CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 15Global Public Health Policies and EpidemiologySmoking Behavior and CessationPharmaceutical industry and healthcare

Local Nordic tobacco interests collaborated with multinational companies to maintain a united front and undermine tobacco control policies

Open access
Hiilamo, Heikki, Glantz, Stanton A·2013·Tobacco Control
DOI 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2011-050149PMC PMC3346886
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To analyse how local tobacco companies in the Nordic countries, individually and through National Manufacturers' Associations, cooperated with British American Tobacco and Philip Morris in denying the health hazards of smoking and undermining tobacco control. METHODS: Analysis of tobacco control policies in the Nordic countries and tobacco industry documents. RESULTS: Nordic countries were early adopters of tobacco control policies. The multinational tobacco companies recognised this fact and mobilised to oppose these policies, in part because of fear that they would set unfavourable precedents. Since at least 1972, the Nordic tobacco companies were well informed about and willing to participate in the multinational companies activities to obscure the health dangers of smoking and secondhand smoke and to oppose tobacco control policies. Cooperation between multinational companies, Nordic national manufacturer associations and local companies ensured a united front on smoking and health issues in the Nordic area that was consistent with the positions that the multinational companies were taking. This cooperation delayed smoke-free laws and undermined other tobacco control measures. CONCLUSIONS: Local tobacco companies worked with multinational companies to undermine tobacco control in distant and small Nordic markets because of concern that pioneering policies initiated in Nordic countries would spread to bigger market areas. Claims by the local Nordic companies that they were not actively involved with the multinationals are not supported by the facts. These results also demonstrate that the industry appreciates the global importance of both positive and negative public health precedents in tobacco control.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2011-050149

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The network recognised the importance of legal precedents in tobacco control, contributing to their decision to support Uruguay's regulations as a global tobacco control issue.

    “The network recognised the importance of legal precedents in tobacco control,97 contributing to their decision to support Uruguay’s regulations as a global tobacco control issue.”

    From Defending strong tobacco packaging and labelling regulations in Uruguay: transnational tobacco control network versus Philip Morris International (2018) · cites this paper as [97]

    The Abstract Conclusions say the tobacco industry appreciated the global importance of tobacco-control precedents, and the Discussion Conclusions emphasize the importance of setting and defending precedents for both sides. The paper does not establish that the network in the citing sentence recognized this importance; it examines Nordic tobacco companies, not that network. The citation appears before the clause about supporting Uruguay’s regulations, so that decision is not treated as attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Constitutional courts upheld strong tobacco control policies in fourteen countries.

    “Constitutional courts upheld strong tobacco control policies in fourteen countries.17199399”

    From Defending strong tobacco packaging and labelling regulations in Uruguay: transnational tobacco control network versus Philip Morris International (2018) · cites this paper as [97]

    The Results discuss smoke-free laws enacted in Nordic countries, but not constitutional-court rulings. Searches for constitutional courts and fourteen countries found no passage addressing the claimed rulings; the court cases mentioned in the Introduction and Discussion concern different matters. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.75)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 35

