Thursday, December 23, 1999
Thank you Professor for accepting our "rendez-vous" . May I ask you to introduce yourself ?
I am an oncologist. I was the director of the Institut Gustave Roussy which is the largest cancer hospital and research center in continental Europe.I am now retired but am the President of the French Alliance for Health.
1.
Recently the French cigarette company SEITA was judged
partially responsible for the sickness caused by tobacco to Richard
Gourlain. Richard Gourlain started smoking Seita's products in 1963
when he was 13. He was never able to stop (although he tried several
times) and died at 49 in January of 1999, killed by his 3 tobacco
related cancers.
This decision makes the front page of many newspapers with reports on the radio, TV, etc..
What
is your own personal reaction as someone who was instrumental in the
enactment of the two anti-tobacco french acts, the 1976 loi Veil and
the 1991 loi Evin ?
I feel that the decision was proper.
Until 1976 there was no warning on cigarette packs regarding the detrimental health effects of tobacco. So it is legitimate to consider that the tobacco producers, who knew since 1953 the health effects of tobacco, did not properly inform smokers.
I must admit that when we prepared the loi Veil and the loi Evin we did not envisage the possibility of litigation.
2. The court made a distinction between various moments in Richard
Gourlain's life : when he was under 18 the court decided the Seita was
100% responsible. This responsibility dropped to 60% after he reached
18 and dropped to zero when the first warnings were set up on the
packs, a consequence of the enactment of the loi Veil, in july 1976.
If I recall correctly the only text was "abus dangereux" ?
How do you feel about the distinction made by the court and do you feel the warnings one the packs were adequate in 1976 ?
Do you remember what was Seita's position at the time ?
What
about now ? apparently today's warnings are not so adequate since the
new EU directive aims at enlarging them considerably ?
I would have preferred a higher responsibility of the Seita till the loi Evin, but I understand that the court felt that when he became an adult he was more aware of the risks with regard to the health warning.
I feel we should enlarge them, in order to better protect the teenager.
This will not change the responsibility of the cigarette manufacturers.
The Seita was not in favor of health warnings and is still reluctant to see them enlarged.
3. Many commentators speak about the loss of individual
responsibility and an americanization of the French legal system. You
have seen many cancer patients dying because of tobacco, how
responsible do you think they were ? and how responsible do you think
were the companies selling tobacco products ?
Do you think it was appropriate for Richard Gourlain to sue the Seita ?
It was appropriate to sue tobacco manufacturers because teenagers were manipulated by aggressive advertising.
4. Pr Claude Got declared that in his opinion the State was also responsible because not enough had been done, is done in France to inform people about the risks of smoking. In a recent article in Le Figaro entitled "Against smoking" you appeared also rather critical of the lack of political will and adequate anti-tobacco programs in France. What does not work in France and what could/should be done ?
Since the loi Evin, many measures have been enacted by the government and the Parliament but much remains to be done.
The price of cigarettes has doubled, but although it is much higher than in the USA it remains too low, in particular regarding rolling tobacco.
The public attitude has changed, but not enough.
The main remaining problems are:
a) the high proportion of smokers at 18 years (about 50% in both genders).
We should better inform them and develop health education at school (from 5 to 12 years) and clinics for tobacco cessation.
We should also fight against promotion and indirect advertising such as seen in movies for example. b) Women: 25% of pregnant women smoke. This is a terrifying proportion. We should educate them and introduce clinics of tobacco cessation in obstetric departments. The whole strategy against women's smoking should be reconsidered and become more aggressive. c) Smoking in underprivileged socioeconomic classes.
This is perhaps the most difficult problem. We should introduce better protection of non-smokers, in particular in the workplace. This is a way to show that smokers could stop smoking during many hours and to encourage them to tobacco cessation. Finally, the government should devote more funds to the fight against smoking and better implement the protection of non-smokers.
5. The Seita said it will appeal the court's decision.
Francis Caballero, Richard Gourlain's lawyer said there was another
suit ready to be filed, in Béziers on behalf of the family of a young
woman who died in her thirties. My impression is that unless you file a
lawsuit nobody in the media and political world is going to care about
tobacco victims. If that is the case, shouldn't the cancer charities
support the victims who want to file such suits ?
It looks to me like a very cost effective way to inform about the risks
of smoking and denounce the hypocrisy of the tobacco manufacturers ?
Yes, I agree, the associations should support the smokers and the victims of passive smoking who sue tobacco manufacturers.
Thank you Professor for taking the time to be with us today.
Comments