Seltzer, C

ACSH
<h2>Tobacco helper - cut-out for Carl Seltzer</h2>Despite the virulent anti-smoking campaign carried on by his associate <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Elizabeth_Whelan" title="Elizabeth Whelan" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">Elizabeth Whelan</a> through their shared industry-friendly group the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Council_on_Science_and_Health" title="American Council on Science and Health" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">American Council on Science and Health</a> (ACSH), Stare worked for the tobacco industry as a cut-out for <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Carl_C.Seltzer" title="Carl C. Seltzer" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">Carl C. Seltzer</a>. <a href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/rqz95a00" class="external autonumber" title="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/rqz95a00" rel="nofollow" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">[2]</a>, who Stare protected for many years. He also organised a lecturing position for Seltzer at Tufts University (through a close associate) which allowed Seltzer to use the title of "Professor"; Seltzer thereupon offered voluntary statistical services to the American Heart Foundation, Kaiser Permanente, and to other genuine research institutes, using his Harvard School of Public Health and Tufts University credentials.The tobacco industry was then able to utilize this entirely-artificial status by promoting Seltzer as an independent "Professor" from the "Harvard School of Public Health"who was an "expert on cardiac (heart) diseases" and a "consultant to the American Heart Foundation." Over a number of decades, more than $2 million in tobacco money (via a secret <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Special_Projects&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Special Projects (page does not exist)" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">Special Projects #4</a> A/c) was channeled to Seltzer via Stare through the law firm <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Shook,Hardy%26_Bacon" title="Shook, Hardy & Bacon" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">Shook, Hardy & Bacon</a>. Yet both Seltzer and Stare publicly maintained that he was totally independent and never took a penny from the tobacco industry.They were able to expoit the Harvard name and maintain they had "never taken a penny from the industry" without fear of prosecution, because this last statement was correct; the money had all come from lawyers, and it was passed to them via Stare's department, which theoretically decided what research would be done.After constant claims about his Department's funding sources, on January 28, 1972, Stare made a written public statement which said:<dl style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><dd><dl><dd>"I don't recall that any individual tobacco company has ever contributed any money directly to the department." <a href="http://ltdlimages.library.ucsf.edu/imagesh/h/c/v/hcv4aa00/Shcv4aa00.pdf" class="external autonumber" title="http://ltdlimages.library.ucsf.edu/imagesh/h/c/v/hcv4aa00/Shcv4aa00.pdf" rel="nofollow" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">[3]</a></dd></dl></dd></dl>These were weasel words intended to deceive: he was himself a recipient of a couple of tobacco grants from the joint tobacco industry body (via the secret CTR (Council for Tobacco Research) Special Account #4 held by a Kansas City law firm), and his department systematically laundered payments for the notorious Dr Carl Seltzer and a half-dozen other Harvard scientists, for a couple of decades. <a href="http://ltdlimages.library.ucsf.edu/imagesd/d/y/i/dyi51a00/Sdyi51a00.pdf" class="external autonumber" title="http://ltdlimages.library.ucsf.edu/imagesd/d/y/i/dyi51a00/Sdyi51a00.pdf" rel="nofollow" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">[4]</a>In mid 1973, Stare was exposed as a scientific <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Lobbyist" title="Lobbyist" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">lobbyist</a> for the food, chemical, and pharmaceutical companies by Harvard students in the campus magazine (The Present Illness),(See student magazine claims about Stare: page 19-20 <a href="http://ltdlimages.library.ucsf.edu/imagesi/i/j/u/iju68e00/Siju68e00.pdf" class="external autonumber" title="http://ltdlimages.library.ucsf.edu/imagesi/i/j/u/iju68e00/Siju68e00.pdf" rel="nofollow" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">[5]</a>) and also at the same time the student body attacked the support being given to the university scientists by the tobacco industry. Dr Gary Huber, and a couple of other Medical faculty members were eventually driven out of the university, but Seltzer, Stare and many others survived.
<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Carl_C.Seltzer">http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Carl_C._Seltzer</a>

<h1 id="firstHeading" class="firstHeading">Carl C. Seltzer</h1>

Carl Coleman Seltzer (recently deceased (citation needed)) was a Harvard-based physical anthropologist graduate supported by tobacco industry funds for more than forty years. He was promoted by the industry's PR companies as an "independent Harvard professor from the School of Public Health; a heart specialist, who didn't believe that smoking was a serious risk."

