Hostname: page-component-7d684dbfc8-8ckrc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2023-09-26T22:49:13.668Z Has data issue: false Feature Flags: { "corePageComponentGetUserInfoFromSharedSession": true, "coreDisableEcommerce": false, "coreDisableSocialShare": false, "coreDisableEcommerceForArticlePurchase": false, "coreDisableEcommerceForBookPurchase": false, "coreDisableEcommerceForElementPurchase": false, "coreUseNewShare": true, "useRatesEcommerce": true } hasContentIssue false

Bridging the Gap between Science and Law: The Example of Tobacco Regulatory Science

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2021


In the 20th century, public health was responsible for most of the 30-year increase in average life expectancy in the United States.1 Most of the significant advances in public health (e.g., vaccinations, water fluoridation) required the combined effort of scientists and attorneys. Scientists identified public health threats and the means of controlling them, but attorneys and policymakers helped convert those scientific discoveries into laws that could change the behavior of industries or individuals at a population level. In tobacco control, public health scientists made the groundbreaking discovery that smoking caused lung cancer, but attorneys and policymakers developed and implemented the policies and litigation strategies that helped reduce smoking rates by more than half over the past 50 years.

JLME Supplement
Copyright © American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics 2015

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)


CDC, “Ten Great Public Health Achievements—United States, 1900–1999,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 48, no. 12 (1999): 241–43, at 241.Google Scholar
Parmet, W. E. Jacobson, P. D., “The Courts and Public Health: Caught in a Pincer Movement,” American Journal of Public Health 104, no. 3 (2014): 392392, at 394.Google Scholar
See, e.g., Smith, K., Beyond Evidence-Based Policy in Public Health: The Interplay of Ideas (Hampshire, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013): At 4; Choi, B. C. K. et al., “Good Thinking: Six Ways to Bridge the Gap between Scientists and Policy Makers,” Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 63, no. 3 (2009): 179–80, at 179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, H. P., “The Law-Science Interface in Public Policy Decisionmaking,” Ohio State Law Journal 51, no. 2 (1990): 375405, at 405.Google Scholar
See Smith, , supra note 3, at 4.Google Scholar
Schuck, P. H., “Multi-Culturalism Redux: Science, Law, and Politics,” Yale Law and Policy Review 11, no. 1 (1998): 146, at 17, 25 (noting that “the time frame of science is relatively open-ended,” while “[t]he law is usually in much more of a hurry to decide than science is”).Google Scholar
Edwards, C. N., “In Search of Legal Scholarship: Strategies for the Integration of Science into the Practice of Law,” Southern California Interdisciplinary Law Journal 8, no. 1 (1998): 138, at 19 (“The last thing a lawyer wants is academic curiosity when it…jeopardizes her client's interests. Lawyers are remembered for the cases they win….”); see also Schuck, , supra note 6, at 24 (“For practicing lawyers, the decisive incentive is the need, consistent with both self-interest and professional ethics, to effectively represent the client's interests, whatever those interests may be.”).Google Scholar
See Blumenthal, J. A., “Law and Science in the Twenty-First Century,” Southern California Interdisciplinary Law Journal 12, no. 1 (2002): 153, at 6–7 (noting the tendency of scientists to “focus on specific research issues that, though arguably tractable from a researcher's point of view, are nevertheless atypical in the legal system”).Google Scholar
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Food & Drug Admin., 696 F.3d 1205 (D.C. Cir. 2012).Google Scholar
Id., at 1219. Failing to acknowledge the methodological limitations, the majority incorrectly concluded that the lack of studies directly linking warnings to reduced smoking rates “strongly implies that such warnings are not very effective at promoting cessation and discouraging initiation.” Id., at 1220. This conclusion was central the court's holding that the warning labels violated the First Amendment's protections for commercial speech.Google Scholar
The FDA's case was also weakened by self-inflicted wounds. See Huang, J. et al., “Cigarette Graphic Warning Labels and Smoking Prevalence in Canada: A Critical Examination and Reformulation of the FDA Regulatory Impact Analysis,” Tobacco Control 23, no. Supp. 1 (2014): i7i12.Google Scholar
Ashley, D. L. et al., “Tobacco Regulatory Science: Research to Inform Regulatory Action at the Food and Drug Administration's Center for Tobacco Products,” Nicotine & Tobacco Research 16, no. 8 (1014): 10451048, at 1045.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, Pub. L. No. 111–31, 123 Stat 1776 (2009).Google Scholar
Printz, C., “TCORS Set to Support the FDA's Regulatory Role: Program Designed to Generate Tobacco-Related Research to Inform Policy,” Cancer 120, no. 6 (2014): 771772.Google Scholar
Federal Trade Commission, Federal Trade Commission Cigarette Report for 2011 (2013).Google Scholar
Paynter, J. Edwards, R., “The Impact of Tobacco Promotion at the Point of Sale: A Systematic Review,” Nicotine & Tobacco Research 11, no. 1 (2009): 2535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, A. E. et al., “Influence of Tobacco Displays and Ads on Youth: A Virtual Store Experiment,” Pediatrics 131, no. 1 (2013): E88–e95; Kim, A. E. et al., “Influence of Point-of-Sale Tobacco Displays and Graphic Health Warning Signs on Adults: Evidence from a Virtual Store Experimental Study,” American Journal of Public Health 104, no. 5 (2014): 888895.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caruso, D. B. Peltz, J., “NYC Looks to Bump Tobacco from Prime Retail Space,” Associated Press, March 19, 2013, available at <> (last visited January 7, 2015) (discussing how RTI's virtual store research related to New York City's proposed law prohibiting the display of tobacco products in retail stores).+(last+visited+January+7,+2015)+(discussing+how+RTI's+virtual+store+research+related+to+New+York+City's+proposed+law+prohibiting+the+display+of+tobacco+products+in+retail+stores).>Google Scholar
Berman, M. et al., Tobacco Product Display Restrictions, available at <> (last visited January 7, 2015).+(last+visited+January+7,+2015).>Google Scholar
See, e.g., Choi, , supra note 3, at 179; Smith, , supra note 3, at 22.Google Scholar