA 1995 Jul 19;274(3):225-233.

Lawyer Control of Internal Scientific Research to Protect Against Products Liability Lawsuits. Peter Hanauer, John Slade, Deborah E. Barnes, Lisa Bero, Stanton A. Glantz. JAMA 1995 Jul 19;274(3):234-240.

Lawyer Control of the Tobacco Industry's External Research Program. Lisa Bero, Deborah E. Barnes, Peter Hanauer, John Slade, Stanton A. Glantz. JAMA 1995 Jul 19;274(3):241-247.

Environmental Tobacco Smoke. Deborah E. Barnes, Peter Hanauer, John Slade, Lisa A. Bero, Stanton A. Glantz. JAMA 1995 Jul 19;274(3):248-253.

The Brown & Williamson Documents. The Company's Response. By Tim Graham. JAMA 1995 Jul 19;274(3):254-255. (This was not Brown & Williamson's side of the issue, but an anti-smokers' editorial about what he claims their response to have been.)

The subhuman filth of the planet earth who published this toxic bilge are listed at the end of this editorial, The Brown and Williamson Documents, Where Do We Go From Here? They are James S. Todd, Drummond Rennie (deputy editor), Robert E. McAfee, Lonnie R. Bristow, Joseph T. Painter, Thomas R. Reardon, Daniel H. Johnson Jr., Richard F. Corlin, Yank D. Coble Jr., Nancy W. Dickey, Timothy T. Flaherty, Palma E. Formica, Michael S. Goldrich, William E. Jacott, Donald T. Lewers, John C. Nelson, P. John Seward, Randolph D. Smoak Jr., Michael Suk, Frank B. Walker, Percy Wootton, and George D. Lundberg (editor). JAMA 1995 Jul 19;274(3):256-258.

The editorial board included Daniel M. Albert of Madison, Wis., William H. Foege, Michael E. Johns, AHF trustee Edmund D. Pellegrino, and Uwe E. Reinhardt.

The California EPA ETS Report / NCI Monograph 10

Along with Donald R. Shopland, Coordinator of the Smoking and Tobacco Control Program of the National Cancer Institute (a Lasker stooge since the 1964 Surgeon General Report), Stanton Glantz directed the California EPA's corrupt ETS report, which in 1999 was proclaimed "NCI Monograph 10" by the Lasker stooge, Surgeon General David Satcher. Real scientists play no role in these bogus reports. They are compiled by a self-selected clique of anti-smoking zealots, and the outcome is preordained.

Stanton Glantz Is Flaying Strawmen

Interest in his specious theories of smoking and heart disease seems to have dried up, and lately Glantz seems to be reduced to spouting paranoid drivel to trump up the supposed threats to science from the lame and lillipution activities of their opposition. I.e., Steve Milloy's Junk Science page, versus the Lasker Syndicate-controlled National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, Centers for Disease Control et al., and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation! And demonizing obscure conferences sponsored by the tobacco companies, versus the flagrant cronyism and corruption of his own California EPA ETS report cum NCI Monograph 10! His point being that science must not be permitted to adopt standards that would "make it impossible to conclude that secondhand smoke -- and thus other environmental toxins -- caused diseases," and never mind that the science is corrupt! Needless to say, Stanton Glantz doesn't have the huevos to address the issues of suppression of research and confounding by infection that are raised on my website! (Constructing "Sound Science" and "Good Epidemiology": Tobacco, Lawyers, and Public Relations Firms. EK Ong, SA Glantz. Am J Public Health 2001 Nov;91(11):1749-1757.)

In 2000, the National Cancer Policy Board, chaired by former Council for Tobacco Research Scientific Advisory Board member Peter M. Howley, produced the report "State Programs Can Reduce Tobacco Use." It was reviewed by a panel of leading anti-smokers who are notable for their psychopathology, including Frank J. Chaloupka, Stanton A. Glantz, Thomas P. Houston, and Mathew Myers. Other members of the NCPB include John Mendelsohn of Enron Corporation and ImClone Systems infamy, John Seffrin of the American Cancer Society, and Lawrence O. Gostin, main author of the Model Emergency Health Powers Act scheme to eliminate civil liberties under the pretext of ill-defined health emergencies.

The Richard and Rhoda Goldman Fund

The Goldman Fund is a major source of Stanton Glantz's funding, with a three-year, $120,000 grant to the Regents of the University of California for the UCSF School of Medicine's Cardiology Division, "to research the health impacts of tobacco" [sic]. Other recipients include the Bronfman-associated "umbrella" foundation, the Tides Center (a two-year, $150,000 grant to the Center for Health and Gender Equity [birth control]; and $75,000 for the Grupo de Informacion en Reproduccion [Mexico]); a two-year, $35,000 grant to the Public Health Institute, also for population control; and $10,000 to the San Francisco unit of the American Cancer Society. In 1996 they donated $100,000 to the ACS. The foundation also makes grants related to environmentalism, gun control, and Jewish concerns. The 2000 Board of Directors of the foundation consisted entirely of Goldmans and Gelmans.

"Richard N. Goldman is Chairman of Goldman Insurance Services, a major independent insurance brokerage firm. Rhoda H. Goldman, who passed away in 1996, was a descendent of Levi Strauss and served on the Board of Directors of both the apparel company and the corporation's philanthropic foundation." (About the Goldmans. The Richard and Rhoda Goldman Fund, accessed 7/27/07.) Sic. Actually, Levi Strauss was a bachelor and his nephews, the Sterns, inherited the company.

"In the year 2000, the Goldman charitable funds gave a combined total of $55 million... Of special interest this year was a $5 million grant to KQED, the Bay Area's public broadcasting station..."

The Richard & Rhoda Goldman Fund was a "$100,000+ Excalibur Contributor" to the American Cancer Society in 2000.

Daniel E. Koshland Sr. was a Levi Strauss executive. His son, Daniel E. Koshland Jr., was the editor of Science magazine (once described as the 'house journal of the National Institutes of Health') from 1985 to 1994; received the Albert Lasker Medical Science Special Achievement Award in 1998; and was a director of the Lasker Foundation. Other relatives of the Koshlands financed Philip Morris and the nicotine patch.

TobaccoScam

TobaccoScam, a project to smear the hospitality industry for attempting to fend off smoking bans, is funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation as well as the Goldman Foundation.

See also Stanton Glantz's lies that p53 mutations are the cause of lung cancer

cast 02-07-08