He was promoted as an independent consultant to Congress for numereous Congressional inquiries; sent as an independent scientist to genuine scientific health conferences; supplied as a statistician to legitimate biomedical research groups to perform their calculations and prepare their reports; promoted onto the Scientific Advisory group for the US Surgeon-General's annual review of the status of cigarette/smoking research; and sent of media tours around the world to preach the message that there was no evidence linking smoking with heart disease.

Administrators and academics at <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Harvard_University" title="Harvard University">Harvard University</a> (especially the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Harvard_School_of_Public_Health&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Harvard School of Public Health (page does not exist)">Harvard School of Public Health</a> and the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Peabody_Museum&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Peabody Museum (page does not exist)">Peabody Museum</a>) were party to this deception at the highest level. They maintained a veil of secrecy over the university dealings with Seltzer because of their public posture of not accepting tobacco industry funding.

Yet almost all of the money Seltzer earned during these years (more than $2 million) came either indirectly from the tobacco companies and their trade association (by way of lawyers and third-party cut-outs in the university), the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Tobacco_Institute" title="Tobacco Institute">Tobacco Institute</a> (TI) or more directly in the form of grants from their fake research organisations the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Tobacco_Industry_Research_Committee" title="Tobacco Industry Research Committee">Tobacco Industry Research Committee</a> (TIRC) and the later <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Council_for_Tobacco_Research" title="Council for Tobacco Research">Council for Tobacco Research</a> (CTR) and <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Center_for_Indoor_Air_Research" title="Center for Indoor Air Research">Center for Indoor Air Research</a> (CIAR).

<h2>Contents</h2>

[<a href="javascript:toggleToc()" class="internal" id="togglelink">hide</a>]</div>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Carl_C._Seltzer#Background">1 Background</a>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Carl_C._Seltzer#Grant_study">1.1 Grant study</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Carl_C._Seltzer#Peabody_Museum_years">1.2 Peabody Museum years</a>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-3"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Carl_C._Seltzer#Smoking_and_masculinity_index">1.2.1 Smoking and masculinity index</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-3"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Carl_C._Seltzer#Correlation_vs_causation">1.2.2 Correlation vs causation</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-3"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Carl_C._Seltzer#Tobacco_industry_support">1.2.3 Tobacco industry support</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Carl_C._Seltzer#Harvard_School_of_Public_Health_years">1.3 Harvard School of Public Health years</a>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-3"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Carl_C._Seltzer#Tobacco_activities_and_covert_support">1.3.1 Tobacco activities and covert support</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

</ul>

</li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Carl_C._Seltzer#Articles_and_Resources">2 Articles and Resources</a>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Carl_C._Seltzer#Related_SourceWatch_Articles">2.1 Related SourceWatch Articles</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Carl_C._Seltzer#References">2.2 References</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Carl_C._Seltzer#External_resources">2.3 External resources</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Carl_C._Seltzer#External_articles">2.4 External articles</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

</ul>

</td></tr></tbody></table>

<h2>Background</h2>

Seltzer was born in 1908 and took his PhD in physical anthropology at Harvard in 1933.

<h3>Grant study</h3>

During the second world war Seltzer remained at Harvard, but assisted in American army office recruitment by conducting thousands of physical measurements of inductees, thus helping create a major database which included smoking and lifestyle information.

