Document gvj4bav3z9mLgG2vk44bv2kq

810 Annals New York Academy of Sciences Whatdo we work with'! What does it do lo us7 And they are driving us into the courts lo get answers to these very simple questions. Not one single industry has agreed to give us the answers to the questions I have posed, including Johns-Moiwliie. D*. Wolfe: I think one explanation for the lack of consciousness ptredueedconsciousness among some workers is that they, have been fclackmailecby industry, if you are a worker snd you ore given a choice of no job or cancer, that is not any kind of Choicest ail, and the worker may opt for having i job even though it exposes him to a carcinogen. Many industries have claimed, and it usually turns out : be an empty claim, that if they have to regulate, hey wlli have to shut down. The more that is exposed, the better. Da. Kotin: Just a quick commenl. First of ail, I hope Mr. Ma?.?.ccchi will recall that Johns-Man*ille was delighted to participate in the prepurutiun of the Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers film, But the thin;--> classical example of something brief but really incendiary: benxene is a "potent carcinogen." It is not a potent carcinogen. It is a "leueomiget." I believe it can cause leukemia. But lo classify hat as a potent carcinogen almost denotes an appronch to the problem that puts scientific dimensions well below those of proprietary or constituency dimensions. Mr. Sfivak: Dr. SelikoiT, cancer experts tell us that among heavy smokers, those who smoke one or more packs a day, one person osl of twenty gets lungeimcer. Dn Selikoff: That is true. Mr. Spivak: if it is true heavy smoking causes cancer, what is the explanation for the fact that the other nineteen heavy smokers do not get cancer ? Dr. Selikoff: I don't know, in fact, even among asbestos workers, one out of five dies of lung cancer, and four out of five don't, and I wish we knew why. Nature is trying lo tell us something, Bnd we certainly have not learnec the answer. Mr, Spivak: Would you be in favor of banniig cignrettcs by law as saccharin is banned? Dr, SELIKOFF In general, os you know, cignrettcs arc a voluntary net. Nobody puts a dgnretle inyour mouth. You car. elect to do it or not, and my own inclination is .that Americans should be allowed in such cases to do us they wish with individual freedom. Food additives are another problem. We generally don't knowwbui is in our food. Mr. Bazell: Dr, Upton, you said a while ago that anybody who hud ihoughs at the beginning of tac war on cancer thal there was a search for a magic bullet would have been foolish, and nobody has said thal. But. in fact, as part of the enacting legislation, there was even a resolution in Congress that caicer should be cured by 1976 logo along with Ihe Bicentennial, and, in fact, at the time thni that legislation was passed, there was very much that mood, and it is still reflected in your budget, isn't it. Doctor, that a massive amount is u search for a cure, and even in your proposed budget for next year only a liny amotnt deals with cnviromncnlnl cancer. When is thal going tochange in a significant way'! Dr. Upton: Two points: I am not aware that any responsible spokesman for ihe Cancer Institute ever predicted a cure by the time cf the Bicentennial. 1 tin aware that there were statements in the press, by others, but I am not nwnre thsit nay responsible spokesman for the Institute or for the cancer research community mude those kinds of promises. As for budget, we do, in fact, devote subslantialsums of moncyto I he development of more effective treatment, and earlier in the program i stressed that I thought that these investments had paid off handsomely. If you compare the amount we spend for the development of new drugs, on the NBC's Meet, the Press: Enviroament 811 preer of JSO million a year, and the amount *e spend or environminial causes, more like SI SO million a year, you can see that we spend a far larger amount of money on the sDera.rcShELfotCrOcaFuFa: eIsdthonnn't otnhinthke wseeaorcuhghfotrtocegreesl. caught in ihe trap of eilher'or. We shouldn't look just for prevention, finding net what is causing caicer, and ignoring cureR. emember that there are many Americans now alive who ir the last -5 years were, unfortunately, exposed to things that we now know cause cancer, and they will need treatment, and I think there is great urgency for ike development of cv<n better treatment and better cures far cancer. Wc hare to do bo:h. MR, MOHROE: We have about a minute and half. MISS YUNCKER; IDi. Kotin, the Nation:.I Cancer Institute his been tasking til chemicals. They have looked, within unimolscreen, at 17, according to the list count I haOvefsteheant. 47, 27 proved to cause cancer in animals..Even assuming they piked the most wicked-looking molecules they could find out of thousands of chemicals ivniiable to loTohkeayt,atrhesat isthareper-eqtutyarstcearsryosfta>tibstiilcli.on dollars ngency. You art n hundrtd billion dollars industry. What sindustrydoing to prevent these chemicals from coning forth without our knowing whether they are cancci-c-.iusing or not? Dr. Kotin: I am sure there is a wide sped rum of industry posiures. 1 cas tell you what one company is doing, and.that is. addressing potentially haiardous agtnts with the same scrupulousness, the sarrtc scientific rigidity as the federal government is. and where an agent is likely to be a potential carcinogen, it is an agenl that is abandoned. One can clearly identify among (he giants ir the chemical industry specific materials that I know have had nuiUonssof dollars pul into them ('('.development which never sow ti c lIigdhotno'tfkcnoomwmthearctiaI lhdanvye. the authority to name a company and Ihe compounds oi I would have jolten a release, but these are tut ligmcnli of the imiglnutlon. When wc arc off the air, I will be glad to tcli you the names of the companies. Mr. Monroe: Thank you. gentlemen, `nr being with ur tocay on MEET THE PRESS.