CONGRESSIONAL RECORD---SENATE

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP75-00001R000300280034-8
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 1
• Document Creation Date: November 11, 2016
• Document Release Date: February 8, 1999
• Sequence Number: 34
• Publication Date: January 14, 1964
• Content Type: OPEN

FOIAb3b FOIAb3b
32
FOIAb3b
JAN 1 4 1964
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE Januaiy 14.
Mr. COOPER. I want to make the
point that the Committee did not make
anyti findings upon the effectiveness of
filter.
Toake certain that I was correct, I
wrote a letter yesterday to Dr. Luther
Terry, thc?'.Surgeon General. I asked if
he would r&spond as quickly as possible.
.I received a'letter from him today which
verifies what X have said. I will read the
letter. Then X, X shall ask that my letter
and his reply be placed in the body of
the RECORD. The letter is dated January 14, 1963:
DEAR SENATOR Cooi za: This is in response
to your letter of Januery 13 which poses cer-
tain questions as to the Advisory Commit-
tee's views on cigarettaf., filters. Certainly,
`
l
it is erroneous to eoncrtide that cigarette
filters have no effect. AsJioted In the Com-
mittee's report, filters In c*mon use do re-
move a variable portion frit. the tare and
nicotine. Your specific questions and our
replies will follow: 'yr
1. Is It not correct that the Advisory Com-
mittee made no judgment as- to ate effect of
adding filters to cigarettes? '.,
'Answer: Yes.
2. Do I understand correctly tttat the
Committee made no finding on flltersfa;cause
it believed It had insufficient evidence
from animal experiments, clinical studies,
or population studies-the three klnd1.4,.of
evidence it considered-on which to base nni-v
The PRESIDING OFFICER.
out objection, the two letters
The letters ordered to be printed in the
RECORD are as follows: s
V.B. SENATE;
Janis .iy 13, 1904.
Dr. LUTHER L. TERRY,
Surgeon General, Public Health Service, De-
partment of Health, iducatfon, and
Welfare, Washington, D.
DEAR DR. TERRY: The r4piort on smoking
and health, and the presstconference Satur-
day, January 11, by the lilvisory Committee
to the Surgeon (3eneral appear to be widely
interpreted as havingincluded a finding
that cigarette filters lave no effect. On the
contrary: Ili
+ 1. Is it not correct that the Advisory
Committee made nN'judgment as to the ef-
fect of adding flll5rs to cigarettes?
2. Do I understand correctly that the
Committee madC.tno finding on filters be-
cause it believed it had insufficient evidence
from. animal 4icperiments, clinical studies,
or populatlonj;studies-the three kinds of
evidence it cjinstdered-on which to base
any flnding_Sns to the effect of the various
types of mte~/'s?
3. To tl extent that a filter removes tar,
nicotine,.;;'rand the gaseous elements of
4
tt
a
r
k
i
I
l
ga
e
e4,
mo
e,
s
t not reasonab
e to ass
findings as to the effect of the various typl3ff? c
sume that the effects of the filter will be
of filters? ? simila . to the effects reported by the Com-
Answer
Yes
.
.ittll+fki fitt?
..,me.o smongewer cgarees 3. To the xtent that a filter removes tar, 4.,13oes not the limited discussion of
chat the epees of the hater will be simuar libves that the development of s ective
to the effects reported by the Committee of flj }}'s may have significance in Arms of
smoking fewer cigarettes? titedUrIng the hazards to health the Com-
Answer. A categorical answer to this ques- +Ittc'e believes It has found?
tion is difficult. The beat I could do would j~ 6. Would' not standardized research on the
be to answer "Yes-perhaps," or ' Yea-prob, t effecti'eness and selectivity of filters, as well
ably." A part of the problem here 1{f. as additional research on the components
whether the filter in addition to removing of smokG'be desirable?
tar, nicotine or other elements of cigarette Becausc,the report of'your Advisory Com-
smoke might also lead to different levels of the
cigarette consumption and different amofasita inttee ialen subject of wide and genera
your
of inhalation, etc. Another difficult i tthat ? in swers, at'.'
we do not know all of the substances Which a ll be helpful to have yowr
y 6,_ answers, Ienst to the first question, w
~
w
_
os
p different filters do or do not remove., ,Since quickly asp sible.
gincerely,
we do not yet know all of the substaiiees In JOHN SHERMAN COOP=.
tobacco smoke which have adverse health
effects, a given filter might permit the selec-
tive passage of hazard substances,.nar well as DEPARTMENT wbr HEALTH. EouCA-
selectively removing others. i y TION, AND WELPAft1f. PURLTO
4. Does not the limited dlsctgsion of a HEALTH sERv7`6E,
new-type filter, on page 61 of the'', ort, su Washington, D.O.