This later became the basis for a major health research program after the war known as the 'Grant study'. It was directed by Seltzer's friend Dr Charles McArthur at Harvard, and initially it studied 250 "normal" Harvard students who had first been measured and tested for personality differences in 1938. They were followed up by questionnaires sent out in 1959, and this resulted in a number of papers promoting the idea that personality was genetically predetermined, and that diseases were linked more to genetic variation than to life-style or environmental factors. <a href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/seh48d00/pdf" class="external autonumber" title="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/seh48d00/pdf" rel="nofollow">[1]</a>

<h3>Peabody Museum years</h3>

For years after the war Seltzer returned to just being a low-level physical anthropologist graduate who worked as a honorary (self-funded) researcher through Peabody Museum on the Harvard campus. He did work on American Indian tribes, helping the government to determine which Indian groups held tribal rights to various national resources, etc. But through his connections at the university and his work on the original data, he was able to extend the follow-up from the Grant study to encompass 922 ex-students.

<h4>Smoking and masculinity index</h4>

Seltzer's first publication on this subject looked at an index of body measurements which he called "the masculinity index" and related this to smokers and non-smokers. He distinguished physical features which were different between males and females. <a href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/psr53e00/pdf" class="external autonumber" title="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/psr53e00/pdf" rel="nofollow">[2]</a> He found that:

The data show that there is a significant association between the strength of the masculine component and the smoking habits of the subjects.

More specifically, weakness' of the masculine component is significantly more frequent in smokers than in nonsmokers. [and] the degree of weakness of the masculine component from the nonsmokers to the heavier smokers is consistent and progressive.

</blockquote>

In other words, the more feminine males smoked, and smoked more heavily the more feminine they were in body build.

This study was noticed by <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Robert_Casad_Hockett" title="Robert Casad Hockett">Robert Hockett</a>, the deputy director of the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Tobacco_Industry_Research_Committee" title="Tobacco Industry Research Committee">Tobacco Industry Research Committee</a> (TIRC) who realised that, although it reported that healthier masculine males smoked less (which was contrary to all the advertising images), the study could be used to support industry claims that there was not necessarily a causal-connection between smoking and health. Both could be under the influence of a third factor, genetics.

Hockett contacted Seltzer and had a long discussion about future funding which resulted in Seltzer receiving a few thousand dollars to write a major article for the Atlantic Monthly magazine ... with some modifications to the conclusions (as noted by MD magazine). <a href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/thd7aa00/pdf" class="external autonumber" title="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/thd7aa00/pdf" rel="nofollow">[3]</a>

"Why People Smoke". <a href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/iin21a00/pdf" class="external autonumber" title="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/iin21a00/pdf" rel="nofollow">[4]</a> in the Atlantic Monthly reported the study findings in a different way:

Smokers are consistently larger than the nonsmokers. They are taller, heavier, broader in the shoulders and hips, bigger in the size of chest, leg and hand."

</blockquote>

They were also more outgoing, risk-taking, life-fullfilling, etc. Essentially he was now maintaining a position which was the exact opposite of the Science report. In this article he says it is genetic differences (the masculinity component') which determine those who are attracted to smoking -- and these features characteristically matched the promotions of the cigarette companies. Smokers are now more like the cowboys in the 'Marlboro Man' ads, while non-smokers are wimps and nerds.

<h4>Correlation vs causation</h4>

This came to be known as the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Constitutional_hypothesis&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Constitutional hypothesis (page does not exist)">constitutional hypothesis</a> which was used by the cigarette companies to explain to the public and politicians why no restrictions on cigarettes were needed. While a statistical link might be show cigarettes are linked to cancer or heart disease, (they said) statistical correlation did not necessarily mean that cigarettes caused the disease. Correlation is not causation became the industry's catch-phrase,

And since both a propensity to smoke and the likelihood of disease were the consequence of genetic predetermination, there was no point in reducing tobacco consumption since it would provide no beneficial effects ... either to the individual or for the community as a whole.

It was a very convincing argument with those politicians who were trying to find a way to protect their state's tobacco farming economy, and it was especially attractive if they needed the generous campaign funds and junkets provided by the tobacco industry.

<h4>Tobacco industry support</h4>

<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Clarence_Cook_Little" title="Clarence Cook Little">Clarence Cook Little</a>, the famous cancer researcher who ran the Tobacco Industry Research Council in a way that suited the industry, reported that he had confidence in Seltzer, and that he should be supported and introduced to other dodgy scientists who worked for the industry. <a href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ajd7aa00/pdf" class="external autonumber" title="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ajd7aa00/pdf" rel="nofollow">[5]</a> Over time he became a central member of the scientific core family of scientists supporting the tobacco industry, while still protesting his independence.

