Thursday, November 29, 2012

Fail: Big Tobacco Court-Ordered To Tell Only Half The Truth

Sayer Ji, Contributor
Activist Post

Today, a U.S. judge ordered tobacco companies to publicly admit they lied and about the dangers of smoking, but they are still being allowed to cover up the lethal, radiation-linked health risks associated with tobacco use.

With the latest order by a U.S. judge to force tobacco firms to admit they lied about the dangers of smoking making today's international headlines, it is easy to forget that big tobacco did not only lie, but knowingly allowed millions of smokers to suffer and die from radioisotope-contaminated tobacco poisoning with their full knowledge and consent.

According to a 2009 article in the journal Isis, both external and industry scientists started researching the dangers of radioisotopes in cigarettes over 40 years ago. The first scientific paper on polonium-210, a daughter radioisotope of uranium, linking it to lung cancer was published in 1964. According to the article:
Despite forty years of research suggesting that polonium is a leading carcinogen in tobacco, the manufacturers have not made a definitive move to reduce the concentration of radioactive isotopes in cigarettes. The polonium story therefore presents yet another chapter in the long tradition of industry use of science and scientific authority in an effort to thwart disease prevention. The impressive extent to which tobacco manufacturers understood the hazards of polonium and the high executive level at which the problem and potential solutions were discussed within the industry are exposed here by means of internal documents made available through litigation. [i]
The internal documents referenced above, which were made available online in 1998 by the Master Settlement Agreement, revealed that the companies suppressed publication of their own internal research to avoid heightening the public's awareness of radioactivity in cigarettes.[ii]

Polonium-210: The #1 Health Threat In Tobacco

Polonium-210 is a byproduct of the decay of uranium daughter isotopes, which, while occurring naturally in the environment, are primarily found within our soil as a result of the use of phosphate fertilizers and pollution from various industries. Industry sources include uranium mining, nuclear and coal-fired power plants. In fact, "fly ash" produced from coal-fired power carries 100 times more radiation into the surrounding environment than a nuclear power plant producing the same amount of energy. This is, of course, when nuclear power plants properly contain their radioactive fuel and waste and don't release massive, irretrievable quantities of radioisotopes into the environment, as occurred in Chernobyl and Fukushima.

Nuclear weapons and munitions (depleted uranium), are another well-known source of global contamination. Also, for those who believe certified organic tobacco is safer, no matter where the uranium comes from, tobacco plants selectively absorb and concentrate the byproduct of its decay, Polonium-210, to dangerous -- if not lethal -- levels. The relatively high levels found within tobacco are rather consistent over time and geographical area.[iii]

A recent review published in the journal Nicotine & Tobacco Research summarized this disturbing fact of history as follows:
[T]he industry was not only cognizant of the potential "cancerous growth" in the lungs of regular smokers but also did quantitative radiobiological calculations to estimate the long-term (25 years) lung radiation absorption dose (rad) of ionizing alpha particles emitted from the cigarette smoke. Our own calculations of lung rad of alpha particles match closely the rad estimated by the industry. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, the industry's and our estimate of long-term lung rad of alpha particles causes 120-138 lung cancer deaths per year per 1,000 regular smokers.
These findings indicate that the tobacco industry's relationship to their consumer base was (and still is) homicidal, in the worst, premeditated sense of the word. The motive? Profit. The industry actually knew how to mitigate the problem, but realized it would interfere with the addictive power of their product (and therefore profitability) to do so:
Acid wash was discovered in 1980 to be highly effectively in removing (210)Po from the tobacco leaves; however, the industry avoided its use for concerns that acid media would ionize nicotine converting it into a poorly absorbable form into the brain of smokers thus depriving them of the much sought after instant "nicotine kick" sensation.

Polonium 210 is extraordinarily toxic when ingested or inhaled. In fact, it is 4500 times more toxic than radium 226 -- a startling fact considering that during the Manhattan Project (1944), the "tolerance dose" for workers was set at 0.1 microgram of ingested radium. When incorporated into the body, radioisotopes like Polonium-210 emit alpha particles, which are the radiobiological equivalent of howitzers on a cellular level, profoundly damaging, mutating and destroying DNA, as well as causing other forms of irreparable damage to the cell.

Because of the fact that the dominant radiation risk model does not acknowledge the profoundly detrimental effects of low-dose, internalized radioisotope exposure (largely because it was developed before the discovery of DNA in the early 50's and was based on external exposures to the type of gamma-radiation associated with atomic bomb blast), the true dangers associated with Polonium-210 have been largely concealed, distorted or discounted.