gest that the Advisory Committee believes' Hon. JOHN SHERMAN'~oOPER.
that the development of selectii`c filters may U.S. Senate, i
have significance in terms of?.l'educing the Washington, D.O. ;
cer
hazards to health the Committee believes to DEAR BENATof Janunryw COOPER. .Thw is in response
It has found? your letter of l3 which poses er-
development of better filters:or more selective ? ? YQW - c.gnICb(e u,u?re. vervaxniy, It
filters Is a promising avenue for further de- Is erroneous to conclude that cigarette filters
velopment. have no effect. As noted In"the Committee's
6. Would not standardized research on the report, filters in common US4~ do remove a
variable portion of the tareistnd nicotine.
effectiveness and selectivity of filters, as well
as additional research;rbn the components Your specific questions and of t. replies will
of smoke, be desirable;;?, follow:
Answer. Yes, unquestionably. 1. Is it not correct that the Ad` y Com-
I hope these responses will be of assistance. mittee made no. judgment as tot' 'ieffect of
sincerely yours, adding filters to cigarettes? t.~
LUTHER L. TERRY. Answer. Yes.
4 Surgeon General. 2. Do I understand correctly that tie Com-
mittee made no finding on filters bor\use it
My commelleon this is that those who believed it had lnsufficiont evidencefrom
study this report must be careful not to animal experiments, clinical studies. or:,pop-
extend the' conclusions of the Commit- ulatlon studios-the three kinds of evidence
tee. It conaidorrd--on which to base any fintI ng
No findings were made with respect to
filters.: ~It is important that, further
study r ttd research be conducted on the
questign of filters. Dr. Terry has stated
that;:he Committee felt that the devel-
Answer. Yea' . ?'; After the closing of the pagodas on Au.
3. To the extent that a filter removes t6i; gust 21, the facts became Irrelevant..
nicotine, and the gaseous elements of cigar
Otte smoke, is it not reasonable to assume Miss Higgins, whose personal contacts
that the effects of the filter will be similar are second to none In the Washington
to the effects reported by the Committee
be tp answer yes-perhaps, or yesIprobably.
A p&:t of the problem here is /Lrhether the
filter In addition to removing tar, nicotine or
other elements of cigarette smoke might also'
lead to i 1fferent levels of c111ggg:uette consump-
tion andi,,dlfferent amou is of Inhalation.
etc. Anot,her difficulty , s that we do not
know all ottthe substatices which different
filters do or flo not ren6ve. Since we do not
yet know alI'1)f the;'substances in tobacco
smoke which have 0dverse health effects, a
given filter miglif; 4fermIt the selective pas-
sage of hazard s istances, as well as selec-
tively removing f clllvs.
4. Does not he limited discussion of a
new type flltez On page Gi of the report, sug.
gest that th4? Adviaory'.'committee believes
that the development of selective filters may
have slgnl? cance In termalof reducing the'
hazards ff1 health the Coni'ntttee believes
It has foind?
Answft. Yea. The Committee~Yelt that the
develoy!tnent of better filters or mdgselective
fllters'as a promising avenue for faitther de-
velo/h ent.
..,Would not standardized research the,
oqiitiveneas and selectivity of alters, as1 ell
lncerely yours.
LUTHER L. TERRY,
Surgeon General.
SAIGON SUMMARY
Mr. DODD., Mr. President, I invite
the attention of my colleagues to an ar-
ticle entitled "Saigon Summary" by Miss
Marguerite Higgins, which appears in
last week's Issue of America magazine.
This is a shocking article; indeed, it
would be almost incredible if it did not
come from a correspondent of such ex-
ceptional stature. Although I am in no
position to vouch for the accuracy of
Miss Higgins' statements on every point,
her article raises such serious questions
about the conduct of American foreign
policy that it cannot be dismissed or ig-
nored. On the contrary, I believe that
the Foreign Relations Committee should
look into the charges and allocations
made by Miss Higgins, and that Miss
Higgins should be called before it as the
first witness to report in more detail on
her personal knowledge of the develop-
ments in Vietnam.
"Saigon Summary" Is the story of the
final days of the Diem regime, or, in Miss
Higgins' words:
Of the inglorious role played by the De-
partment of State by encouraging, for the
first time in our history, the overthrow in
time of war of a duly elected government
fighting loyally against the common Commu-
nist enemy.
In her article, Miss Higgins makes the
statement that the agitation about
Buddhist persecution was a complete
fraud and she charges, further, that the
State Department knew that it was a
fraud. She quotes Roger Hilsman, As-
sistant Secretary of State for Far East-
Sanitized Approved For Release, ':. GIA-RDP75-0000.1R00030028.0034-8'