You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 298 No. 1, July 4, 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  Commentary
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (1)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Topic Collections
 •Medical Practice
 •Law and Medicine
 •Tobacco
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Public Health Benefits of Recent Litigation Against the Tobacco Industry

Jon S. Vernick, JD, MPH; Lainie Rutkow, JD, MPH; Stephen P. Teret, JD, MPH

JAMA. 2007;298:86-89.

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

As with lawsuits involving other dangerous products, litigation against the tobacco industry can serve several important functions. Lawsuits can compensate individuals harmed by the product and can serve a public health purpose by encouraging manufacturers to change their products, sales, or marketing strategies to reduce risks. Information obtained in litigation also can be used to support future regulatory action.1

Litigation against the tobacco industry has met with mixed success.2 Between 1954 and 1994, private citizens filed more than 800 lawsuits against tobacco manufacturers.3 The tobacco companies achieved great success in court during this time by challenging the science that tied smoking to negative health consequences, by arguing that smokers knew they were taking a risk when they smoked, and by suggesting that smokers' lifestyles, rather than smoking itself, contributed to their illnesses.4 Only 2 courts found . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Engle v Liggett

Author Affiliations: Center for Law and the Public's Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland.



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Open Doorway to Truth: Legacy of the Minnesota Tobacco Trial
Hurt et al.
Mayo Clin Proc. 2009;84:446-456.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Corporate Philanthropy, Lobbying, and Public Health Policy
Tesler and Malone
AJPH 2008;98:2123-2133.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Mapping the Scope and Opportunities for Public Health Law in Liberal Democracies
Magnusson
J Law Med Ethics 2007;35:571-587.
 





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2007 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.