| By Mark Ferrulo - Aug 8th, 2008 at 11:13 am EDT |
Bumped. It looks like Moffitt is taking notice. - Ray
And not just any hospital, we’re talking H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, one of the top 20 cancer hospitals in the country. This nationally renowned cancer treatment and research institute is paying thousands of dollars to lobbyists in Tallahassee, that are also registered lobbyists for tobacco companies.
Seriously, I’m not just trying to grab your attention with a provocative headline and then blogger-judo you down some tangentially related, but less interesting story line. The Moffitt Cancer Center has seven registered lobbyists that represent them in Florida’s capital, who also walk the halls of The Capitol building on behalf of cigarette companies, cigar manufacturers and purveyors of chewing tobacco and snuff.
For example, there’s Michael P. Harrell, public affairs director of the law firm, Foley & Laudner, and registered with the state of Florida as a lobbyist for the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Dosal Tobacco Corporation, the Miami based manufacturer of the popular “305’s” brand of cigarettes (among others.)
Sebastian Aleksander is another Florida lobbyist registered to represent the Moffitt Cancer Center. He’s also got some dandy clients in his portfolio, notably Reynolds American and Swedish Match North America. Reynolds American is the parent company of R.J Reynolds Tobacco Company, manufacturer of 1 out of every 3 cigarettes sold in the country, including...
Mr. Aleksander’s other client, Swedish Match North America, has five different product categories - snuff, cigars, chewing tobacco, pipe tobacco and lights. You may be familiar with their popular “Red Man” chewing tobacco brand.
Then there’s Florida lobbyist Carole Duncanson. Not only is she officially registered with the Florida legislature to “press the flesh” for the Moffitt Cancer Center, she also walks The Capitol halls on behalf of Swisher International, maker of the ubiquitous Swisher Sweets cigar.
Let me be clear - I’m not exposing this unseemly and sickly ironic relationship between one of Florida’s most respected medical institutions and tobacco lobbyists to harm the Moffitt Cancer Center. They do amazing things to help those stricken with cancer and there are countless stories of their staff saving and improving the lives of individuals stricken with this disease.
In fact, I sent the following Email to their Public Information Officer hoping there was some reason for this cancer hospital/tobacco lobbyist relationship I was unable to fathom on my own:
Dear Ms. Foley,
The Moffitt Cancer Center, a hospital I’ve long admired, has more than a dozen lobbyists that represent the institution in Tallahassee. A number of these lobbyists also represent cigarette manufacturers, cigar makers and chewing tobacco companies. How does the Moffitt Cancer Center justify hiring lobbyists for tobacco companies to represent the best interests of a cancer hospital?
Sincerely,
Mark Ferrulo
Two weeks later, here’s the only response I’ve received:
Hi Mark,Thanks for your e-mail. I will make sure it gets passed along to the most appropriate department.
Best,
Michelle
It comes as no surprise that there exists amoral lobbyists who will work on behalf of anyone who will write them a check, whether it’s an institution trying to save the lives of people with cancer, or a company whose products cause it.
What’s surprising is that Moffitt Cancer Center would spend thousands of dollars hiring tobacco industry lobbyists who have such a clear conflict of interest with their own mission and the best interest of their patients. I’ll give you one example:
In the 2008 legislative session, there was an effort to raise the cigarette tax. Studies have shown that raising cigarette taxes reduces both adult and teen smoking rates and provides much needed revenue to fund anti-smoking and health care programs. In fact, the Moffitt Cancer Center receives more than 15 million dollars every year from Florida’s current tax on cigarettes (among the lowest in the nation.) On which side of this issue were the Moffitt Cancer Center lobbyists I’ve named above?
We may never know exactly what role they played in the defeat of this particular bill, but this is just one example of the clear conflict of interest Moffitt Cancer Center’s tobacco lobbyists have with the hospital and research center that also writes them a check each year.
On April 1, 2008, the Moffitt Cancer Center’s campus went “100% Tobacco Free”. This should also be the year that the Moffitt Cancer Center also goes “100% Tobacco Lobbyist Free”.
Comments are closed for this post.
Dr. Sameul Epstein, a professor of occupational and environmental medicine at the University of Illinois at Chicago, in "Reversing the Cancer Epidemic," a chapter of the book, Ecological Medicine: Healing the Earth, Healing Ourselves, (edited by Kenny Ausubel, 2004, pages 87-88), says of the so-called War on Cancer":
What has been happening to our ability to treat and cure cancers over all this time? In the 1960's, there was about a 49 percent five-year survival rate. Forty-nine percent of people survived five years after diagnosis in the 1960's, when virtually no money was being spent in these areas. Now, after billions of dollars have been poured into cancer treatment, the length of survival is about six years. It has barely increased over the last forty years for the great majority of common cancers in the overall population.
How does all this square up with what we are constantly hearing about these miracle cancer drugs? The answer lies in a deceptive statistical ploy. The efficacy of cancer drugs is determined on the basis of what we call tumor response. If a patient with cancer takes a drug and at the end of six months the tumor has shrunk in size, that's a tumor response. That's supposedly fine. We're doing very well indeed. Let's go out and market this miracle drug. Let's go out and make millions and billions out of it.
However, if you follow up with these patients who have had a tumor response at six months after diagnosis and treatment, in twelve to eighteen months you generally find that the original tumor has recurred and often grown larger. Sometimes, the treated patient will die sooner than the untreated patient -- and this is quite apart from the fact that the treated patient's quality of life is often devastated by highly toxic chemotherapy and radiation.
Dr. Epstein continues:
For the majority of cancer chemotherapeutic agents, there is questionable evidence of efficacy. There are some relatively rare cancers for which there is strong evidence of efficacy; for childhood cancer, where treatment is successful, the incidence of long-term recurrences are very high. Delayed toxic complications such as neurological, behavioral, and reproductive problems are also common, and the incidence of secondary cancers caused by the treatment itself is very high.
According to the book, Dr. Samuel Epstein began his career as a laboratory chief documenting the metabolic origins of cancer, impeccably documenting the direct effects of industrial chemicals as causes of Cancer. He wrote the original proposal for what became the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976. During the Reagan era, he was on a White House hit list and efforts were made to keep him off any government committees studying cancer prevention. An actual smoking gun memo reads "Get him out. Horrible." In 1998 he was honored with the Right Livelihood Award, known as the "alternative Nobel Prize." He has written innumerable scientific articles and several compelling books, including "The Politics of Cancer" and "The Safe Shopper's Bible." He is the chairman of the Cancer Prevention Coalition, a global network of scientists, public servants, and activists.
It is clear to me that, if it was the goal of cancer institutions to cure or prevent the disease, environmental health would be a major factor in cancer research, and alternative therapies would be included for treatment.