An Overview of Tobacco’s History

The history of tobacco spans centuries and includes its journey from indigenous cultures to a global commodity.

Tobacco was originally used by the indigenous peoples of the Americas before the arrival of Europeans. Native Americans grew the plant and used it in pipes for both medicinal and ceremonial purposes.

When Christopher Columbus returned to Europe, he brought with him a few tobacco leaves and seeds. However, widespread European use of tobacco didn’t begin until the mid-16th century. Figures like Jean Nicot of France, after whom nicotine is named, were instrumental in popularizing tobacco. It was introduced to France in 1556, Portugal in 1558, Spain in 1559, and England in 1565.

In 1612, John Rolfe, an English settler, successfully cultivated the first commercial tobacco crop in Virginia. By 1619, tobacco had become the colony’s largest export. Over the following two centuries, the burgeoning tobacco industry in North America significantly increased the demand for slave labor.

Initially, tobacco was primarily used for pipe-smoking, chewing, and snuff. It wasn’t until the early 19th century that cigars gained popularity. Although cigarettes had existed in rudimentary form since the early 1600s, they didn’t become widely favored in the United States until after the Civil War. This increase in popularity was due to the spread of “Bright” tobacco, a distinctively cured yellow leaf grown in Virginia and North Carolina. The introduction of “White Burley” tobacco and the creation of the first practical cigarette-making machine, backed by tobacco magnate James Buchanan “Buck” Duke in the late 1880s, further propelled cigarette sales.

The harmful health effects of tobacco were not initially understood; in fact, many early European physicians adopted the Native American belief that tobacco had medicinal properties.

By the early 20th century, as cigarette smoking became more widespread, scientific and medical journals started publishing articles on the health effects of smoking. In 1930, researchers in Cologne, Germany, identified a statistical link between cancer and smoking. Eight years later, Dr. Raymond Pearl from Johns Hopkins University found that smokers had shorter lifespans compared to non-smokers. By 1944, the American Cancer Society began cautioning the public about the potential hazards of smoking, even though they acknowledged that there was no definitive evidence connecting smoking to lung cancer.

Although a statistical correlation between smoking and cancer had been observed, a direct causal relationship had not yet been established. Furthermore, the general public remained largely unaware of the accumulating statistical evidence.

This began to change in 1952 when Reader’s Digest published an article titled “Cancer by the Carton,” which highlighted the dangers of smoking. The article had a profound impact: similar reports started appearing in various periodicals, and the smoking public started to take notice. Consequently, cigarette sales dropped for the first time in over twenty years the following year.

In response, the tobacco industry took decisive action. By 1954, the major U.S. tobacco companies had established the Tobacco Industry Research Council (TIRC) to address the rising health concerns. With guidance from TIRC, tobacco companies began aggressively marketing filtered cigarettes and low-tar options, which were touted as a “healthier” alternative. The public was receptive to these changes, and soon cigarette sales surged once again.

The tobacco industry faced a significant challenge in the early 1960s when the Surgeon General’s Advisory Committee on Smoking and Health was established. This committee was formed due to mounting political pressures and a growing body of scientific evidence linking smoking to cancer. In 1964, the committee published a comprehensive 387-page report titled “Smoking and Health.” The report unequivocally stated that “cigarette smoking is causally related to lung cancer in men,” and while the evidence for women was less extensive, it pointed in the same direction. It highlighted that smokers were nine to ten times more likely to develop lung cancer compared to non-smokers and identified specific carcinogens in cigarette smoke, such as cadmium, DDT, and arsenic.

Since then, the tobacco industry has faced continuous challenges, despite remaining profitable. In 1965, Congress passed the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act, mandating the inclusion of health warnings from the surgeon general on all cigarette packages. Subsequently, in 1971, all broadcast advertising of cigarettes was prohibited. The regulatory measures continued with the banning of smoking on interstate buses and domestic airline flights lasting six hours or less in 1990. Legal actions followed, including Mississippi’s 1994 lawsuit, the first of 22 state cases seeking compensation from tobacco companies for Medicaid costs related to smoking-related illnesses. In 1995, President Clinton announced plans for the FDA to regulate tobacco sales and advertising aimed at minors, further tightening restrictions on the industry.

Tobacco has existed longer than the United States itself, and the U.S. government has acknowledged the link between smoking and cancer for over thirty years. Yet, despite this recognition, the tobacco industry managed to evade significant legal consequences for decades.

Previous attempts to hold tobacco companies accountable through lawsuits were largely unsuccessful. With substantial resources for legal maneuvering, tobacco firms easily overcame early challenges, such as the initial lawsuit filed in 1954. The most notable pre-1990s case occurred in 1983 when Rose Cipollone, a lung cancer patient and smoker, sued Liggett Group, claiming the company failed to warn her about the risks of their products. Initially awarded $400,000, Cipollone’s judgment was later overturned after extensive legal battles, including two appeals to the Supreme Court. Financially unable to sustain the legal costs, Cipollone’s family eventually dropped the case.

Today, however, the legal landscape has shifted significantly. Over the past three decades, state laws and legal precedents have evolved to hold manufacturers more accountable for the consequences of their products. The traditional defense of “contributory negligence,” which previously shielded companies from lawsuits involving consumers partly responsible for their own harm, is no longer as effective in most jurisdictions. Courts now recognize “comparative negligence,” allowing defendants to be held liable for a proportionate share of damages. Additionally, the concept of “strict” liability has gained prominence, enabling courts to assign responsibility to manufacturers even in cases where negligence isn’t proven, simply based on the harm caused by their products.

This transformation in legal standards has created a more favorable environment for plaintiffs seeking justice against tobacco companies, marking a stark contrast to the legal immunity these companies once enjoyed.