Further Information

Environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality in a prospective study of Californians, 1960-98 | Enstrom JE, Kabat GC
Article Published: 2003

Risk: Lung cancer: RR= 0.75 (0.42-1.35) from the abstract of the study. Cardiovascular: RR= 0.94 (0.85-1.05) from text table 8.1, CALEPA 2004
Type: Cohort
Funding Source: see further information
Significance: Not Statistically Significant Negative

Published By: Br Med JA, 2003;326(7398):1057

Further Information


The American Cancer Society initiated CPS I in 1959, conducted follow up until 1972, and has maintained the original database. Extended follow up until 1997 was conducted at the University of California at Los Angeles with initial support from the Tobacco-Related Disease Research Program, a University of California research organisation funded by the Proposition 99 cigarette surtax (www.ucop.edu/srphome/trdrp). After continuing support from the Tobacco-Related Disease Research Program was denied, follow up through 1999 and data analysis were conducted at University of California at Los Angeles with support from the Center for Indoor Air Research, a 1988-99 research organisation that received funding primarily from US tobacco companies.

The whole study, costing several million dollars, was financed by state funding and funds from the American Cancer Society, except for the last $75,000  needed for the compilation of the data. The money was denied when it became clear that the study would not have produced the "right" results and demonstrated that passive smoke was a danger. For that reasons, the two Authors were forced to turn to the  Center for Indoor Air Research, financed by the tobacco industry, to complete the study. Using that as an excuse, all scientific journals refused to publish this important study except the British Medical Journal, which was crucified by the antismoking establishment, which has an obvious and huge interest in falsely representing passive smoke as a public danger. This study demonstrates conclusively that exposure to passive smoke cannot be measured.

This milestone study was intentionally omitted from the 2006 Surgeon General Report on passive smoking. For further information on this incredible story, click here, and here.

FORCES is supported solely by the efforts of the readers. Please become a member or donate what you can.

Contact Info
Forces Contacts
Media Contacts
Evidence Categories
Quick Look-Up
List of Methodological Errors in ETS Studies
Hill's Criteria and Authoritative Citations
What Must an Epidemiologic Study Warrant?
Table of All Studies on ETS and Lung Cancer up to 2006

Pie Charts of ETS/Lung Cancer Studies
How many cigarettes must be smoked to create an ETS danger?

Passive Smoking: an Institutional Problem
A 13-minute video to understand the fraud

If you like to read rather then listen, download
Now available for free