By mid 1962 Seltzer was firmly on the tobacco industry gravy train. <a href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/xbd7aa00/pdf" class="external autonumber" title="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/xbd7aa00/pdf" rel="nofollow">[6]</a> He had been linked up with a major research project conducted at Johns Hopkins university by Carolyn Thomas (similar to the Harvard student study). He was also being used to gather intelligence on the biases and research of other scientists for the tobacco industry <a href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/dbn7aa00/pdf" class="external autonumber" title="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/dbn7aa00/pdf" rel="nofollow">[7]</a> both for possible recruitment, and to prepare counter-measures.

The tobacco industry had also pulled some strings and arranged for him to be recruited to the advisory board of the Surgeon General's Committee (SRC) preparing the annual report on Smoking and Health. <a href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/yqn96c00/pdf" class="external autonumber" title="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/yqn96c00/pdf" rel="nofollow">[8]</a> However he had little influence here.

<h3>Harvard School of Public Health years</h3>

While Seltzer's position at the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Peabody_Museum&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Peabody Museum (page does not exist)">Peabody Museum</a> meant that he was able to use Harvard University letterhead, it still didn't carry the prestige of being a member of Harvard University's academic staff itself. So in 1962, the industry arranged for Seltzer to meet Professor <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Frederick_J._Stare" title="Frederick J. Stare">Frederick J. Stare</a>, a shill for the food and chemical industry, and the Harvard Professor who ran the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Harvard_School_of_Public_Health_Department_of_Nutrition&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Harvard School of Public Health Department of Nutrition (page does not exist)">Department of Nutrition</a> at the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Harvard_School_of_Public_Health&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Harvard School of Public Health (page does not exist)">Harvard School of Public Health</a> as a private fiefdom <a href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/zgd7aa00/pdf" class="external autonumber" title="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/zgd7aa00/pdf" rel="nofollow">[9]</a>

<h4>Tobacco activities and covert support</h4>

At this time he was recruited by the tobacco industry virtually on a full-time basis, and he eventually transferred to work in <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Frederick_J._Stare" title="Frederick J. Stare">Stare</a>'s Department of Nutrition (from 1963 until 1977). This gave him more cover and some manufactured scientific status. <a href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/wid7aa00/pdf" class="external autonumber" title="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/wid7aa00/pdf" rel="nofollow">[10]</a>. It also gave Stare a cut of the proceeds. <a href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/dcm06a00/pdf" class="external autonumber" title="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/dcm06a00/pdf" rel="nofollow">[11]</a>

Stare was to protect him for many years -- and when serious questions arose in the main university, he arranged for payments to be made as grants directly into the Department coffers, by-passing the normal administrative rules. He also organised a lecturing position for Seltzer at <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Tufts_University" title="Tufts University">Tufts University</a> (through a close associate) which allowed Seltzer to use the title of "Professor". Seltzer then offered voluntary statistical services to the American Heart Foundation, Kaiser Permanente, and to other genuine research institutes by using his Harvard School of Public Health and Tufts University credentials.

The tobacco industry utilised his manufactured status as an independent "Professor" from the "Harvard School of Public Health" who was an expert on cardiac (heart) diseases and a consultant to the American Heart Foundation ... by having him appear as their witness in Congressional hearings.

Time Magazine on July 7 1970 reported that Carl Seltzer, "from the Harvard School of Public Health, a consultant to the Surgeon General's Advisory Committee in 1964", said this about heart disease in 1969:

"It will be regrettable, if the impact of the prestige of the U. S. Public Health Service led scientists and the public to believe in and accept as firmly established facts which, on the basis of current knowledge, are speculative and lacking in scientific validity.

The situation demands not special pleading but scientific truth, namely, what is reasonably established. And, certainly, it has not been reasonably established that cigarette smoking causes coronary heart disease."

