Gary L Huber

From SourceWatch
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This stub is a work-in-progress by the ScienceCorruption.com journalists's group. We are indexing the millions of documents stored at the San Francisco Uni's Legacy Tobacco Archive [1] With some entries you'll need to go to this site and type into the Search panel a (multi-digit) Bates number. You can search on names for other documents also.     Send any corrections or additions to editor@sciencecorruption.com

{{#badges: tobaccowiki}}


Gary Huber was a pulmonary physician and university lecturer from Harvard and later Texas who sold out to the tobacco industry early and often. Atf Harvard University he conducted researcher for the tobacco industry for many years. His emphysema project was paid for directly by the tobacco industry law firm of Shook, Hardy and Bacon. Huber was only Assistant Professor at Harvard when he was put in charge of the Tobacco Research program.

When plaintiff's attorney Ronald L. Motley approached Huber with internal documents that described his project as a public relations ploy, Huber became a witness against the tobacco industry in the Medicaid lawsuit cases. (Taken from a PBS Frontline interview with Huber.)

Huber appears to have entered into a relationship with the tobacco industry around 1971, offering to help design a research program for them that "meets their needs" [2]

Huber has also worked for the University of Texas Health Science Center. According to an article from FAIR, Huber left another job, "heading the University of Kentucky's Tobacco and Health Research Institute, after evidence surfaced of further payments from R.J. Reynolds, Brown and Williamson, and the Tobacco Institute (UPI, 3/31/81)."[3]

Student and campus problems

Stories about him being thrown out of a series of universities by his students reads like a fictional novel. After being hounded out of Harvard by student activists the tobacco industry found him a job as the head of the Tobacco and Health Institute's Research Center within Kentucky University. Huber probably took more money from the tobacco industry than any other medical researcher.

He had been forced out of Harvard University over his ethical standards and then needed an armed body guard (supplied by RJ Reynolds) at Kentucky University when his students rebelled. Huber's position at Kentucky University soon became untennable. He was accused of fraud and forced to resign. At Texas University (shortly after this) he became entangled in his lies during a court-case, and then turned whistleblower -- revealing everything about his secret life working for tobacco.]

But before this turn of evens, the tobacco industry give him a trip to Australia to appear as a tobacco witness in the AFCO Case [Australian Federation of Consumer Organisations] .His deposition in a Medicaid case against the tobacco industry reads like a comic novel -- nothing was ever his fault -- he was fooled by a diabolical tobacco industry.

Documents & Timeline


1939 /E Born Millwood Washington State. Father a logger and well-digger.


1959 /E Basketball scholarship to Washington State Uni Graduated, Attended University of Washington Medical School


1972 ?? Recruitment of him by SHB 2015063536


1972 'zealots' letter ???


1972 Seeking first grant - emphasises that it is his view that the health problems from smoking is very low .... ??? 92463312/3318\


1972 Huber was funded in 1972 for total $2.8 million over 5 years. Still going ten years later in 1982 in midst of change-over 2015041129


1972 Jul (c) He first met AJ Stevens and the other Tobacco Executives in California 03748756/8759


1972 Jul 6 - first outline. Heubner of TI had approached Huber a few years earlier. Proposed research project -- Channing laboratories: 2072821697/1704


1972 Oct 23 American Brands Inc along with the other companies have been considering sponsoring Gary Huber's Harvard University research. Memo from in house lawyer Cyril Hetsko to CEO Robert Walker

This is with reference to the proposal for.a research program at Harvard Medical School over a five-year period to be supported by sponsoring tobacco companies. This was the subject of the visit with you on September 27 1972 by Alex Galloway and Dave Hardy.

Dave Hardy has since informed Janet Brown by telephone that the other five major cigarette m anufacturers plus Larus and U.S. Tobacco have committed to sponsor the program and have paid 20% of their respective first semi-annual apportioned amount into the fund to start the program. Thus at the outset we can conclude that this program will go forward with or without our participation.To put it another way,our non-participation will not defeat the program or prevent the development of whatever research data and conclusions will be generated [However American Brands had pulled out of the AMA-ERF program]n the light of our experience and attitude toward the AMA program, do we want to make a five-year financial commitment to the Harvard program ? It is possible that a cumulative effect of American alone withdrawing from the AMA program, not participating in the Washington University program and not participating in the Harvard program may start a negative reaction against American amongst doctors.

The Harvard research program includes emphasis on ingredients and on resolving questions [so] participation may offer the only chance, even though perhaps a slim one, that a given company might have of learning of a developing possibility of incrimination of an ingredient in one or more of its brands and the possible absence of, or lack of incrimination of, such ingredient in brands of one or more of its competitors.

http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/adb77a00/pdf


1972 Nov 10 Understood that funding for Harvard would be balanced by cut at CTR. 966001060


1972 Dec - May 1973 Report by BAT exec after a visit to US] In December 1972, it was announced that the U. S. tobacco industry had made a five-year grant to the Harvard Medical School for investigation into pulmonary and cardiovascular diseases. The amount of the grant was not announced but I was told in confidence that the initial grant was $3 m. On visiting the group who will be carrying out the research, I learned that the first main objective will probably be to identify the characteristics of those susceptible to chronic non-specific lung disease. 43. This research will be based on the Channing Laboratory of the Boston City Hospital. This Laboratory was originally concerned with infectious diseases but has since spread into other fields. The principle investigator is Dr Gary L. Huber, Assistant Professor of Medicine. He will have as project consultants,

  • Dr FH Epstein, Head of the Harvard Medical Unit and a Professor of Medicine:
  • Dr Edward H. Kass, Director of the Channing Laboratory and also a Professor of Medicine; and
  • Dr RS Cotran, Professor of Pathology.
  • Dr Frank E Speizer is the statistician to the project.

I met Drs. Kass, Huber & Speizer. Drs. Kass and Speizer have both worked in England: Kass with Dr AL Cochrane of the MRC Pneumoconiosis Research Unit in epidemiological studies in the Rhonda valley, and Speizer with Dr CM Fletcher on the latter's long term prospective study of lung function. Speizer is returning to London on June 15th to help Fletcher to write up his next report for publication.

44. The Channing group has recently been carrying out long term studies of the effects of air pollution in the Boston area. They have had a prospective study of policemen and tunnellers for the past seven years in order to see if exposure to car exhausts had any adverse effects on health. None had been found. The group Is carrying out a prospective epidemiological study in an Italian district of East Boston, where they hope eventually to have 38, 000 subjects. These interests led the group to investigate also the effects of cigarette smoking.

They asked for a Lorillard smoker: this led to a visit from Dave Hardy and eventually to the research grant. The smoking project has three broad divisions - chemical and physical, animal and epidemiological.

The group includes an aerosol physicist, and if he has achieved what has been claimed, he must be good. He first investigated smoke particle size in the human smoker, and I was told that he had found that after the smoke had passed the mouth, particle size remained stable. He has also found that the particle size distribution of smoke produced by the Lorillard smoking machine is stable, whereas that of the Dontenwill machine is not. It is also claimed that he has found the puff profiles of human smokers and of the Lorillard machine to be similar. Knowing the great variety of human smoking puff profiles I found this, and some of the other claims, rather hard to believe.

The group has three Lorillard smokers [smoking machines]. Two are used for animal work and are linked to exposure chambers for rodents which have five rotating carousels for the animals: these were in another building so that I didn't see them. The effects on animals of mainstream whole smoke, side stream smoke and of smoke from cigarettes made of cytrel and of marijuana will be investigated. The epidemiological work will be based largely on the 38, 000 subjects in the prospective study.

45. As far as I could ascertain the main objective of the project is to find means by which individuals susceptible to emphysema and bronchitis and to coronary heart disease (to a less extent) could be identified in advance. Identification of individuals susceptible to lung cancer is deferre d to a later stage. The initial approach of the team has been to consider what characteristics might provide markers of susceptibility to chronic non-specific lung disease, and the following are examples of those that are being considered:

46. The Channing group has developed a small portable air sampler about the size of a small tape recorder. The group uses the closing volume test as one of their respiratory tests. They claimed that it was reasonably reproduceable, but some subjects were unable to make the rather complicated apparatus work at all. In their measurements of blood COHb, they had found that cigar smokers had a very high level of COHb, and found it difficult to account for this if cigar smokers did not inhale. If these observations are representative, they raise the question: If CO contributes to coronary heart disease, why do cigar smokers not have a much higher death rate. [4]


1973-74 In the academic year, several of Huber's investigatons will be moved from Harvard Medical School to the Beth Israel Hospital http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/iju68e00/pdf


1973 Otis Singletary, President of University of Kentucky tried unsuccessfully to recruit Huber. He preferred to stay at Harvard.


1973 "Kass- Reif controversy "I only know of one scientist who denies smoking .." ZN555_562.pdf


1973 Sep 14 The Tobacco Institute has commissioned this confidential report into Charles R Halpern [ex A&P], of the Center for Law and Social Policy, a Democrat-aligned legal think-tank which is based in Washington DC.

Mr Halpern has been in communication with the Board of Governors and others at Harvard urging that they rescind their work on the tobacco research project at Harvard.

http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/rem32f00/pdf


1973 Oct Harvard's independent medical newspaper The Present Illness features an article "Caution: Harvard may be hazardous to your health" In mid 1973 Professor Frederick Stare had been exposed as a scientific lobbyist for the food chemical and pharmaceutical companies by Harvard students in the campus newspaper The Present Illness and also the student body attacked the support being given to the university scientists by the tobacco industry. Corporate influence over the health of the American people was a major focus of their attention. A couple of faculty members were eventually driven out of the university but most survived. The magazine contained lengthy discussions of the pharmaceutical, food and tobacco industries in the issues on Drs Ebert, Stare, and Huber respectively. http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/iju68e00/pdf


1975040[ 1975 Apr [In the 1978 "First Draft" of a long "White Paper. Smoking & Health: The Untold Story"]

Two articles supporting this view [that passive smoking problems were only of annoyance] appeared in the New England Journal of Medicine in April, 1975.

In "Concentrations of Nicotine and Tobacco Smoke in Public Places," a research paper by William C. Hinds and Melvin W. First of the Harvard School of Public Health, the authors concluded that "ambient cigarette smoke would not be expected to produce the strong public reaction to tobacco smoke that has developed in the past few years." Hinds and First suggested that "annoyance from tobacco smoke is caused by-factors other than the average concentration of particulate matter. in the indoor atomosphere." In the same issue, Dr.Gary L.Huber of the Harvard Medical School wrote that "the nonsmoker passively exposed to tobacco may indeed have an adverse health response on a psychogenic basis." Thus even among the minute fraction of people who profess physical reactions to ambient smoke, the fundamental cause may be psychological. There have been innumerable reports of nonsmoker behavior that could best be described as neurotic. For example, women have physically attacked other women for smoking in supermarkets.

[Hinds, First and Huber were all in the pay of the tobacco industry.] http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/pqo92f00/pdf


1975 Apr 10 FP Haas of Liggett Group writes to (finance manager ??) James Scott Hill over "related costs" to do with funding of the Tobacco Institute, Council for Tobacco Research (CTR), etc. Scott has been querying certain payments and Haas is defending past decisions.

  • Council for Tobacco Research ($45,000)
    • Literature Storage and Retrieval
    • Special Projects

      [These are] scientific research projects of a quality sufficient to bear the imprimatur of the Scientific Director of CTR, which have been approved by management on my recommendation and which have the potential of arming our counsel and the industry with research helpful in court, in Congress, or elsewhere in adversary situations. The total commitments already made for Special Projects for 1975 amount to $112,865 (our share being about $5,200). As of now, there are no Special Projects commitments for 1976, but this is not to say proposals will not be made.

