This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Thomas P. Houston, MD
American Medical Association Chicago, Ill

JAMA. 1991;266(19):2702.

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

To the Editor.

— In December 1990, the American Medical Association (AMA) was approached for advice by a law professor appointed by the US 10th Circuit Court to represent a Kansas prison inmate in a case¹ involving the inmate's forced exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS). Of 42 pages in the state attorney general's written argument, 29 pages were an attack on the scientific validity of ETS as a potential health risk. The AMA was asked to give an opinion on the scientific arguments in the case.

The Kansas attorney general's brief was compared with a tobacco industry report, Environmental Tobacco Smoke: A Review of the Literature (TIR).² Of the 29 pages in the Kansas brief that questioned the scientific validity of the adverse health effects of ETS and the research in the field, 15 pages were direct transcriptions from TIR, without acknowledging the tobacco industry as the . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

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