</blockquote>

The tobacco industry's PR companies also promoted Seltzer to gullible media organisations in other countries, and the industry sent him around the world, as an expert on smoking and heart-disease <a href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/gpn54e00/pdf" class="external autonumber" title="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/gpn54e00/pdf" rel="nofollow">[12]</a>. When not on tour, they paid for him to provide statistical services to many legitimate health research groups in the USA looking into the relationship between smoking and health. [<a href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/uxz95a00/pdf" class="external autonumber" title="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/uxz95a00/pdf" rel="nofollow">[13]</a>] His Harvard credentials were highly attractive to small research groups eagre to boost the prestige of their work.

Over a number of decades, more than $2 million in tobacco money via a secret account was channeled to Seltzer via Stare. The money passed from the companies, to a secret "Special Account #4" held by the Kansas City law firm <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Shook,Hardy%26_Bacon" title="Shook, Hardy & Bacon">Shook, Hardy & Bacon</a>. Payments were then made as grants to the Department of Nutrition, where Stare took his cut, and passed the rest to Seltzer.

Yet both Seltzer and Stare publicly denied any links with the tobacco industry <a href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/zon54e00/pdf" class="external autonumber" title="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/zon54e00/pdf" rel="nofollow">[14]</a> and claimed that they never took a penny from the tobacco industry. <a href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/zon54e00/pdf" class="external autonumber" title="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/zon54e00/pdf" rel="nofollow">[15]</a>

As he approached retirement Seltzer began to specialise in overseas trips which were funded and organised by the tobacco industry. They paid a public relations company to shop him around various countries, setting up meetings, interviews and press conferences with print, radio and television program personel. <a href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/cvr87e00/pdf" class="external autonumber" title="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/cvr87e00/pdf" rel="nofollow">[16]</a> For instance, with his wife Ruth he visited Australia for Philip Morris, then went on to New Zealand. <a href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/inz28e00/pdf" class="external autonumber" title="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/inz28e00/pdf" rel="nofollow">[17]</a> Later he toured Europe.

He was also available for any conference anywhere where the problems of smoking were to be discussed -- both legitimate scientific conferences, and the many fake conferences run secretly by the tobacco industry. Whereever he travelled, he sprouted the message -- "there is no causal connection between smoking and disease. Smoking is not linked to coronary heart disease (CHD)". He tended to avoid questions of any links to lung-cancer, claiming that cancer was not his area of expertise. Later his message was supplemented by the claim that his research showed that giving up smoking had no effect whatsoever on the health of the ex-smokers.

When the US government refused further funding for the famous long-term <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Framington_Heart_Study&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Framington Heart Study (page does not exist)">Framington Heart Study</a> which had proved a causal link between smoking and CHD the tobacco industry secretly put in some supplementary funding. In return, Seltzer found himself on the scientific staff of the study. He was now in a position to review and recalculate twenty years of Framingham's health data on CHD, and, as with the Kaiser Permanente study, he discovered through his re-evaluation of the data, that the original claims about smoking and CHD were wrong. <a href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/jst88e00/pdf" class="external autonumber" title="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/jst88e00/pdf" rel="nofollow">[18]</a> He also promoted the idea that lung cancer, CHD and smoking propensity were all linked with genetically determined Type A personalities.

Many years later, after being forced to retire from the HSPH under the University rules, he returned to work for the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Council_for_Tobacco_Research" title="Council for Tobacco Research">Council for Tobacco Research</a> (CTR) once again through the Peabody Museum. <a href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ewm07c00/pdf" class="external autonumber" title="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ewm07c00/pdf" rel="nofollow">[19]</a> This time he was paid through grants made to a Museum researcher -- passed on to his 'assistant' (Seltzer). Clearly he was too valuable for the industry to lose. <a href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ord8aa00/pdf" class="external autonumber" title="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ord8aa00/pdf" rel="nofollow">[20]</a> <a href="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/jiv22a00/pdf" class="external autonumber" title="http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/jiv22a00/pdf" rel="nofollow">[21]</a>

</div>

</div>

Seltzer, C

Attachments