  • Tobacco Institute (budgeted for $230,000)
  • Tobacco Tax Council (Budgeted $90,000)
  • ( Major university projects)
    • Harvard Project [Gary Huber] (budgeted $23,000)
            I believe $11,913 of this has been paid for this year. There is a substantial possibility that this entire project may wash out,
      if it can be done gracefully , but we do have a contractual commitment which does not expire until late in 1977.
          Discussions are to be held with Dr. [Gary] Huber on May 15 at CTR. Expenses for this project are based on share of market after relatively minor contributions from Tobacco Associates and US Tobacco Company.
    • Washington University Project (budgeted at $23,000)
      Cancer immunology: This is a contractual commitment which does not expire until April, 1978. American does not participate, but Larus and Tobacco Associates do, in a relatively minor way.


  • Central Files and Consultants (cost in 1975, $70,000)

    The law firm of Jacob and Medinger handles these expenses through equal payments by all six companies.This method of disbursing funds was selected to preserve attorneys' work product [to 'block discovery'] as best we could. Two accounts are involved: the Central File and Consultants

    • Consultants -- doctors and scientists whose services are used on a current basis as consultants or as witnesses in current legislative hearings on restrictive smoking in public areas
      • (i.e., smoking poses no real risk for non-smokers), bringing Dr. [Philip] Burch from England under the aegis of Michigan State (Burch having "bested" Doll in the field of epidemiology, etc.).
      • Others consult in the area of coronary heart disease ([Carl] Seltzer),
      • epidemiology ([Theodore] Sterling and [Ian] Macdonald).
      Were it not for the papers these independent scientists publish, and the advice and counsel we receive from them, our position would be further eroded.
    • The Central File, or litigation file, is an instrument through which literature collected, stored and retrieved is thoroughly analyzed for counsel's benefit. Central Files also keep current witness files for scientists and doctors so that counsel can in turn prepare for examination or cross-examination.
            This service has proved less costly and time consuming than having lawyers arduously make the initial analysis. (I know, for in the early years I personally analyzed papers written by Wynder, Ochsner, Overholt, etc. in preparation for early trials, and it was nearly back-breaking).

  • Outside Legal Fees and Research (Budgeted $180,000)
        -- for Covington & Burling ($28,000)
  • Earle Clements and Jack Beatty

http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/vjj66b00/pdf


1976 /E A draft brochure with copy using Harvard's Gary Huber as the main authority, is being prepared for the Tobacco Institute. It uses First and Hines studies, and quotes from others. http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/itu3aa00/pdf


1976 Tobacco Industry Biographical Index records

HUBER, GARY L., M.D., Chief, Division of Respiratory Diseases, Department of Medicine, Harvard University Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts [Art. 1975/Biog. 1976]

http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/fhw23a00/pdf


1976 Report to the CTR on "University Projects"grants made to:

  • Gary Huber, Harvard University -- pulmonary and heart disease
        "Funded in 1972 for a total of $2,282,750 ovr 5 years"
  • Martin J Cline, UCLA --lung disease mechanisms/cancer detection
        "Funded in 1974 for a total of $1,700,000 over 5 years"
  • Lauran V Ackerman & Paul E Lacy, Washington Uni -- cancer immunology/detection
        Funded in 1971 for $2 million over 5 years + $800K extension for another 2 years.

Also a list of CTR Special Projects

  • John R Carter, MD, Director Institute of Pathology, Case Western Reserve Uni
        This study "may indicate a bias related to a patients smoking history" using lung cancer autopsys .
        Funded in 1974 for $86,305 over 2 years.
  • Richard J Hickey, Mgmt. & Behav. Sciences Center, Wharton School, Uni of Penn
        "Dr Hickey's theories support the constitutional hypothesis."
        Funded in 1973 for $110,132 over 2 years
  • Thomas F Mancuso MD, Dept Occupational Health, University of Pittsburgh
        "[His] epidemiological studies emphasize environmental and occupational effects"
        Funded Sep 1973 for $24,400 for 1 year (+ supplementary $17K for his 1972 SP#4 grant).
        Mancuso is also heavily involved in vinyl chloride controversy (found in tobacco smoke); Presentations to the OSHA, House subcommittees, and New York Academy of Science. He is associated with Theodore Sterling in a paper on lung-cancer.
  • George Wolf, MIT
        Nutritional effects on lung cancer (graduate fellowship - vitamin A)
        Funded in 1974 for one year $10,000
  • LGS Rao, Snr Biochemist, Dept of Steroid Biochemistry, Royal Infirmary, Glasgow
        '"Lung cancer may be an endocrine disease" (low androsterone levels)
        Funded in 1974 for $30,000 over 3 years.
  • Carl Seltzer, Dept Nutrition, Harvard Uni School of Public Health.
        Constitutional differences between smokers and non-smokers/CHD
        General Support of Dr Seltzer's work (SP#52R5)
        The current renewal of $50,000 is for support until June 30 1975

    "Dr Seltzer's article '"Critical Appraisal of the RCP Report" in The Lancet sparked 75 letters and other comments",
    "Dr Seltzer has access to Kaiser-Permanente, Framingham, and Boston Normative Aging Study data."

  • Hans Selye MD, Dir, Inst of Exper. Medicine of Surgery, Uni of Montreal
        Studies stress in disease development.
        Renewed grant in 1972 for total of $150,000 over 3 years.
    He had testified (Canadian Parliament in 1969) that smoking had an "intensely beneficial effect" on stress.

http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/iqu07c00/pdf


1976 Jul 28 Meeting of the Research Liason Council (RLC). The tobacco industry had set up the RLC in 1974 to provide oversight on CTR and other research activities. This (later) report by Janet Brown of ATCO, appears to be a history of some disputes in the RLC. "The question of extension of the Harvard project, and of "NIH participation" at Harvard was raised." Apparently (it appears from these notes) there was no question of NIH participating in the industry's research. Lorillard, however, seems to have thought that that was the issue, and had advised David Hardy that if NIH did not participate, Lorillard would continue its Harvard contributions "only if the budget were reduced by the amount NIH would have contributed." Hardy said that the only issue was whether the industry objected to Huber's receiving grants from NIH at the same time he was doing work for the industry. [While it is not clear from the Hetsko notes, this issue may have been whether Huber should apply to NIH for grants for smoke inhalation cardiovascular research on pigeons.] Huber was already receiving NIH grants for inhalation studies which were not part of the industry's research —on marijuana and tobacco substitute. RLC felt the industry should be assured that NIH money would not be part of the industry project. Hetsko observes that [American Brand]'s problem "is not with participation in the projected budget but with resolution of the NIH problem." http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/xpz36b00/pdf


1976 Oct /E The latest document in the CFH File [Cyril F Hetsko's files on the RLC] (other than routine correspondence (1) enclosing reports of the Harvard project, (2) noting that the question of renewing the Harvard project would be handled by the Executives and the Committee of Counsel, and (3) that Kornegay urged renewal of the Harvard project; [as above]


1977 Special Account No.4 Report of the CTR.

The following represent present and known future commitments of Special Account No 4.

  • Harvard Medical School -- The use of Special Account No. 4 for accounting expenses relating to Dr Huber's research program has been approved . A payment of $2,050 was made in this connection last year. It is not known when the next audit expense will be, nor is the amount known, although the past payment may be a guide.

http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/hao66b00/pdf

Note: Most payments to Huber were made via a special arrangement with joint shares by the companies, and billed directly to them by the lawyers. This is just some secret expenses payments.]


1977 Huber was reporting on modification of filters 2010048896,


1977 Feb 8 TN Finley is an old associate of Huber. He received grant money before Huber. 955022461


1977 Mar 21 Harvard Medical School press release draft on the tobacco industry's Harvard Research Program .

Dr. Gary Huber, Director of a research program at Harvard Medical School, designed to clarify the relationship between the use of tobacco and health, expressed his appreciation today for the continuation of support provided by seven tobacco companies and an association of Tobacco Growers. The researchers are attempting to determine whether tobacco smoke can be shown to have influence on the development of a number of diseases which have been statistically associated with smoking. The funds will enable them to continue his research for the next three years.

It says that Gary Huber has had $5 million from Tobacco companies in the years 1972-77, and now has 12 Harvard investigators and technical personel engaged in his research.
[He later turned whistleblower and revealed how the science was manipulated and results distorted]

Dr. Huber, in addition to his role as principal investigator in this research program, is

  • Chief of the Respiratory Diseases Unit at Beth Israel Hospital, one of Harvard University's affiliated teaching institutions.
  • president of the New England Chapter of the American College of Chest Physicians ;
  • trustee of the American Lung Association in Boston;
  • National Delegate to the American Heart Association .
  • served on several advisatory and consultating committees to the National Institutes of Health.
  • senior editor of the journals Chest and Heart and Lung
  • a contributing editor to several other scientific publications.

Dr. Franklin Epstein, Herrman L. Blumgart Professor of Medicine at Harvard, is the Project Consultant.

http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/kss88e00/pdf

[Don't confuse Franklin Epstein with Frederick Epstein of Michighan. Both were tobacco helpers.] The press release is circulated among the top executives of Philip Morris. http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/sxk68e00/pdf


1977 May Finds macrophages in lung that are good, and kill bacteria. Study extended 3 years. Tobacco - Health Harvard Research Extended 3 Years 950157049


1977 May Huber's emphasema abstract 680149880


1977 May 3 Hinds/First controversy - attack on the TI's misuse of information from these pigeon ??? studies. File note* HINDS/FIRST CONTROVERSY. Harvard 502406081


1977 Jun Huber's contract was extended for three years. Bringing cumulative sponsorship to $5m 680010127


1977 Jun 10 Hind/First Controversy re RJR BOOKLET "THE FACTS ABOUT PUBLIC SMOKING" 500010619


1977 Jul Huber writing to Enviro Control Ltd about Melvin First at HSPH and associates Drs William Hinds, Otto Grubner, and Robert Weker.. Pigeon inhallation exposures beginning. Gardner is employed as overseer of the project 50223924/3928


1977 Jul 26 Huber sends a copy of the American Lung Association of Boston's newsletter to Roemer at RJ Reynolds. His note gives the financial details also http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/jhc19d00/pdf


1977 Aug 2 he became "Governor" of Boston chapter of American College of Chest Physicians, and began to lobby for a tobacco-funded conference 502405709/5710


1977 Sep 26 Huber has discovered that his rats get emphasema from cig smoking. Holtzman is worried - Shinn has visited him at Harvard, and still not solved the problem. Huber is due to speak at a conference. 1005053856


1977 Oct 3 Joel Gardner of Enviro Controls Ltd is contract overseer for tobacco companies over Huber's operation 50223952


1977 Oct 26 SH&B memo Huber's Las Vegas paper is too technical for journos to understand - He rejected Zahn request for paper, but now he notes that a paper also goes to Zahn Must know of Zahns tobacco links. ZN23148


1977 Nov 4 Complains of being misquoted by the press at conference. Will never speak to the lay press again. Report by Zahn 504841362/1367


1978 Huber and problems with his change-over to St Auburn Hospital in 1978 2017028727


1978 Feb 8 Bill Shinn report on Eynsenck and Huber [https://www.industrydocumentslibrary.ucsf.edu/tobacco/docs/lgdh0110


1978 Feb 9 William Shinn of Shook Hardy & Bacon is advising the company lawyer-members of the Committee of Counsel

Some of you have asked for additional, information concerning funding through Special Account No: 4. This account is administered by Jacob & Medinger and Ed Jacob and I have reviewed the enclosed report.

