If There Was Any Doubt Of Labour's Anti...
News3 mins ago
No best answer has yet been selected by Scotman84. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.According to the July 2004 issue of New Internationalist,
In 1978, the US Tobacco Institute said � What the smoker does to himself may be his business, but what the smoker does to the non-smoker is quite a different matter � This we see as the most dangerous development yet to the viability of the tobacco industry.
In the 1990s, Philip Morris spent millions of dollars on a campaign to sabotage a study by the International Agency for Research on Cancer on the dangers of environmental tobacco smoke. Their strategy was
1. Delay the progress and/or release of the study
2. Affect the wording iof its conclusions and official statement of results
3. Neutralise possible negative results of the study
4. Counteract the potential impact of the study on governmental policy, public opinion and actions by private employers and proprietors.
The issue is largely devoted to smoking and the actions of tobacco companies.
www.newint.org
Thanks estie - I knew it existed but couldn't find it.
Scotman - my experience of dealing with insurance companies over many years leads me to believe that they rarely get proper advice on risks. They tend to believe what they have always believed.
As an example, a friend was refused house insurance because of flooding, on the basis of her postcode. This despite millions of pounds having been spent on eliminating flooding in the area.