According to a review published in the journal Health Physics in 2010, smoking tobacco has resulted in "443,000 deaths and 5.1 million years of potential life lost among the U.S. population each year from 2000 through 2004." Furthermore, the review estimated that the associated collective radiation dose from smoking is "more than 36 times that to the workers at all the U.S. nuclear power plants, U.S. Department of Energy nuclear weapons facilities, and crews of all the vessels in the U.S. Nuclear Navy." It is no surprise then that it has been suggested that tobacco products should carry a radiation-exposure warning label.[iv]

View the Polonium abstracts from the National Library of Medicine indexed on

[i] Brianna Rego. The Polonium brief: a hidden history of cancer, radiation, and the tobacco industry. Isis. 2009 Sep ;100(3):453-84. PMID: 19960838

[ii] iv Monique E Muggli, Jon O Ebbert, Channing Robertson, Richard D Hurt. Waking a sleeping giant: the tobacco industry's response to the polonium-210 issue. Am J Public Health. 2008 Sep ;98(9):1643-50. Epub 2008 Jul 16. PMID: 18633078

[iii] Polonium-210 and lead-210 in the terrestrial environment: a historical review. J Environ Radioact. 2011 May ;102(5):420-9. Epub 2011 Mar 5. PMID: 21377252

This article first appeared at GreenMedInfo.  Please visit to access their vast database of articles and the latest information in natural health.


This article may be re-posted in full with attribution.


If you enjoy our work, please donate to keep our website going.


Ron said...

I have seen my cousin died at only 37 just because of excessive smoking. those who smoke, believe that nothing gonna happen to them so early. but you never know when death knocks your door... all the tobacco companies are actually sacrificing our precious life time just for the sake of their profit... can't u see!

Anonymous said...

I no longer smoke, and I don't advocate it for anyone. But if Polonium is naturally occuring in the soil and being taken up by the plants, could we not make the same claim about producers of all plant based products knowingly poisoning us?

Peanut butter, canned vegetables, fresh greens, all of them must contain polonium. Does our author suggest polonium is harmless if digested, and only ever dangerous if inhaled?

Anonymous said...

I do have to say, I think people were taught to hate the wrong thing about cigarettes. Yes, the radioactive tobacco IS BAD... However I came to realize after being around native peoples during Occupy Toronto that tobacco itself isn't the problem. Tobacco is sacred to them. They wouldn't make a plant sacred that was a killer. It is what we are adding to these cigarettes, what we are doing when we grow the tobacco (radioactive fertilizer) that is causing all these health issues! I realized I wouldn't have a problem with people smoking if these additives were removed and the tobacco was grown in a safe way. We have become so well indoctrinated we forgot WHY smoking is bad. The anti-smoking people, in their fervor to get people away from a poisonous product, perhaps forgot to make the distinction? So we hate tobacco when it isn't the tobacco that is the problem. We have to stop poisoning the cigarettes and stop poisoning the tobacco plant when we grow it!

Perhaps growing one's own organically, being careful with fertilizing it, could be the answer? Obviously Big Tobacco isn't going to change, so it looks like individuals are going to have to make their own. Smoking could make a come-back as a safe cultural pastime rather than the cancer-causing practice the Big Tobacco have made it to be.

Anonymous said...

There is no one alive today who did not know smoking was bad for you. I can remember that in the mid 50's we called them cancer sticks.

My advice to cigarette makers some years back was to close business on a long weekend. Bring in the lawyers, pay off the debts and give the rest to share holders and get out of the business. It was rather obvious that it was the intent of the government and lawyers to bleed them dry and that is what we still see.

The government is the one I blame for this. Years back they were in the perfect position to declare tobacco to be poison and ban it. The reason they did not was money, pure and simple. The governments make a lot of money in tobacco taxes and they would rather millions die every year then give that up. This is the fault of greedy tax and spend politicians.

Anonymous said...

Money pure and simple does not explain every thing in this world.
The late 90's Y2K was about the time chemtrails really started appearing everywhere often.

Good point about natives and tobacco the sacred plant. American tobacco companies poison this strong (meant for occasional use) plant and enhance its addictive properties as you say.
Remind you of anything else?

Coca, in Peru. Sacred leaf of the Gods, one that allows everyone from children to old people to spend more time at altitude without pain or negative effects. Magical.
Americans learned to refine and concentrate certain properties of the wonderful coca leaf.
Cocaine, what a crime.

Poppies. Lovely poppies, the black tar flows out, is dried and you have opium. Used for centuries as medicine and pain killer......not abused as a weapon of war until the British and Americans (Taft University hall of shame) raised hell in China with it over a few centuries. Americans learned once again to refine and concentrate this natural product to create heroin.

Heroin, the grand prize of the Vietnam war and of the Afghanistan war. American banks need that money more than junkies need their shit.
google is your friend.

Anonymous said...

When I worked in the tobacco industry, the taxes on a pack of cigarettes was about 2/3 of the retail price. Since then the states and feds have added more taxes - I suspect today about 80% of the pack price is taxes.

With what - over $6 per pack - going into state and federal budgets during a recession, I really doubt you'll ever see the end of the industry. What you'll see is one side of Uncle Sam's mouth telling you it's bad for you, and the other side saying "Thank you, thank you, thank you, for all these tax dollars. Smoke 'em if you got 'em, and if not, buy more!".

Anonymous said...

While it's true that the Vietnamese and Afghanistanis did grow poppies to flood the world with drugs and it is also true that the American army was not able to end that horrible trade it is totally incorrect to sat that drugs were any part of that war. The drugs are just a fact of life in that part of the world and the war neither encouraged it nor stopped it.

Post a Comment