I also enclose a memorandum with regard to funding of projects and would appreciate your advice if you find this to be incorrect in any way. There is probably no need for you to retain these notes once you have satisfied yourself of the current situation.
[This a clear instruction to the other company lawyers to shred the document after having read it.] Also enclosed are two requests for funding. The [Hans] Eysenck request would be funded through Special 4 and the [Gio Gori] Franklin Institute request. through a CTR-Special Project. I recommend approval of both.

Material REDACTED from some versions We may want to discuss research in a larger context. i.e., what are the industry's present needs? ' This, of course involves consideration of the
  • role of institutional type projects (tobacco, e.g. Harvard [Huber], and non-tobacco, e.g. Washington University [St Louis]);
  • the role of CTR; and
  • the need for special areas of research with due regard for the politics of science,
  • the importance of developing witnesses
  • and the need for a responsive mechanism to meet unfounded claims made about tobacco.

He then talks about further use of the scientific 'spy' Leonard Zahn who attends many scientific conferences to report on adverse scientific findings and anti-smoking activities.

We have been unable to visit with Dr. Huber in Boston [Harvard University] because of weather conditions. I have, however, suggested to him that he talk with Henry Meadow, attorney for the Medical School, about the situation at Charlesgate. Dr Huber will advise Mr Meadow that the checks are being held because of the inadequacy of facilities at Charlesgate and on account of lease uncertainties.
[They were in a battle with the Beth Israel Hospital, which had turfed Huber's research program out following student objections.] Dr. Huber has agreed to conduct a two-hour presentation at an American Thoracic Society/American. Lung Association meeting in May. There will be several participants, who will discuss the status of tobacco research in the fields of cancer, cardiovascular disease and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Dr. Huber also contemplates a section on the nonsmoker and tobacco smoke. Dr. Huber has advised that his group has received the number one scientific rating from NCI on a research proposal, "Nicotine Titration (Accommodation) in Cigarette Smokers." I have 157 pages of proposal in my office which I will make available to anyone who would like to have a copy of it. This work, if funded, would investigate whether cigarettes with a "low tar and nicotine" yield are "less hazardous."
[Huber managed to maintain funding for his work from both the NCI and the tobacco industry because the NCI didn't know about his lobbying work on the side for the industry.] Sometime ago Dr. Huber asked that a committee be formed at Harvard to critique the scientific aspects of the smoking and.health program. Dr. Huber, as you know, is very proud of the caliber of work done and wanted to lay to rest any accusations (completely unfounded), that the industry had control over the research. A presentation is to be made to this committee within the next few days Dr. Huber has mentioned from time to time the possibility of engaging in "passive smoking" research. He has contemplated further work of the kind done by Hinds and First [Both tobacco scientists] . He is also curious as to what factors may contribute to the strong feelings of certain anti-smokers with respect to the smoking of others.
[Huber had a giant ego, and total confidence in his own judgements -- it ended up in court cases, and then he became a whistleblower, admitting that this work was corrupt.]

Special Account No 4: (known and future commitments)

    Harvard Medical School -- The use of Special Account No. 4 for accounting expenses relating to Dr. Huber's research program has been approved. A payment of $2,050 was made in this connection last year. It is not known when the next audit expense will be, nor is the amount known, although the past payment may be a guide.

[They paid Huber through several round-about routes -- and they also secretly paid the Harvard University itself via Special A/C #4 (although the Harvard Board denied knowing that Huber was working for the tobacco industry.)] [5] Un-Redacted version of letter (without SP#4 list).


1978 Apr 17 Russell Ross, Associate Dean for Scientific Affairs, School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle. He has sent a clipping to Jack Roemer at RJ Reynolds. Ron Sustana sends it on to "Nick and Jim" saying that it raises some questions and issues that are serious [thoughts].

There are those who say the tobacco people are becoming "altruistic" and showing their "obligation to society," while there are others who question the motive behind the generosity.

A group of seven major tobacco firms, including Reynolds, Philip Morris and Lorillard, are putting $1.6 million this year into medical studies at Harvard, UCLA and Washington University at St. Louis.

At Harvard, pulmonary specialist Dr.Gary Huber is developing rat models in order to expose them to the equivalent smoke from a pack and a half of cigarettes a day. Studies are being made on the condition of the rats' lungs following the exposure. The industry' commitment over an eight-year period is $6.2 million. While Dr. Huber conld not be reached for comment on the study, a spokeswoman. for the. Harvard Medical School. Lillian Blacker said, the study "is not coming out favorable" for the tobacco industry.

Dr. Dwight E. Harken, professor of surgery emeritus at Harvard, warns that researchers who accept moncy from the tobacco industry "live on the horns of a dilemma" and risk the loss of credibity.

He said many "significant people" at his medical school were "flabbergasted" when It was announced the school would undertake the tobacco industry-financed study on respiratory desease. [6]


1978 May At tobacco industry consultants workshop 2010048789


1978 May 14-17 Leonard Zahn's report on Huber speaking (also Rylander) at the annual meeting in Boston of the American Lung Association/American Thoracic Society.

This meeting was, to put it simply, loaded with anti-smoking presentations, with one notable exception.

The exception was a paper by Gary Huber of Harvard who sought to raise "controversies" by discussing the need for more research into tobacco and health, the history of the tobacco industry, the increase in smoking despite anti campaigns, the economic importance of tobacco to the nation and the 600,000 farm families that raise tobacco, the inconsistent or weak evidence in several research areas, etc.

  • Huber,the first speaker of the morning session, was followed by
  • CC Harris, Bethesda ;
  • C'TR grantee Lynne Reid of Boston ;
  • David M. Conning, London, England,
  • Ragnar Rylander of Sweden
  • Lenfant was scheduled to present: a "Summary and Perspective"at the end but did not because of lack of time.

Interestingly, thcre was not a single question or comment by anyone in the audience or on the panel at thc end.

http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/yji55d00/pdf


1978 Sep 27 Huber is sending Henry Roemer at RJR (VP and General Counsel), anything that might interest a pro-smoking lobbyist. He says this is the first of three papers his team will be publishing: "The Case Against Marihuana Smoking". (author is Peggy Mann - deals mainly with pot and pregnancy) Huber gets only a casual mention "A similar study was performed on rats exposed to marihuana smoke by Dr. Gary Huber of Harvard Medical SchooL He showed slides illustrating how cannabis smoke impairs the ability of pulmonary macropbages to destroy bacteria . Macrophages are cells of the immunity system which line the airways of the lung in order to protect them against intectlon." His group's study was looking at the Biological Effects on the Defense System of the Lungs , and it compared the inhalation effects of marihuana and tobacco smoke on male albino rats. It found that the marihuana itself might be beneficial for asthma sufferers, but warned against the smoke inhalation. He want the documents passed on to Dr [Murray] Senkus and [Frank] Colby (full-time scientific lobyist), and he signs himself Chief, Respiratory Diseases Unit, Deparment of Medicine, Division of Respiratory Diseases, Harvard Medical School-Beth Israel Hospital

======

1979 The defendents terminated sponsorship of the Harvard University research in 1979. The chief scientist on the project, Gary Huber, in a letter to Shook, Hardy & Bacon, stated his disagreement with the termination decision:

How can a research program that has been productive of good research in an important area where good research is vitally needed now be terminated? How can four major NIH research grants on smoking and health that were awarded under the most competitive of circumstance in areas of crucial national importance now be terminated? How can a program that again has been favorably reviewed by an advisory committee of Harvard Professors now be terminated?

[Findings of Fact: State of Minnesota (Hubert H Humphrey III vs all tobacco companies -- Oct 1997] http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/cdb78c00/pdf


1979 Feb Problems with the tobacco funding Huber outlines the system at Harvard 2015063536/3540


1979 Sep 30 Corrupt tobacco researcher Gary Huber is reporting on a monthly basis to George Hall, Enviro Control Inc. (Maryland), on the use of inhalation of smoke to experimentally induce atherosclerosis in pigeons. This is the final month of their study.

  • Melvin First of the HSPH is providing consultative services (the experiments were being done at Charlesgate West Animal Inhalation Facility).
  • Biological Chemistry is being done by Dr David Drath -- looking at cholesterol build up (over 4 to 12 months of inhalation exposure).
  • Morphology Unit. This has had to move from the Beth Israel Hospital to Mount Auburn Hospital and is now operational.
  • Inhalation Facility has transfered from Charlesgate to Mr Auburn.
  • Biostatistics under Ms Anita Fulchiero has continued. They have 61 pigeons who have been smoking for a year. They have preliminary results for a lot of measurements.
  • Administration. They have transfered over to Mount Auburn Hospital

It is not clear why he was reporting to Enviro Control. http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/xsy81e00/pdf


1979 Oct 24-28 At a meeting American College of Chest Physicians he says "cig smoking does not impair the activity of pulmonary macrophages" -- but makes them more effective. p 198 The tobacco lawyers said he came to ridiculous conclusion that "Smoking appears to make lung cells more effective" 681879254 p33


1979 Dec /E (said to be Mar 12, but death of Pope) Gary Huber speech outlining his findings about pigeon smoke inhalation. http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/xfk29d00/pdf


1979 Dec 18 William Shinn of Shook Hardy & Bacon advises Thomas Ahrensfeld, General Counsel of Philip Morris, that

  • Carl Seltzer's editorial in the American Heart Journal will be published early in the new year.
  • There may be questions [in the Committee of Counsel] with regard to the Harvard project and Dr [Gary] Huber's future plans. At some point counsel should determine what, if anything, to do about the absence so far of any phase out payments from Liggett.
  • Miscellaneous items would have included
    • a brief report on some twin data; [Cederlof and Friberg]
    • an announcement that Dr Domingo Aviado has relinquished his duties at Allied Chemical (and been placed on a leave of absence, with pay, until July 31, 1980);
    • a report on Dr [Arthur] Furst's contributions in recent months and continuation of his consultancy;
    • a report on Dr [Theodor] Sterling and comment with regard to a renewal of his research project;
    • and mention of the Australian ads. [not the AFCO case]

http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/kqo88d00/pdf

1982 Mar Arch. Environ. Health article by Brooks, WW, Bing, OHL., Huber, GL & Abelmann, WH "Contractile performance of rat myocardiun after chronic tobacco smoke inhalation." Rats exposed to cigt. smoke had a significant diminution in body & left ventricular wt. compared to sham-smoked controls. When compared to food- http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/vfq21a00/pdf


1980 Huber's questioning - from a later transcript of his testimony during Texas vs ATCO.
Q. Did you ever have a meeting in a hotel in Boston with industry officials who expressed concern that your research was, quote, "getting too close to some things, end of quote?
A. Yes.
Q. And who was that, sir?
A. It was with industry attorneys Q. Can you tell us approximately when that happened Doctor?
A. I would anticipate it was in 1980. But I would have to check the records to be sure. [Deposition January 19, 1998, ??] Findings of Fact: State of Minnesota (Hubert H Humphrey III vs all tobacco companies -- Oct 1997 http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/cdb78c00/pdf ]


1980 /E [From the April 19 2010 Maisonneuve Magazine article]

The Committee of Counsel also presided over so-called special projects: attempts to garner public credibility by commissioning outside scientists to carry out studies, giving the appearance that the industry was truly interested in learning about the health effects of cigarettes. For example, a scientist at Harvard University, Dr. Gary Huber, was persuaded in 1972 to let the tobacco industry fund his research into the question of whether smoking causes emphysema. An internal memo written by American Tobacco lawyer Arnold Henson shows that this “Harvard Project” was supported because of

  1. "our obligation to spend money on research
  2. the value of Huber to the industry and
  3. the PR value of the Harvard name.”

