Widdick v. Brown & Williamson
"The Tobacco Conspiracy Trial"
Plaintiff Cancer Researcher Undermines Tobacco Conspiracy Theory
(May 14)A leading cancer expert testified for the plaintiffs that deceased smoker Roland Maddox's cancer was definitely caused by smoking. However, this same expert also admitted that cancer experts for American Tobacco who said in the 1950s that there was no link between cancer and smoking were telling the truth, especially given the research at the time. And this concession by Dr. David Sidransky cast doubt on the plaintiff's allegations of conspiracy against the Brown & Williamson Tobacco Company.
The plaintiffs called Dr. Sidransky, a cancer researcher at Johns Hopkins Medical School, to lay to rest any doubt that smoking causes cancer. Dr. Sidransky spent the entire day on the stand, testifying that smoking is the leading cause of cancer and telling jurors how it causes cancer. According to Sidransky, carcinogenic compounds in cigarette smoke cause genetic mutations in lung cells when a person begins to smoke. The carcinogen attacks a cell's DNA, which is composed of a sequence of chromosomes, and destroys a key cancer-suppressing chromosome in the DNA. The mutated cells reproduce and can eventually overwhelm healthy cells, resulting in a tumor.
The doctor told the court that the more a person smokes, the greater the person risks getting lung cancer. He said that some smokers develop cancer years after they quit, explaining that chromosome damage can start with the first smoked cigarette. Dr. Sidransky referred to studies that excluded factors such as air pollution and environmental radiation as strong carcinogens and revealed how difficult it is to convince cancer patients that cigarette smoking -- not psychological factors, diet, stress, or pollution -- caused their condition.
Dr. Sidransky said he examined a sample of the late Roland Maddox's lung tissue for genetic damage. He found a few cancer cells, but the sample was too small to determine what kind of lung cancer Maddox had. (Certain types of lung cancers are more strongly linked to cigarette smoking than others.) Putting it in context of epidemiological studies, the witness used Maddox's medical history to conclude that his cancer was definitely caused by smoking.
Plaintiff attorney Norwood Wilner showed Sidransky a several American Tobacco Company documents dating back to the 1960s that deny the link between smoking and cancer. One public statement suggested cigarette smoke was no more dangerous than milk, processed foods, asphalt, or airplane rides. The doctor called these statements "half truths," "ridiculous," and "lies." One confidential letter indicated that American Tobacco was aware of the studies showing that smoking causes chromosome damage.
But during cross-examination by Brown & Williamson attorney Tom Riley, Dr. Sidransky was attacked for drawing his conclusions from medical history and epidemiology, not clinical test results. Riley also pointed out that Maddox may have had a kind of lung cancer that is less associated with smoking. The defense countered Sidransky's assessment of the various tobacco documents with a handful of articles from the 1950s, published around the time Maddox began smoking Lucky Strikes. These articles contained quotes from the top cancer experts of that time, such as the president of the American Cancer Society and the president of the National Cancer Institute, who said that there was no proven link between smoking and cancer or that smoking may be healthy. Sidransky was forced to admit that these experts were telling the truth, given what was known about smoking at that time.
Riley also questioned Sidransky's expertise in lung cancer because the doctor is the director of Head and Neck Research at Johns Hopkins and has dealt more with head and neck cancers than lung cancers. In addition, the defense attempted to cast doubt on Sidransky's research conclusions, forcing him to concede that the chromosome deletion in the cancer suppresser gene is one of the most common mutations in many types of cancers, including non-smoking related cancers. In short, the defense cast doubt on whether Maddox's cancer was even smoking-related, suggesting that perhaps he may have suffered from cancer even if he had not smoked. Riley pointed out to jurors that only 10 percent of smokers ever get lung cancer.
When court resumes on Friday, various relatives of Maddox are expected to take the stand.
top of page
| 
