In a short letter published by The Guardian on Sunday July 22, Sandra Mullin of Vital Strategies/International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease/Bloomberg Philanthropies explains that the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World is a Trojan Horse in a strategy to drive a policy agenda that will suit Philip Morris International (PMI) business needs.
On June 18, I started working with Derek Yach at the Foundation for a Smoke-free World, as an online community manager (I am not yet listed as staff on their website): I don't feel like a Trojan horse for PMI and I don't think I am one. As I felt a bit wrongly accused and targeted I'd like to clarify why I chose this job. This is my personal opinion not an official comment for the Foundation (part of my exposé was posted on my blog THR_rendezvous well before Sandra's letter was published).
Update:
As of January 2nd 2019 I resigned from my job with the Foundation
I left the text I had written available. Can the Foundation succeed in helping smokers switch to less dangerous alternatives? Time will tell. It's still a bit too early for me to comment. Maybe in a small book to come :)
When Derek Yach launched the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World, on September 2017, with an $80 million per year funding by Philip Morris International for 12 years, starting in 2018, I was stunned by the immediate level and tone of the opposition expressed by a number of prominent tobacco control advocates (ie Simon Chapman, Matt Myers, Stan Glantz) I have known for years and the World Health Organization while all of them were aware of Derek's huge contributions and commitment to tobacco control.
I had been a bit estranged from the field since 2011 as I had been more involved in organizing temporary workers for a Microsoft's supplier (see The Other Microsoft).
I had completely missed the emergence of 'e-cigarettes' and the heated conflict that unfolded and is still unfolding within the tobacco control community: listen for example to Laurent Huber's presentation during a conference in Washington DC in April 2018 or the excellent webinar of Ken Warner on October 17, 2017 (now also an article on March 18, 2018 or a podcast on July 23, 2018).
I never doubted Derek's commitment to tobacco control (I had first met him when he was the organizer of the first All Africa Conference on Tobacco Control in Harare in November 1993) and I have been taken aback by the fact his credentials and record were ignored or dismissed by people blinded by the deal made with PMI. Of course, Derek explained his intent was for this new Foundation to be completely independent but that was not taken seriously by any of his critics.
I am very curious to read the details of Derek's journey in his soon to be published book Project Unthinkable, a doctor's gamble to save millions of lives, where he will give us more information about how he made this deal.
In a previous life, when I was managing the French National Committee for Tobacco Control (from 1991 to 1997), I initiated and supervised more than 100 lawsuits against the tobacco industry, including many against Philip Morris: we were able to obtain punitive damages from the tobacco companies we sued (mostly for illegal advertising). This money was extracted by litigation but it was still tobacco money although I would say it was smoker's money that transited through the tobacco companies. I never felt the origin of this funding had any influence on our work although I think the state bureaucracy was sometimes (often) upset by the relative independence this funding was giving us, beyond the limited funding we received from the Health Ministry and the Social Security Administration. I know some people disagree with this point of view but I wish they would take one minute (or more) to consider our record in tobacco control before dismissing us as traitors to the cause.
It looks like there is still huge underfunding in the tobacco control field. The PMI millions would represent almost as much as the funding provided in the last ten years by Bloomberg and Gates philanthropies, so it is a very significant (understatement) influx of funding.
Can we trust Derek to manage this funding independently of PMI? I do. As I mentioned, I first met Derek in 1993, in Harare, during the first African tobacco control conference he had organized. He had already been an advocate for many years, since he was a medical student in Cape Town in the 70s. Factor in all his work for making the Framework Convention happen and I think the least he deserves is time to be judged on his work not be condemned even before anything happens. He deserves this presumption of innocence.
As for the harm reduction strategy he supports, based on the growth of e-cigarettes, I also believe it deserves a fair hearing as e-cigs health benefits compared to combustible cigarettes appear very significant. This last point is vehemently disputed by the most vocal critics but the data and the scientific evidence is not clear against e-cigs: it's rather the opposite. So there is definitely a need to try to clarify this situation and not dismiss off the bat products already adopted by many smokers who are adamant they make them healthier, a point of view that is also shared by a fair number of health professionals (see for instance the May 26 2014 letter sent to Margaret Chan).
I am a newcomer to this debate but I hope the cyberinterview format that I had used in the previous 180 rendez-vous can be of help in figuring out what's going on and what's the right thing to do although until now I have been unable to have people representing the opposing view accept to talk about it with me.
I am certainly not ready to throw stones at Derek Yach nor agree to ostracize him from the public health community as a few people at the World Health Organization and elsewhere seem inclined to do. Nor am I willing to be labeled as part of a Trojan Horse for PMI without saying anything to the contrary.
I know I could/should let this letter go, keep it probably unnoticed and quickly drowned in the ocean of news but I like reading The Guardian and I thought I should eventually let them know and maybe their and my readers know how I feel about this image. If the shoe fits I should wear it? Non merci. Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes does not apply to me, I only want to help give a voice to tobacco harm reduction.
Feel free to give me your feedback and to contact me if you want to explain your position via a rendez-vous (philippeboucher2 at gmail.com).
Take good care.
Philippe Boucher
PS: I wrote this post on Monday July 23, after reading Sandra Mullin's letter but I posted it as of October 10 because I did not want to see it at the top of the rendez-vous or mixed with them.