In 1980, when Huber’s results started “getting too close to some things,” the lawyers cut off the scientist’s funding.

<a href="[http://maisonneuve.org/pressroom/article/2010/apr/19/smoke/ " Target=_blank> <IMG SRC="../library/Seearticle.jpg" ALIGN=right> </a>

[This statement is WRONG on "getting too close... " and they didn't cut off his funds, they just paid them in a different way and transfered him to Kentucky University where he created even more problems.]


1980 Jan 22 Dr John Wyatt died suddenly of a heart attack. He had been the Director of the Tobacco and Health Research Institute at the University of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky, since 1974. He was a1so a member of the Scientific Advisory Board of CTR, and a prominent supporter of the tobacco industry who was paid to tour Australia, etc. preaching the industry claims of 'no proven effect'. This left the position vacant at the most fortuitous time for Gary Huber, who's tenure at Harvard was becoming impossible due to student pressure.


1980 Mar 1 Gary Huber is to make a speech to the Tobacco Institute's Board of Directors


1980 Mar 31 end of the phase-out period of Huber's Harvard Research Project http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/eek41a00/pdf


1980 Apr 3 At the Smoking & Health Program, Harvard Medical School at Auburn Hospital. He has sent Shook Hardy & Bacon (the tobacco lawyers) a copy of his progress report on smoking marijuana "The Biologic Effects of Marijuana on the Lung". The grant came from NIDA. http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/fhf94f00/pdf [Note how he always deals through the lawyers.]


1980 Apr 16 Harvard Research Project Fourth Quarter Phase-Out Expenses. Shook Hardy & Bacon has split up the finalisation costs of Huber's interrupted Harvard program, and has shared them between the companies based on the Maxwell-Report market-share figures. The payments for the last research period is to be ended by March 31 1980. [Note that checks from individual tobacco companies are to be set to both Harvard Medical School and to Dr Gary L Huber himself, so there is no doubt that the University was fully conversant with the source of funding.] The rodent study presentation by Dr Jean Bignon in Sardinia during April 28-30 1980 is of unknown significance. http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/eek41a00/pdf


1980 May 16 James Bowling (Philip Morris) replies to a note from Ernest Pepples (inhouse lawyer with B&W). Huber has accepted an "important post at the Uni" [of Kentucky] Pepples is travelling to Kentucky and will visit Huber. [Pepples obviously engineered the appointment] http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/zvt38e00/pdf


1980 Jun A Tobacco Institute Report headed "Drs Wyatt and Huber" says:

Dr John Wyatt, Director of the Tobacco and Health Research Institute at the University of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky, since 1974, died on January 22 1980. He was a1so a member of the Scientific Advisory Board of CTR. Dr Gary Huber has been appointed to the above position, effective August, 1980. Dr Huber formerly directed the Smoking and Health Program at Harvard, a large part of which was sponsored by the US Tobacco Industrry.

http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/vin23e00/pdf


1980 Jun 27 President Otis A Singletry of the University of Kentucky (UK) introducd Gary Huber as the new director of the Tobacco & Health Research Institute.

A panel of outside scientists [had studied] the operations of the Institute preceeding Huber's hiring and describe the situation he inherited as "approaching chaos."

Huber was to last only 16 months at the University of Kentucky. http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/iux09a00/pdf


1980 Jun 30 Huber leaving Harvard Med School 1005071691


1980 Aug Huber shifted from Harvard to the University of Kentucky

Shortly after he became director of ihe Institute, Huber eliminated 28 positions and canceled all 46 research grants financed with Institute money. In its 7 page report the panel concluded that:

  • The "undistinguished" research carried out at the insitute was produced by a lack of close supervision from the administration and the absensce of professional revidw by "knowledgeable" unbiased scientists.
  • Before Huber's arrival in August 1980 the administration of the institute "approached chaos". The panel found itself unable to make a complete study of work done at the institute in recent years because records have been lost of destroyed.

The report concluded that although the firings were "appropriate and needed," they set the stage for later hostilities at the institute. "Clearly Dr, Huber was hot sensitive to the local and University political climate and the possible consequences of his actions and may have received inadequate guidance in regard to these matters," the panel said.


1980 Aug Huber now head of the Tobacco and Health Institute. "Dr Huber formerly directed the Smoking and Health Program at Harvard, a large part of which was sponsored by the US Tobacco. Industry.http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/vin23e00/pdf Huber eliminated the jobs of 20 Institute employees and abolished eight vacant positions. Huber said the moves were carried out with the backing of Singletary, UK legal counsel John C. Darsie Jr., graduate Dean Wimberly Royster and UK Personnel Director Peggy McClintock.


1980 Aug Huber took over the Kentucky research institute and fired many employees and closed down a lot of research projects.


1980 Aug 14 Letters in the New England Journal of Medicine critical of the White/Froeb research.

  • "Difficult to believe...require further investigations," wrote--three German scientists. "Methods...are open to criti- cism.-...Possibility of bias."
  • "Serious questions about the validity of the measurements," wrote Gary Huber, M.D. "The search for public policy on an issue of this importance must be based on 'irrefutable scientific evidence'." -
  • "Study is flawed.... Serious error in [spirometer's] measure- ment of forced vital capacity," wrote Allan P. Freedman, M.D. He said the spirometer "fails to meet the technical recommen- dations of the American Thoracic Society."

White/Froeb responded to the criticism in the same issue and several letters supporting their research were published.

Also a note on Huber at Kentucky.

GARY HUBER, M.D., new director of Kentucky's Tobacco and Health Research Institute, told the Louisville Courier-Journal he might authorize research to see if smoking provides "something to man- kind that is of benefit in coping with the stresses we all face."

http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/urw05d00/pdf


1980 Sep /E He immediately closed down some long-term smoking & health research projects (one with primates which had been on-going for many years). There was an immediate ...

"broad range" of complaints against Huber initiated by institute employees. They then charged him with travel voucher infringements, the illegally hiring and firing of employees, sexual harassment, mismanagment of institute funds, falsifying research data, and receiving payments and favours from tobacco companies. The Kentucky Institute is funded by a 0.5 cent tax on each pack of cigarettes sold in Kentucky, and it was greated in the early 1970s to "prove or disprove" the health hazards of smoking and "preserve and strengthen the tobacco industry in Kentucky."

2010028358


1980 Sep 15 Huber outlined his research priorities to the Kentucky Tobacco Research Board. He maintained during the briefing that

"Tobacco isn't harmful to the vast majority of people who smoke"

The comment provoked an immediate outburst from Huber's colleagues in the medical school. However Huber repeated the claims in a newspaper column (Oct 18) and in an informal lecture given to the medical school faculty.


1980 Oct 7 The Cigarette Papers says about the White-Froeb paper:

    The paper demonstrated that nonsmokers working in smoky offices have pulmonary function similar to that of light smokers. This study represented the first medical evidence that workplace exposure to secondhand smoke could impair lung function in otherwise healthy nonsmoking adults.

    On October 7, 1980, Californians Against Regulatory Excess (CARE), the tobacco industry's organization that ran the campaign against Proposition 10, issued a statement to the press criticizing the White and Froeb paper.

    This publication of White and Froeb has aroused new activity by the proponents of legislation and regulation aimed at restricting smoking in public places. This activity has occurred despite the many defects in the study and widespread criticism of the study by members of the medical and scientific communities. {2303.02}

    The CARE statement drew heavily on an editorial comment by Claude Lenfant and Barbara Liu of the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute that had accompanied the White and Froeb publication in the New England Journal of Medicine. The editorial (43) had stated:

    [T]he evidence that passive smoking in a general environment has health effects remains sparse, incomplete, and sometimes unconvincing. Yet the dearth of scientific data has not prevented this issue from becoming the focus of major debates that have resulted in national and local legislative actions. These actions, in turn, have reinforced the endless conflict between the rights of smokers and those of nonsmokers. {2303.02, p. 2}

    The CARE press release then asserts that many authorities have criticized the study:

    Much criticism and many doubts about the study methods utilized and conclusions reached by White and Froeb have been voiced in letters to the New England Journal of Medicine. {2303.02, p. 3}

    The authors of the criticisms included Franz Adlkofer, Gary Huber, Allan P. Freedman, Domingo Aviado, Michael Halberstam, and George E. Schafer (a former Surgeon General of the Air force and a self-identified consultant to the Tobacco Institute). Huber and Aviado received funding through the industry's special projects division. Aviado was paid $85,000 for a CTR special project from 1977 to 1978 and also received $675,500 as a consultant through Special Account 4 from 1981 to 1990. Huber received "computer and staff expenses" through a Shook, Hardy, and Bacon consultancy. Except for Schafer, none of this information was disclosed at the time. Adlkofer works at the German Verband, which conducts activities similar to the Tobacco Institute and the Council for Tobacco Research.

    CARE's press release also directs ad hominem attacks against White, suggesting that White's research was biased because he had volunteered to work in favor of the Proposition 5 and 10 campaigns.

    White's extreme anti-smoking statements reveal his bias against smoking. ("When children are playing ball in the Little League, smoking parents should not be allowed within 50 yards of them.") Dr. White, besides his involvement on the pro-Proposition 5 campaign in 1978, is a member of the Campaign Support Committee of Californians for Smoking & No Smoking Sections (the pro-Proposition 10 people) and appeared with Paul Loveday, the campaign chairman, at the news conference announcing the initiative drive. This "political" involvement may affect the objectivity necessary in science. {2303.02, pp. 11--12}

    CARE's statement also included general comments from Dr. Hiram T. Langston, Duncan Hutcheon, Edwin R. Fisher, Suzanne Knoebel, and John Salvaggio criticizing the evidence that passive smoking is dangerous. All these individuals received money through the industry's special accounts. Attacks on the White and Froeb study were not limited to the California campaign. A memo dated July 24, 1981, from JK Wells, B&W corporate counsel, to Ernest Pepples notes that a letter criticizing White has been sent to a member of Congress:

    [ Dr. Michael] Liebowitz has sent Congressman [Charlie] Rose [D-NC] an extensive and hardhitting letter very critical of James White. It is not clear whether the letter can be used by the industry in the present posture of the situation. {1825.01}

    "The situation" might refer to a National Academy of Sciences report (44), completed for the EPA, urging increased restrictions on smoking in public buildings. Proposition 10 was defeated in 1980. Nevertheless, the tobacco industry realized that the issue of secondhand smoke was here to stay. Five years later, in 1985, the "B&W Public Issues Environment" memorandum views the growth of smoking restrictions as a threat to the industry and predicts that smokers will probably support these restrictions.

<a href="[http://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft8489p25j&chunk.id=d0e20255&toc.id=d0e19883&toc.depth=1&brand=eschol&anchor.id=JD_Page_429#X" target=tobdocs> <img src="../library/seeArticle.jpg" align=right> </a>


1980 Nov 11 Huber was advised by the dean of the graduate school that an institute employee might have embezzled about $1,800 in insurance payments intended for Isabelle Wyatt, the widow of the Institute's former director, Dr John P Watt. The employee was fired on December 19.


1980 Dec Huber found evidence of waste, mismanagement and possible embezzlement among the institute's 60 employees, and unsucessfully urged the university to hire an outside firm {Peat Marwick] to conduct a thorough audit


1980 Dec 20 /E Huber requested that an external company (Peat Marwick) be employed to audit the Institute. He also cancelled all 46 research grants financed by the institute -- including many awarded to University of Kentucky professors.


