 |
The 130th Annual Meeting of APHA |
|
The 130th Annual Meeting of APHA |
Robert N. Proctor, PhD, History Department, and Science, Medicine and Technology in Culture Initiative, Pennsylvania State University, 312 Weaver Building, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, 814 863 8943, rnp5@psu.edu
Historians have played an important role in tobacco liability litigation since the 1980s. Historians have most often been employed to support what is known as the "common knowledge" defense: everyone has always known about the hazards of tobacco, so anyone who smoked and contracted disease from the habit, has only themselves to blame for their disease.
The way this works is as follows. Historians are hired to dig up as many examples as they can of public warnings against tobacco, whether on film, radio, TV, popular literature, newspapers, magazines, or whatever. The sheer volume of this material is then used to claim that no one could possibly have escaped this barrage of anti-tobacco propaganda. This is combined with a second strategy, arguing that the science establishing the hazard has always been pretty suspect--or else extremely recent. Epidemiology is "mere statistics," and experiments done on animals cannot be extrapolated to humans. There is therefore (according to this industry stance) no "proof" that tobacco causes harm, or at least not until very recently, or only in a very vague and suspect philosophical sense. Historians are hired to show that as late as the 1960s, '70s, or even later, there were "legitimate reasons" to doubt e.g. the conclusions of the Surgeon General's Report--and that the industry therefore acted responsibly in raising doubts about the status of the science involved. In a nutshell: "Everyone knew, but nobody had proof."
I will explore the role of historians as expert witnesses in such disputes, paying particular attention to how arguments have been made to establish or counter arguments about the status of popular and scientific knowledge in the past. Some comments will also be made about my own personal experiences as a witness in such cases, and how trial practices may have influenced historiography (and vice versa) in recent years.
Learning Objectives:
Presenting author's disclosure statement:
I do not have any significant financial interest/arrangement or affiliation with any organization/institution whose products or services are being discussed in this session.