The American Cancer Society Position on Tobacco Harm Reduction

Published in CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 2008

In 2007 the Royal College of Physicians published a comprehensive review of tobacco harm reduction.  The report, available here, concluded “…that smokers smoke predominantly for nicotine, that nicotine itself is not especially hazardous, and that if nicotine could be provided in a form that is acceptable and effective as a cigarette substitute, millions of lives could be saved.” 

The report made “the case for radical reform to the way that nicotine products are regulated and used in society. The ideas presented are controversial, and challenge many current and entrenched views in medicine and public health. The principles behind them have the potential to save millions of lives. They deserve consideration.”

In January 2008 the American Cancer Society published a news article in its publication, CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, that was strongly critical of the Royal College report.  The original Cancer Society article is available here.

In February the journal published a letter from Dr. Rodu (read it here) and another letter signed by fourteen contributors to the Royal College report (available here), both of which questioned the validity and accuracy of the news article.  The journal also published a response from Drs. Michael Thun and John DeLancey of the Cancer Society (read it here).

In April the journal published a letter from Dr. Carl Phillips and Paul Bergen that was strongly critical of the Cancer Society position on tobacco harm reduction (available here).  The journal also published a response from Drs. Tim Byers and Elmer Huerta, members of the American Cancer Society Board of Directors (available here).

The original news article and the letters that followed are rare examples of open and honest debate about tobacco harm reduction.  Interested readers are encouraged to read all of these documents to understand why the American Cancer Society is strongly opposed to tobacco harm reduction, and why proponents of tobacco harm reduction believe that the American Cancer Society position is not justifiable.