1981 Jan to March Huber complained to UK officials tha he was being harassed by pranks, threats and vicious rumour questioning his mental stability and sexual habits. The Campus police were assigned to investigate threats. Huber says someone was asking about his 14 year old daughter, and that his passport was stolen the day before an overseas trip.


1981 Feb he asked RJ Reynolds Tobacco to hire protection for him. (also said to be a private eye)


1981 Mar Huber continued his six month effort to establish four major research programs and to recruit nationally-known scientists to direct these.


1981 Mar 11 The University was advised by an Institute employee (representing others) that allegations would be released to the Louisville newspaper unless an investigation into Huber was initiated. The following day, legal counsel Darsie was assigend to investigate the controversy. The University begins to conduct an internal audit of the Institute, after having rejected the Huber recommendation for an external, Peak Marwick Michell audit.


1981 Mar 29 Huber gave an intervew to the Herald-Leader calling the Institute a "cess-pit" and claiming to be made a scapegoat for past mismanagement. University officials are angered by Huber's public dicussion of past waste, mismanagement and unsatisfactory research at the Institute. He wrote and distributed a scathing 45 page report on the work and program supervision.

Institute staff began to collect a lengthy list of charges against Huber (led by UK legal counsel John Darcie) .

According to interviews, tape recordings and transcripts of later meetings, the employees raised allegations that Huber maniputaled research data; fraudulently bilked tbe state for his moving expenses; sexually harassed female employees; billed the university twice for a rental car; used the lnstitute's postage meter to send out personal mail; used a university truck to move his motorcycle; And accepted payments from tobacco companies.

http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/iux09a00/pdf

[The Institute received $3.5 million a year from a special Kentucky cigarette tax, and was supposed to remain independent of company grants.]


1981 Apr 1 "Probe of Huber is Narrowed by UK Official"

The probe into Huber's misdemeaners at University of Kentucky by John Darsie is narrowed down to a few travel voucher (Huber said they were forged). However RJR admitted that it provided him with security evaluation service. It noted his claim of "numerous instances of harassment that Huber said have occurred since he became director of the institute last summer."

The report identified a number of past and present employees of the institute as suspects, and discussed the sexual preferences of some of the suspects.

The security evaluation also advised Huber to arm himself and provide protection his 14-year-old daughter. Huber subsequently began carrying a .357-caliber Magnum in the glove compartment of his car and taught his daugher how to use a shotgun."

2010028357


1981 Apr 5 Lexington Herald article on Huber's problems at Kentucky University. 680260940


1981 Apr 7 University of Kentucky's President, Oris Singleary, suspended Huber and Pochay until the Roberts criminal investigation was complete. Val Pochay, who accompanied Huber from Harvard had become associate director at the Institute was suspended also Huber who holds a tenured profesorship in pulmonary medicine at the University, was reassigned to the College of Medicine. Pochay was reassigned to the office of the graduate school. Dr Leyton Davis was serving (until Oct 1981) as acting director of the institute. http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/wvc76b00/pdf


1981 Apr 19 Lexington Leader carries a story "Ex Surgeon General blasts UK's Huber". Dr Luther Terry said he should never have been hired by the university [because he] has for year had a reputation as a "hand man" for the tobacco industry."


1981 Apr 20 Fayette County Commonwealth's Attorney Larry Roberts decided to ask a gand jury to indict both Huber and Pochay on theft-by-deception charges in connection with their moving expenses from Boston to Lexington last year.


1981 Apr 21 At Kentucky University he was "temporarily reassigned' because of "possible criminal charges" over "falsifying research data."
[Probably refers to Pochay]


1981 Aug 31 Don Hoel, the tobacco lawyer of Shook Hardy and Bacon has written a 'note to file' about a proposed Rylander-organized ['closed'] symposium on "Environmental Tobacco Smoke effects on the nonsmoker-II" This note includes a list of those to be invited. Huber was listed as a rapporteur who would help edit the conference proceedings. http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/kqo33f00/pdf


1981 Oct 2 Story from The Lexington Herald. Tobacco Institute Official Passes Lie-detector Tests on Expenses, {sic "Tobbacco Institute"]

Dr Gary Huber the suspended director of the University of Kentucky's Tobacco and Health research isntitute has passed tow lie-detector tests and convinced the county's chief prosecutor that he is not guilty of overcharging he state for his moving expenses. He said he does not plan to seek an indictment of Huber. However {he} intends to present to a grand-jury evidence against Val E Pochay, the Isntitute's suspended associate director.

http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/wvc76b00/pdf


1981 Oct 10 and 18th: Singletary met with Huber to emphasise that the University would only assist Huber rid himself of the criminal charges if Huber would resign from the university. Huber secretly taped these meetings with a concealed recorder The Fayette County commonwealth attorney, Larry Roberts, was intending to prosecute him for allegedly defrauding the university of about $8,000 in moving expenses. One of Singletary's conditions was that this was to be repaid, and that he resign his tenured professorship at the UK medical school and leave the state.


1981 Oct 23 President Otis A Singletry of the University of Kentucky (UK) informed the UK trustees that Huber had been fired from the Institute for "unsatisfactory administrative performance". This left him as a professor at the University's Medical School.


1981 Oct 24 Kentucky University President Otis Singletary fired Huber for "unsatisfactory administrtive performance. Huber's dismissal came nearly seven months after he was suspended as director of the troubled insitutte, which had received nearly $35 million in state tax money over the past decade for tobacco research. He retained his tenureed professorship at the UK Medical school. http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/wvc76b00/pdf


1982 Feb 26 This bundle of cuttings of Huber's problems at the University of Kentucky has been faxed to someone at this time. Why? http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/wvc76b00/pdf


1983 Dec 31 The RJ Reynolds Tax Return shows they made a donations/contribution to

  • National Chamber Foundation -- $105,000 [published fake research for the industry]
  • The Nutrition Foundation Inc -- $50,000 [Fred Stare's operation]
  • Harvard Medical School -- $330,000 [Gary Huber's operation]
  • Harvard University -- $12,381 [unknown]
  • Springield College(YMCA) -- $72,850
  • YMCA North Carolina -- $600,000
  • Jackson Laboratory -- $124,200 [Lab of CC Little of CTR]
  • Washington University (MO), School of Medicine -- $216,045
  • Bowman Gray School of Medicine [Duke] -- $455,747
  • Duke University Medical Center -- $113,600
  • Crisis Control Ministry NC -- $100,000
  • North Carolina Tobacco Foundation -- $390,000
  • Summit School Inc (NC) -- $138,490
  • LULAC National Educational Service -- $5,500 [Hispanic lobbyists]
  • Committee for Economic Development (NY) -- $70,000
  • Eleanor Roosevelt Institute (NY) -- $200,000
  • Rockefeller University (NY) -- $277,665 [Fred Seitz]
  • Pennsylvania State Uni -- $279,014 [Wharton School lobbyists]
  • Medical College of PA -- $75,000
  • Clemson University (SC) -- $55,004 [lobbyists]
  • Uni of Tennessee -- $49,330
  • Southwest Foundation for Research & ?? (TX) -- $287,901
  • American Cultural Relations Foundation (VA) -- $75,000
  • Close Up Foundation (VA) -- $694,000 [Margery Kraus]
  • New River Community College (VA) -- $42,570
  • Virginia Poly Inst & State Uni -- $64,070 [Center for Public Choice economists]
  • University of Washington (WA) -- $535,000
  • National FFA Foundation, Inc. (WI) --$225,000

http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/jln27a00/pdf


1985-60000 1985-6 /E ??? Uni of Kentucky trying to recover money from him and Val Pochay 950160335


1985 Funding of $1.68 M to Uni of Texas Health Center between 1985 and 1996 was routed through an outside account bearing a Greek codename to keep if off hospital books and make it difficult for an outsider to find. Dr Huber says he is being made a scapegoat. Huber says that he went along with funding terms that were dictate by the law firms. 82525659 ,,2001382


1986 Dec /E [RJR Jones Day Reavis & Pogue document:]

The purpose of the Corporate Activity Project was to analyze plaintiffs' theories (particularly in New Jersey) pertaining to corporate misconduct issues and the evidence [likely to be exposed]

Although the industry funded a number of other outside' research projects. it did so only when it received clear advance assuranees of a 'favorable' outcome. For example. Dr. Gary Huber, then of Harvard, solicited industry funds with his view that "the number of people at potential risk from tobacco consumption is extremely small relative to the very large number of people who now smoke." Dr Huber's research led him to what plaintiffs will characterize as a ridiculous conclusion that 'smoke appears to make [lung] cells more effective, rather than less.

After leaving Harvard, Dr Huber was "temporarily reassigned" from his position as Director of the University of Kentucky Tobacco and Health Research Institute "until an investigation of possible criminal charges" was completed. The charges included misuse of university money, falsified research data, and receipt of money from tobacco companies (which apparently was prohibited by the University of Kentucky program).

See page 33  http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/rrx95a00/pdf   

1989 Sep 29 On SH&B A/C Medical Witness Maintainance and Development program p 47 B&W accounts from SHB 680706292


Huber's position at Kentucky University becomes untennable. He finds another position at a Texas University. But first they give him a trip to Australia to appear as a tobacco witness in the AFCO [Australian Federation of Consumer Organisations] trial.

1990 On list of Risk Assess Criticisms 2501191209


1990 Mar 15 Leo Dreyer reporting on ETS witness program of SH&B to ETS Committee. At Tony Andrade's suggestion, we anticipate meeting with Dr. Huber after the AFCO trial to obtain his general ETS overview and de-briefing. http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/sjg22d00/pdf


1990 Mar 19 CONFIDENTIAL Discussion Points for ETS Committee (probably by Leo Dreyer of SH&B). Huber [after AFCO] - status of subpoena http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/rjg22d00/pdf


1990 Apr 11-12 and later May 7-8 gave evidence at AFCO/TIA case. AFCO filed an application on June 11, 1987 in the Federal Court of Australia alleging a breach of Section 52 of the Australian Trade Practices Act by the Tobacco Institute of Australia (its ad had claimed "there is little evidence and nothing which proves scientifically that cigarette smoking causes disease in nonsmoker. ]

AFCO sought an injunction to prevent TIA from repeating the statement in the first advertisement and also sought its court costs. TIA contended that the epidemiological studies have methodological flaws and that, in any avent, the studies, even when considered in conjunction with other factors, provide, at most, possible suggestions of an association between ETS and disease, and do not provide any evidence of causation. TIA argued that to establish causation, there also must be evidence from animal studies and an understanding of the disease mechanism, since these two elements were lacking, TIA urged that there is no scientific proof nor more than a little evidence that ETS causes any disease.