  1. [3]Egsmose T The tobacco problem in Denmark and the difficulties in implementing an organized plan of action Tokai J Exp Clin Med 1985 10 457 63 3836528
  2. [5]Thoma W Remarks by Walter Thoma PMI Corporate Affairs Conference Boca Raton, Florida Wednesday 30 11 1988 Philip Morris http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/caj22e00 accessed 1 Oct 2010
  3. [6]Robinson JB ETS in Nordic Countries Presentation to PM EEC ETS Conference, 12–14 November 1986 Hotel La Reserve Bellevue, Geneva 14 11 1986 Philip Morris http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/etu22e00 accessed 6 Oct 2010
  4. [7]Tobacco Institute Inc U.S Exhibit 20,346, Meeting, “Project Down under Conference Notes” June 24, 1987 24 6 1987 Datta http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ftp36b00 accessed 11 Oct 2010
  5. [8]Hiilamo HT Tobacco control implications of the first European product liability suit Tob Control 2005 14 22 30 15735296 PMC1747990
  6. [13]Malone RE Balbach ED Tobacco industry documents: treasure trove or quagmire? Tob Control 2000 9 334 8 10982579 PMC1748361
  7. [15]Glantz S Slade J Bero L The Cigarette Papers Berkeley University of California Press 1996
  8. [25]Thornton RE Letter from Re Thornton to W van Putten Regarding Confidential Report on a Conference 22 11 1985 British American Tobacco http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ejm85a99 accessed 5 Oct 2010
  9. [56]McDaniel PA Intinarelli G Malone RE Tobacco industry issues management organizations: creating a global corporate network to undermine public health Global Health 2008 4 2 18201375 PMC2265275
  10. [57]Carter SM Cooperation and control: the Tobacco Institute of Australia Tob Control 2003 12 Suppl 3 iii54 60 14645949 PMC1766127
  11. [79]Smith G Nordic Tobacco Industries Symposium on ETS Stockholm - March 16th, 1987 18 3 1987 British American Tobacco http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/zut40a99 accessed 30 Sep 2010
  12. [83]Muggli ME Forster JL Hurt RD The smoke you don’t see: uncovering tobacco industry scientific strategies aimed against environmental tobacco smoke policies Am J Public Health 2001 91 1419 23 11527774 PMC1446797
  13. [84]Barnes R Hammond S Glantz S The tobacco industry’s role in the 16 cities study of secondhand tobacco smoke: do the data support the stated conclusions? Environ Health Perspect 2006 114 1980 7 PMC1764165 17185281
  14. [94]Drope J Chapman S Tobacco industry efforts at discrediting scientific knowledge of environmental tobacco smoke: a review of internal industry documents J Epidemiol Community Health 2001 55 588 94 11449018 PMC1731959
  15. [95]Barnoya J Glantz SA The tobacco industry’s worldwide ETS consultants project: European and Asian components Eur J Public Health 2006 16 69 77 16076855
  16. [96]Barnoya J Glantz SA The tobacco industry and secondhand smoke: lessons from Central and South America Ethn Dis 2003 13 S88 90 13677420
  17. [97]Assunta M Fields N Knight J “Care and feeding”: the Asian environmental tobacco smoke consultants programme Tob Control 2004 13 Suppl 2 ii4 12 15564219 PMC1766156
  18. [98]Lambe M Hallhagen E Boethius G [The cynical game of the tobacco industry. Many years’ efforts to deny or cover-up the negative effects of tobacco are revealed by the forced publication of internal documents] (In Swedish) Lakartidningen 2002 99 2756 62 12101604
  19. [99]Hiilamo H Tobacco industry strategy to undermine tobacco control in Finland Tob Control 2003 12 414 23 14660780 PMC1747767
  20. [118]Neilsen K Glantz SA A tobacco industry study of airline cabin air quality: dropping inconvenient findings Tob Control 2004 13 Suppl 1 i20 9 14985613 PMC1766143
  21. [122]Muggli ME Hurt RD Repace J The tobacco industry’s political efforts to derail the EPA report on ETS Am J Prev Med 2004 26 167 77 14751332
  22. [124]Ong EK Glantz SA Tobacco industry efforts subverting international agency for research on cancer’s second-hand smoke study Lancet 2000 355 1253 9 10770318
  23. [135]Rylander R The humble defense Eur J Public Health 2001 11 460 1 11766493
  24. [171]Drope J Bialous SA Glantz SA Tobacco industry efforts to present ventilation as an alternative to smoke-free environments in North America Tob Control 2004 13 Suppl 1 i41 7 14985616 PMC1766145
  25. [172]Chapman S Penman A “Can’t stop the boy”: Philip Morris’ use of Healthy Buildings International to prevent workplace smoking bans in Australia Tob Control 2003 12 Suppl 3 iii107 12 14645956 PMC1766125
  26. [176]Dearlove JV Bialous SA Glantz SA Tobacco industry manipulation of the hospitality industry to maintain smoking in public places Tob Control 2002 11 94 104 12034999 PMC1763854
  27. [184]Assunta M Chapman S “The world’s most hostile environment”: how the tobacco industry circumvented Singapore’s advertising ban Tob Control 2004 13 Suppl 2 ii51 7 15564221 PMC1766159
  28. [185]Kyriss T Potschke-Langer M Gruning T [The German cigarette industry association—obstructing effective tobacco control in Germany] (In German) Gesundheitswesen 2008 70 315 24 18604770
  29. [186]Yach D Bettcher D Globalisation of tobacco industry influence and new global responses Tob Control 2000 9 206 16 10841858 PMC1748346
  30. [187]Smith EA ‘It’s interesting how few people die from smoking’: tobacco industry efforts to minimize risk and discredit health promotion Eur J Public Health 2007 17 162 70 16837518
  31. [188]Lambe M Swedish snus for tobacco harm reduction Lancet 2007 370 1206 author reply 1206–7 17920911
  32. [189]Hiilamo H Hirschhorn N Tobacco industry documents from outside sources: new perspectives on industry strategies on local levels Cent Eur J Public Health 2006 14 175 9 17243496
  33. [191]MacKenzie R Collin J Sriwongcharoen K “If we can just ‘stall’ new unfriendly legislations, the scoreboard is already in our favour”: transnational tobacco companies and ingredients disclosure in Thailand Tob Control 2004 13 Suppl 2 ii79 87 15564225 PMC1766166
  34. [194]LeGresley EM Muggli ME Hurt RD Playing hide-and-seek with the tobacco industry Nicotine Tob Res 2005 7 27 40 15804675
  35. [195]Muggli ME LeGresley EM Hurt RD Big tobacco is watching: British American Tobacco’s surveillance and information concealment at the Guildford depository Lancet 2004 363 1812 19 15172782

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hiilamo, H., & Glantz, S. A.
Affiliations
University of California, San Francisco (US)
Corresponding author
Glantz, Stanton A
ORCID
Venue
Tobacco Control
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2011-12-23
Volume
22
Issue
2
Pages
e2-e2
ISSN
  • 0964-4563 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-3318
DOI
10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2011-050149
PMC
PMC3346886
OpenAlex
W2101392902
Cited by
15
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2012: 3
FWCI
2.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Tobacco Control (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
  • Nordisk Ministerråd
  • National Cancer Institute (R01CA087472, CA 87472)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare
Keywords
tobacco industry, tobacco control, British American Tobacco, Philip Morris, united front, smoking bans, passive smoking, health effects of smoking, Nordic countries, industry documents
MeSH terms
Smoking Prevention, Humans, International Cooperation, Lobbying, Public Policy, Scandinavian and Nordic Countries, Smoking, Tobacco Smoke Pollution, Smoking Cessation, Tobacco Industry, History, 20th Century, History, 21st Century

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review