Those giving evidence for the TIA (c Mar - July 1990) were all the old tobacco regulars:

  • John W Clayton Jr, Toxicologist
  • Gary L Huber, Pulmonary physician (... for 5 days)
  • Max W Layard, Statistician
  • George B Leslie, Toxicologist
  • Sven Malmfors, Toxicologists
  • Richard Tweedie, Statistician (... for 5 days)
  • Bruce A Warren, Pathologist
  • Philip Witorsch, Pulmonary physician

The Justice's [Morling] decision of February 7, 1991 concluded that the statement was false and misleading as of July 1, 1986, [He stated] "there is more than a little evidence and indeed scientific proof that environmental tobacco smoke causes lung cancer, respiratory disease (limited to such disease in children under twelve months of age) and attacks of asthma in nonsmokers.

http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/qei49e00/pdf


1990 Apr 19 to July 16: In the AFCO case Clayton Utz imported, John W Clayton Jr, Gary L Huber, Maxwell W Layard, George B Leslie, Sven Malmfors, Richard Tweedie, Bruce A Warren and Philip Witorsch. http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/kee87e00/pdf


1990 Jun 3

Compare the scientist attacking the Envionmental Protection Agency ,
1989 Nov 19: [Wrong date on document] The Environmenal Protection Agency (EPA) was in the process of publicly asserting that second-hand smoke (ETS) was a known carcinogen ("risk assessment"). This is a draft speech script prepared for a media briefing by Dr Don de Bethizy, sentior toxicologist at RJ Reynolds. They have lined up all the industry's favourite scientific touts who are being paid to attack

..."the scientific merit of two EPA draft documents -- the ETS risk assessment and the workplace smoking guide" [which he says] contain many major scientific shortcomings. The time we have today only permits us to scratch the surface.
      [In fact they dug out the deepest slime in the shit-pit. Every scientist mentioned here is a long-term tobacco industry science-for-sale entrepreneur or witness for hire.] Today, you'll hear why

  • Gray Robertson, an internationally regarded expert on indoor air quality, believes the Workplace Smoking Guide is poorly conceived, with conclusions that are ill-considered.
          [owner of ACVA/HBI -- the most corrupt of all the indoor air testing company employed by the tobacco industry. He was one of the industry's main contract lobbyists.]
  • After Gray Robertson, you'll hear from Dr Phil Witorsch, pulmonary physician and a clinical professor of medicine at George Washington University Medical Center. He will detail the specific reasons he believes the EPA has drawn invalid from evidence concerning the relationship betenn ETS and respiratory diseases in children.
          [He spent most of his time as a tobacco consultant, travelling around the world to provide witness services for the tobacco industry in court cases. He was a founding member of the notorious IAPAG (Indoor Air Pollution Advisory Group) which was a 'WhiteCoats' organisation run by tobacco lawyers Covington & Burling.]
  • Dr. John Wesley Clayton, professor emeritus of pharmacology and toxicology at the University of Arizona, and former president of the International Congress of Toxicologists, will discuss the available toxicological data on ETS. None of these data appears in the Risk Assessment. And -- more important -- none supports the contention that ETS is a human carcinogen.
        [Clayon had then been receiving CTR grants for 15 years, and in return, on his retirement, he had become a professional witness who worked extensively for the Tobacco Institute (and probably any other industry with the funds). He was handled by lawyers Shook Hardy & Bacon.]
  • Dr Maurice E LeVois, a highly experienced epidemiologist who has designed large studies for the US government will detail some important omissions in the Risk Assessment. As Dr LeVois will point out,the draft arbitrarily omits important epidemiological, dosimetric, medical and statistical evidence that conflicts with the conclusions reached by the EPA.
          [LeVois was, at various times, the partner of Max Layard and also George Carlo -- both notorious science-for-sale entrepreneurs (Carlo also for the cellphone industry). During the 1990s they worked almost full-time for two industries -- tobacco and dioxin/herbicides -- mainly through infiltrating organisations like Veterams Affairs and conducting their fake studies]
  • Dr. Richard L Tweedie, the dean of information and computing sciences at Bond University in Australia, will present the findings of his own analysis of the epidemiologic studies conducted on ETS. And he will discuss some major differences between his conclusions and those reached by the EPA.
        [Tweedie and his girlfriend (also a long-term tobacco tout) Kerry Mengerson were rewarded with an endowed chair at the University of Colorado]
  • Peter N. Lee, a British statisticianwhose work is frequently cited by the EPA in the
  • Risk Assessment, will explain why the misclassification adjustment made by the EPA is mathematically incorrect.
          [Lee spent his life as a full-time contractor in statistics to the Tobacco Advisory Committee (TAC) of the UK. He was retained to try to find holes in any adverse scientific finding.] Dr William J. Butler, a biostatistician, will focus on the EPA's failure to identify or discuss several important confounding factors that could account for most -- if not all -- of the increased risk noted by the EPA.
          [Butler was a contract scientific lobbyist from the company Failure Anaiysis, Inc. Butler and this company worked extensively for the tobacco industry: he was one of their regular witnesses used with State Assembly hearings. He also spoke at Philip Morris's closed McGill Uni. ETS symposium -- which only enrolled paid industry touts.]
  • Dr Joseph L Fleiss, the head of the division of biostatistics at the Columbia University School of Public Health, will discuss a number of considerations that make meta-analyis an invalid basis for drawing conclusions about ETS.
          [A regular Tobacco Institute consultant and speaker used at fake/closed conferences. (McGill Uni.)]
  • Dr. Paul Switzer, a professor of statistics at Stanford University, will focus on a number of statistical uncertainties, inconsistencies and biases that seriously undermine the scientific credibility of the Risk Assessment .
          [Another regular scientific witness who also played a key role in the fake McGill University ETS Symposou,]
  • Finally, Dr W Gary Flamm, the president of the International Society for Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, will talk about serious violations of scientific objectivity contained within the .document.
          [The Society was a front for a group of science-for-sale toxicologist who worked for a range of industries with poisoning and polluting problems. Flamm also lectured at McGill.]

http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/inx14d00/pdf

1990 Jun 3

Compare the scientist attacking the Envionmental Protection Agency ,
1989 Nov 19: [Wrong date on document] The Environmenal Protection Agency (EPA) was in the process of publicly asserting that second-hand smoke (ETS) was a known carcinogen ("risk assessment"). This is a draft speech script prepared for a media briefing by Dr Don de Bethizy, sentior toxicologist at RJ Reynolds. They have lined up all the industry's favourite scientific touts who are being paid to attack

..."the scientific merit of two EPA draft documents -- the ETS risk assessment and the workplace smoking guide" [which he says] contain many major scientific shortcomings. The time we have today only permits us to scratch the surface.
      [In fact they dug out the deepest slime in the shit-pit. Every scientist mentioned here is a long-term tobacco industry science-for-sale entrepreneur or witness for hire.] Today, you'll hear why

  • Gray Robertson, an internationally regarded expert on indoor air quality, believes the Workplace Smoking Guide is poorly conceived, with conclusions that are ill-considered.
          [owner of ACVA/HBI -- the most corrupt of all the indoor air testing company employed by the tobacco industry. He was one of the industry's main contract lobbyists.]
  • After Gray Robertson, you'll hear from Dr Phil Witorsch, pulmonary physician and a clinical professor of medicine at George Washington University Medical Center. He will detail the specific reasons he believes the EPA has drawn invalid from evidence concerning the relationship betenn ETS and respiratory diseases in children.
          [He spent most of his time as a tobacco consultant, travelling around the world to provide witness services for the tobacco industry in court cases. He was a founding member of the notorious IAPAG (Indoor Air Pollution Advisory Group) which was a 'WhiteCoats' organisation run by tobacco lawyers Covington & Burling.]
  • Dr. John Wesley Clayton, professor emeritus of pharmacology and toxicology at the University of Arizona, and former president of the International Congress of Toxicologists, will discuss the available toxicological data on ETS. None of these data appears in the Risk Assessment. And -- more important -- none supports the contention that ETS is a human carcinogen.
        [Clayon had then been receiving CTR grants for 15 years, and in return, on his retirement, he had become a professional witness who worked extensively for the Tobacco Institute (and probably any other industry with the funds). He was handled by lawyers Shook Hardy & Bacon.]
  • Dr Maurice E LeVois, a highly experienced epidemiologist who has designed large studies for the US government will detail some important omissions in the Risk Assessment. As Dr LeVois will point out,the draft arbitrarily omits important epidemiological, dosimetric, medical and statistical evidence that conflicts with the conclusions reached by the EPA.
          [LeVois was, at various times, the partner of Max Layard and also George Carlo -- both notorious science-for-sale entrepreneurs (Carlo also for the cellphone industry). During the 1990s they worked almost full-time for two industries -- tobacco and dioxin/herbicides -- mainly through infiltrating organisations like Veterams Affairs and conducting their fake studies]
  • Dr. Richard L Tweedie, the dean of information and computing sciences at Bond University in Australia, will present the findings of his own analysis of the epidemiologic studies conducted on ETS. And he will discuss some major differences between his conclusions and those reached by the EPA.
        [Tweedie and his girlfriend (also a long-term tobacco tout) Kerry Mengerson were rewarded with an endowed chair at the University of Colorado]
  • Peter N. Lee, a British statisticianwhose work is frequently cited by the EPA in the
  • Risk Assessment, will explain why the misclassification adjustment made by the EPA is mathematically incorrect.
          [Lee spent his life as a full-time contractor in statistics to the Tobacco Advisory Committee (TAC) of the UK. He was retained to try to find holes in any adverse scientific finding.] Dr William J. Butler, a biostatistician, will focus on the EPA's failure to identify or discuss several important confounding factors that could account for most -- if not all -- of the increased risk noted by the EPA.
          [Butler was a contract scientific lobbyist from the company Failure Anaiysis, Inc. Butler and this company worked extensively for the tobacco industry: he was one of their regular witnesses used with State Assembly hearings. He also spoke at Philip Morris's closed McGill Uni. ETS symposium -- which only enrolled paid industry touts.]
  • Dr Joseph L Fleiss, the head of the division of biostatistics at the Columbia University School of Public Health, will discuss a number of considerations that make meta-analyis an invalid basis for drawing conclusions about ETS.
          [A regular Tobacco Institute consultant and speaker used at fake/closed conferences. (McGill Uni.)]
  • Dr. Paul Switzer, a professor of statistics at Stanford University, will focus on a number of statistical uncertainties, inconsistencies and biases that seriously undermine the scientific credibility of the Risk Assessment .
          [Another regular scientific witness who also played a key role in the fake McGill University ETS Symposou,]
  • Finally, Dr W Gary Flamm, the president of the International Society for Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, will talk about serious violations of scientific objectivity contained within the .document.
          [The Society was a front for a group of science-for-sale toxicologist who worked for a range of industries with poisoning and polluting problems. Flamm also lectured at McGill.]

http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/inx14d00/pdf

1990060t 1990 Jun to mid 1991: In its defense against AFCO (Australian Federation of Consumer Organisations) over the charge of misleading advertising, the Tobacco Institute of Australia (TIA) under Donna Mayne-Staunton called eight expert witnesses -- six imported from the Shook Hardy & Bacon stable of witnesses in the US. They were :

  • Professor Richard Tweedie , a statistician who is presently Dean of Information and Computing Sciences at Bond University.
        [Tweedie and his girlfriend (also a long-term tobacco tout) Kerry Mengerson were rewarded with an endowed chair at the University of Colorado]
  • Professor Phillip Witorsch of Washington D.C. Professor Witorsch specialises in respiratory medicine. He is presently Clinical Professor of Medicine, Adjunct Professor of Physiology and Director, Section of Environmental Medicine and Toxicology, Division of Pulmonary Diseases and Allergy at the Department of Medicine at the George Washington University of Medicine and Health Sciences in Washington DC. Professor Witorsch is also Adjunct Professor of Pharmacology at Georgetown University Schools of Medicine and Dentistry.
        [He spent most of his time as a tobacco consultant, travelling around the world to provide witness services for the tobacco industry in court cases. With his brother Rafael, he was a founding member of the notorious IAPAG (Indoor Air Pollution Advisory Group) which was a 'WhiteCoats' organisation run by tobacco lawyers Covington & Burling.]
  • Dr. Sven Eric Torbjorn MaImfors of Enebyberg, Sweden. Dr. Malmfors is an independent consultant in toxicology and risk assessment. He holds a degree which is equivalent to a Bachelor of Medicine degree in Australia. Dr. Malmfors is an Assistant Professor of Toxicology at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm.
        [Malmfors' primary business was Malmfors Consultin, a lobby firm in Sweden. He was also a WhiteCoat member of IAPAG and the related UK WhiteCoats organisation, ARIA (Associates for Research in Indoor Air). He founded and ran the Scandinavian version known as EGIL.]
  • Mr. George Brian Leslie of Bedfordshire, England. Mr. Leslie is an independent toxicologist and pharmacologist. He holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Physiology. As an independent consultant in toxicology he has lectured in the subject to students at, inter alia, the London University, the Royal Veterinary College, the School of Pharmacology, the Royal Post Graduate Medical School, the University of Leads, the University of Dijon and the University of Wales.
        [Leslie was the co-founder (with Professor Roger Perry) and administrator (with his wife) of two Philip Morris-funded front/laundry organisations -- ARIA in the UK (for laundering payments to British WhiteCoats) and IAI (Indoor Air International) a Swiss-based, so-called 'scientific society' which ran manipulated conferences. He also produced their journal and newsletter, both funded by the tobacco industry. With Roger Perry, he was also Philip Morris's main European recruiter of Asian WhiteCoats.]
  • Professor Gary Louis Huber of Tyler, Texas. Professor Huber specialises in respiratory medicine. Professor Huber is Professor of Medicine in the Department of Medicine at the University of Texas Health Centre at Tyler, Texas and in the Department of Medicine at the University of Texas Health Science Centre at Houston, Texas.
        [Huber probably took more money from the tobacco industry than any other medical researcher. He was forced out of Harvard University, then needed an armed body guard (supplied by RJ Reynolds) at Kentucky University; accused of fraud and forced to resign. While at Texas University (shortly after this) he became entangled in his lies during a court-case, and then turned whistleblower -- revealing everything about his secret life working for tobacco.]
  • Professor Emeritus John Wesley Clayton. Professor Clayton is Professor Emertus of Pharmacology and Toxicology at the University of Arizona in Tucson, Arizona. Until retirement in 1989 he held the position of Professor of Pharmacology and Toxicology, College of Pharmacy and Professor of Microbiology and Medical Immunology at the University of Arizona.
        [Clayon had then been receiving CTR grants for 15 years, and in return, on his retirement, he had become a professional witness who worked extensively for the Tobacco Institute (and probably any other industry with the funds). He was handled by lawyers Shook Hardy & Bacon.]
  • Dr. Maxwell William Layard. Dr. Layard is a partner in Layard Associates, a firm of consulting statisticians in California. He has been in that position since 1989. Prior to that time Dr. Layard was at various periods, an Assistant Professor of Mathematics at the University of California. Davis, a statistician employed by the National Cancer Institute, a Biostatistician at the U.S. Veterans Administration and a manager of Biostatistics and Epidemiology at Failure Analysis Associates in California.
        [Statistical consultant (Layard & Associates) who depended upon the tobacco industry for most of his income. His associates included Maurice LeVois, who was even more corrupt.]
  • Professor Bruce Albert Warren, Professor of Pathology at the University of New South Wales.
        [Egoistic Professor of Pathology with political inclinations.]

[With the exception of Warren, the lone Australian, all of the above were well-known, paid scientific touts for the tobacco industry who had worked for many years with their US and UK tobacco industries. ]
Each of the experts testified that the statement, the subject of the proceedings, was an accurate characterisation of the evidence concerning ETS. [Source: TIA document] http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/otl30a99/pdf See also tobacco industry time-table for witnesses. http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/bhx59b00/pdf


1990060t 1990 Jun to mid 1991: In its defense against AFCO (Australian Federation of Consumer Organisations) over the charge of misleading advertising, the Tobacco Institute of Australia (TIA) under Donna Mayne-Staunton called eight expert witnesses -- six imported from the Shook Hardy & Bacon stable of witnesses in the US. They were :

  • Professor Richard Tweedie , a statistician who is presently Dean of Information and Computing Sciences at Bond University.
        [Tweedie and his girlfriend (also a long-term tobacco tout) Kerry Mengerson were rewarded with an endowed chair at the University of Colorado]
  • Professor Phillip Witorsch of Washington D.C. Professor Witorsch specialises in respiratory medicine. He is presently Clinical Professor of Medicine, Adjunct Professor of Physiology and Director, Section of Environmental Medicine and Toxicology, Division of Pulmonary Diseases and Allergy at the Department of Medicine at the George Washington University of Medicine and Health Sciences in Washington DC. Professor Witorsch is also Adjunct Professor of Pharmacology at Georgetown University Schools of Medicine and Dentistry.
        [He spent most of his time as a tobacco consultant, travelling around the world to provide witness services for the tobacco industry in court cases. With his brother Rafael, he was a founding member of the notorious IAPAG (Indoor Air Pollution Advisory Group) which was a 'WhiteCoats' organisation run by tobacco lawyers Covington & Burling.]
  • Dr. Sven Eric Torbjorn MaImfors of Enebyberg, Sweden. Dr. Malmfors is an independent consultant in toxicology and risk assessment. He holds a degree which is equivalent to a Bachelor of Medicine degree in Australia. Dr. Malmfors is an Assistant Professor of Toxicology at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm.
        [Malmfors' primary business was Malmfors Consultin, a lobby firm in Sweden. He was also a WhiteCoat member of IAPAG and the related UK WhiteCoats organisation, ARIA (Associates for Research in Indoor Air). He founded and ran the Scandinavian version known as EGIL.]
  • Mr. George Brian Leslie of Bedfordshire, England. Mr. Leslie is an independent toxicologist and pharmacologist. He holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Physiology. As an independent consultant in toxicology he has lectured in the subject to students at, inter alia, the London University, the Royal Veterinary College, the School of Pharmacology, the Royal Post Graduate Medical School, the University of Leads, the University of Dijon and the University of Wales.
        [Leslie was the co-founder (with Professor Roger Perry) and administrator (with his wife) of two Philip Morris-funded front/laundry organisations -- ARIA in the UK (for laundering payments to British WhiteCoats) and IAI (Indoor Air International) a Swiss-based, so-called 'scientific society' which ran manipulated conferences. He also produced their journal and newsletter, both funded by the tobacco industry. With Roger Perry, he was also Philip Morris's main European recruiter of Asian WhiteCoats.]
  • Professor Gary Louis Huber of Tyler, Texas. Professor Huber specialises in respiratory medicine. Professor Huber is Professor of Medicine in the Department of Medicine at the University of Texas Health Centre at Tyler, Texas and in the Department of Medicine at the University of Texas Health Science Centre at Houston, Texas.
        [Huber probably took more money from the tobacco industry than any other medical researcher. He was forced out of Harvard University, then needed an armed body guard (supplied by RJ Reynolds) at Kentucky University; accused of fraud and forced to resign. While at Texas University (shortly after this) he became entangled in his lies during a court-case, and then turned whistleblower -- revealing everything about his secret life working for tobacco.]
  • Professor Emeritus John Wesley Clayton. Professor Clayton is Professor Emertus of Pharmacology and Toxicology at the University of Arizona in Tucson, Arizona. Until retirement in 1989 he held the position of Professor of Pharmacology and Toxicology, College of Pharmacy and Professor of Microbiology and Medical Immunology at the University of Arizona.
        [Clayon had then been receiving CTR grants for 15 years, and in return, on his retirement, he had become a professional witness who worked extensively for the Tobacco Institute (and probably any other industry with the funds). He was handled by lawyers Shook Hardy & Bacon.]
  • Dr. Maxwell William Layard. Dr. Layard is a partner in Layard Associates, a firm of consulting statisticians in California. He has been in that position since 1989. Prior to that time Dr. Layard was at various periods, an Assistant Professor of Mathematics at the University of California. Davis, a statistician employed by the National Cancer Institute, a Biostatistician at the U.S. Veterans Administration and a manager of Biostatistics and Epidemiology at Failure Analysis Associates in California.
        [Statistical consultant (Layard & Associates) who depended upon the tobacco industry for most of his income. His associates included Maurice LeVois, who was even more corrupt.]
  • Professor Bruce Albert Warren, Professor of Pathology at the University of New South Wales.
        [Egoistic Professor of Pathology with political inclinations.]

[With the exception of Warren, the lone Australian, all of the above were well-known, paid scientific touts for the tobacco industry who had worked for many years with their US and UK tobacco industries. ]
Each of the experts testified that the statement, the subject of the proceedings, was an accurate characterisation of the evidence concerning ETS. [Source: TIA document] http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/otl30a99/pdf See also tobacco industry time-table for witnesses. http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/bhx59b00/pdf


1990 Oct List of objectors to EPA ETS risk assessment of Respiratory disorders in children http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/lny19e00/pdf


1990 Oct On List of Objectors to EPA ETS risk assessment in 2501096669


1990 Dec 5 Sam Chilcote of the Tobacco Institute is advising his Executive Committee (CEO's of the tobacco companies) that the Scientific Advisory Board of the EPA has finally issued a determination that passive smoking (ETS) is a Class A Carcinogen, and a likely cause of lung cancer. At a Public Hearing announcing this fact, time was left for tobacco company lobbyists to have their say:

  • Mr. Steven Parrish, Vice President, Philip Morris
  • Dr. Donald deBethizy
  • Dr.John Wesley Clayton
  • Dr. Maurice E LeVois
  • Dr. Richard Tweedie
  • Dr. Peter N Lee
  • Dr.William J Butler
  • Dr. Joseph L Fleiss
  • Dr. Paul Switzer
  • Dr.Philip Witorsch
  • Dr Gray Robertson
  • Dr W Gary Flamm

Also part of this package is the Tobacco Institute's submission which includes various scientists who didn't give direct testimony:

  • Mark J Reasor
  • James A Will
  • Domingo Aviado
  • Maxwell Layard
  • Alan J Gross
  • George Howard
  • Ronald D Hood,
  • Raphael J Witorsch.
  • S James Kilpatrick Jr
  • Gio Batta Gori
  • Nathan Mantel
  • Arthur Furst
  • Gary Huber
  • John A Todhunter

http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ipq06a99/pdf


1991 was working at the University of Texas.-- now at the University of Texas Health Center 2025528294


1991 Mar /E At Texas, Huber had now built a new support group. Research papers now list as co-authors:

  • Gary L Huber MD, University of Texas Health Center,
  • Robert E Brockie MD, Presbyterian Hospital of Dallas
  • Vjay K Mahajan MD, St Vincent's Hospital Medical College of Ohio.

Their conclusion is that "The majority of published data do not support the conclusion that exposure to the residual constituents of ETS is associated with lung cancer in nonsmokers." http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/hby83e00/pdf


1991 May 20 Giving talk on science and regulation 2026096152 2025527418


1991 Jun 2 Letter to Philip Morris "Proposal for Latin American Communications". Parker-Cleveland PR want to write newspaper stores, op-ed pieces, letters-to-editor, feature stories, etc (6 to 8 per month @ $125 per hour) to "dispel some of the myths already circulating about ETS". They plan to use authotatative material from:


1991 Jul Consumer's Research article - uses Linear risk/threshold arguments. Linear Risk Extrapolation "Because of the physiochemical nature of ETS, mainstream smoke and sidestream smoke differ, the extrapolation of health effects from studies of mainstream smoke of active smokers to nonsmokers exposed to ETS may not be appropriate ." [Nat Academy of Sciences...] Concept: Mathematical theory that assumes that if there is a definable disease risk for the active smoker, then a lesser risk exists for a non-smoker exposed to ETS, which can be projected directly or "linearily". Page 10 http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/mxw83e00/pdf


1992 Apr Huber has an article in Consumer's Research magazine: "Passive smoking and your heart" http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/oqk98e00/pdf


1992 May /E Kathleen Parker Cleveland draft article "Huber Story 1". She quotes the industry-funded article by Gary Huber, in the industry-funded magazine "Consumer Research." [Huber is now in Texas Health Center]

He and his fellow authors concluded that actions by companies and government to ban smoking are the result of political and emotional needs rather than a conclusion based on science.

"The facts are irrelevant," Huber said in a telephone interview following publication of the article. "The move to regulate passive smoking meets somebody's political agenda." This political.agenda apparently was set by Sir George Godber at a 1975 meeting of the World Health organization. Godber, noting that efforts to stop smokers through education and health warnings had filed, said at that meeting that the only alternative was to make smokers feel responsible for others' health.

    "The most effective way to reduce future tobacco cigarette smoking consumption would no be to warn the smokers of the potential adverse consequences of tobacco, but rather to induce a sense of concern and guilt -- concern and guilt not for the smokers themselves, but for causing harm to loved ones, family, and other nonsmokers in the smoker's environment."

By fostering the perception that environmental tobacco smoke is harmful to nonsmokers, active smoking progressively has become an undesirable and an antisocial behavior, according to Huber.

"I run smoking cessation programs," Huber said in the telephone interview. "Most come not because they want to quit smoking, but because smoking makes them socially uncomfortable."

http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ecr19e00/pdf


1992 Sep 14 A participants list for a 3-day conference on "Tobacco Smoking and Nutrition: Influence of Nutrition on Tobacco-associated Health Risk". The participants list includes: Frank Colby, William Simmons Gary Huber (Now Uni of Texas), Ragnar Rylander (Uni of Gothenberg), Jeffrey S Wigand (whistleblower), and Leonard Zahn -- plus about forty (probably) legitimate scientists. The University of Kentucky and its Tobacco & Health Research Center had about a dozen. http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/aav03f00/pdf


1993 with the Texas Health Center in Tyler 2045691952


1993 Sep 27 Huber is at Texas University when he hears about a new "sound science organisation" called TASSC. He sees the value of this to the tobacco industry and writes to advise Tony Andrade of SH&B of the think-tank's existance "I am pursuing the matter further and will keep you informed" he says.++++++++ [He obviously doesn't know that it is a tobacco industry subterfuge.] 2024233656


1993 Nov The Clinton Administration was planning to raise the EPA to cabinet-level status. TASSC gets underway with Garrey Curruthers conducting a major media tour promoting the sound-science/junk-science message.

  • Nov 28 1993 Denver Post "Here's how science might be used to keep science honest.

    The stated mission of the nonprofit corporation is to use its own scientific panel to "inform public officials, the media, and the general public about the consequences of inappropriate science," focusin on current examples of "unsound government research used to guide policy decisions. Compliance with environmental regulations cost the nation an incredible $115 billion in 1991 alone"

    Jan 2 1994 The Tampa Tribune Slogans no substitute for sound science.

    [Syndicted from LA Daily News] Among TASSC's goals: to Inform the general public about the consequences of inappropriate science by focusing attention of current examples of unsound government research used to guide policy decisions; to establish an educational out-reach program; and to offer resources to ensure that sound scientific principles are applied. Unfortunately, such skeptics as Bruce Ames, Lois Gold, Dixy Lee Ray and the late Aaron Wildavsky don't get attention with the same ease as star-studded environmental groups and enterprises like Greenpeace and the Walden Project.

    The writer, columnis Michelle Malkin, actually suggests that readers sign up for a free membership to TASSC.

The attached supporters list (as of Jan 18 1995) names, Bruce Ames, Joseph Bast, George Carlo, Bernard Cohen, Geraldine Cox, James Enstrom, James Fyock, Harvey Gold, Ronald Gots, Paul Grant, Alan Hedge, Gary Huber, Peter Huber, Thomas Jukes, Patrick Michaels, Henry Miller, Alan Moghissi, Donald Stedman, Richard Stroup, Thomas Wyrick. These are just the most obvious among the 520 or so listed -- many of them gullible academics; some small-business managers with a chip on their shoulder, many more corporate inhouse and external lobbyists for polluting organisations. While APCO actually ran the organisation through Steve Milloy and Garrey Curruthers, there was also an Advisory Board made up of scientific lobbyists who could link TASSC to political organisations and possible future corporate funders. Also mentioned as a supporter was:

Gary L Huber, MD Uni of Texas Health Center at Tyler TD

http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/hwo26b00/pdf


1993 Dec Writing to Germans lobbying for speech at conference 2028359696/9697


1994 The financial connection between Huber's work and the tobacco industry was not revealed until Business Week broke the story in 1994


1994 Good outline of him and his associates, now in Texas http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ysm22d00/pdf


1994 Mar Attack on Huber's "Smoke and Mirrors" article in Regulation (Cato) which was itself attacking the EPA 517261373


1994 May 14 Philip Morris Draft article attacking EPA. Gary Huber and Frederick Seitz are accusing the EPA of Junk Science. This article is being prepared for 'Mat distribution' to small newspapers who will use it intact -- with no editing or checking.


1995 /E "Next Time" document. This long RJ Reynolds document is on reactions to the 1988-89 launch of the Premier electric cigarette ("smells like burning rubber") and also on their plans to attack the problem during a relaunch, under the three code-names:

  • "XA". Like Salem or Winston
  • "XB". Light tasting cigarette like ULT
  • "XDU" Which will exceed Premier with lower tar scores (and more nicotine)

However this is a 'brainstorming' document and they recognise that to claim these cigarettes as "more safte" or "less risk" could involve them in litigation since they can't prove it without twenty years of research.

As Tom Griscom has stated, we need to understand our critics and their motivation.

  • Some are crusaders who want to eliminate all tobacoo use from society.
  • They will use any means available to achieve that end.
  • We are their enemies.

And also:
So what's the bottom line for scientists and health officials?

  • Either you believe smoking can and will disappear from society in the next 10-30 years, and will allow no product modifications that might deter people from quitting, and therefore "sacrifice" a generation or two of° smokers. or
  • You don't believe smoking will be absent from society in the near future and believe an ethical approach is product modification and as such the tobacco industry should be encouraged to make cigarettes with less "risk" , or
  • You haven't resolved this issue to have a point of view.

Many of our critics are on a crusade. That is they believe that one of the biggest achievements they could have is to eliminate tobacco smoking from society. They believe:

  • Smokng is one of the, or the, largest contributor to cancer in man and one of the larger contributors to heart disease.
  • Their belief is largely based on -
    1. Association of smoking and disease reported in epidemiology studies
    2. Lung changes and clinical changes described in smokers
    3. Plausibility arguments based on chemistry of tobacco smoke -- carcinogens, nicotine, and CO
    4. Skin-painting studies in rodents

They also plan to convene a panel of scientists and health officials to promote the new cigarette. [Many health officials are in favour of Premier-type nicotine delivery systems.]
They suggested:

  • ex FDA commissoners Joe Rodrick, Jere E Goyen ("Gerry"), Arthur Hayes.
    [All three had a consultantcy arrangement with Reynolds - Hayes became an employee]

They also proposed seek endorsement from scientists who had been used with the previous Premier panel. [This is a mix of obviously corrupt scientists, with some naive and 'don't knows'.]

The committee might be chaired by Bob Squire who has published on weighing comparisons between different compounds or substances. Such a committee should have M.D.'s, Toxicologists, and experienced pathologist. An example of a committee might be:.

  • Bob Squires - Johns Hopkins Univ.
    [tobacco friendly consultant; also worked for chemical industry.]
  • Gerry Wogan - MIT [unknown]
  • Gio Gori - formerly NCI [lifelong tobacco scientific lobbyist]
  • Dietrich Hoffmann - American Health Foundation.
    [An anti-smoker, but with major tobacco funding]
  • Bernard Wagoner [Wagner] - Columbia Univ.
    [Major tobacco industry scientific dogsbody]
  • Roger Jenkins - Oak Ridge Labs [well funded by tobacco]
  • Alvin Feinstein, Rockefeller [A lifelong tobacco lobbyist]
  • Joe Brain - Harvard School of Public Health [unknown]
  • Gary Huber - Univ. of Texas
    [A lifelong scientific corrupter and tobacco lobbyist, who later turned whistlebower]

http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/rxf63d00/pdf

[The most notable thing about this puff-piece is the complete absence of any mention of his years of work at Harvard University, or at the Kentucky University -- both of which threw him out.]


1995 Apr 19 In Texas with Brigid Byrne - still doing work for the tobacco industry . - 517261194


1995 Apr 20 RJ Reynolds has produced a report labeled "SAMMEC - Recent Efforts"

The tobacco industry had continued its funding of attacks on this economic model using the services of

  • Theodor Sterling;
  • John Ashford [Uni of Exeter UK];
  • Richard Wagner; Richard Ault and Robert Ekelund;
  • SAI [Stanley Greenfield and Systems Analysis International ;
  • Jones Day Reavis & Pogue [lawyers];
  • William Butler [Could be either WH or WJ Butler];
  • Gary Huber and Birgid Byrne.

http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/jnd70d00/pdf


1995 May Brigid Byrne says Huber was coached by RJR lawyers before May 1995 hearing over CRS report, and that she was cornered in toilet by another. Described as "former aide" who "travelled with him" to Washington. 520762258/2266


1995 May 22 Huber, G, Levois, M, Layard M, Gough, M and other shonks + Fontham, Elizabeth ??? Scientists "roundtable" being organised by SH&B - 2050982514


1995 Jun At the Uni of Texas . On the List of Chris Coggin's report on RJR meeting with CRA staff and EPA people over preparation of the ETS Report. +++CRS+++ 99029775/9776


1996 Oct Donald E Gardner is sitting on a Scientific Advisory Panel (put together by Bernard M Wagner Associates) along with Gary Huber, Rudolph Jaegar, and Gary Burger (ex CIAR Board member and R&D at RJR). http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/aah30d00/pdf


1997 Dec 21 Huber turned whistleblowere -- confession and history -- in a Texas Medicaid law suit http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/qxo01d00/pdf

1998 Mar 3 Deposition of Huber in Dunn v RJR Nabisco. The summary says:

The prior deposition of the plaintiffs' expert witness, a professor of medicine, was played to the jury. He described the research he conducted on smoking and health on animals and humans, which was funded by the tobacco industry.

He stated that lawyers affiliated with the tobacco industry began to interfere with the research and effectuated suppression of scientific information. He suggested that this was part of a broader disinformation campaign. He said the findings of his research would support the concept that nicotine was a dependence-producing substance.

He indicated that he was never told by anyone from the cigarette companies that the Harvard project was being used for political or public relations. He explained that he felt manipulated by the tobacco companies because scientific information that would have been helpful was not shared, scientific support that appears to have been available was not given to researchers, and a commitment to funding was not forthcoming.

http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/qbr07a00/pdf


1998 Aug 11 The Working Draft (Confidential) of a lawyer's list of tobacco industry helpers -- under the title: Expert / Consultant Submissions Regarding ETS to Regulatory Agencies on Behalf of Philip Morris Gary Huber of University of Texas-Tyler is one of the hundreds listed as having given evidence for Philip Morris at various hearings, etc. http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ybo17c00/pdf


2008 Jun Gary Louis Huber was practicing as a physician in Tyler Texas.




<tdo>resource_id=6322 resource_code=huber_gary search_term=Gary Huber</tdo> Categry:Tobaccowiki articles needing cleanup