214 THE JOURNAL OF SCHOOL HEALTH

effects upon some psychological functions and the higher energy costs suggests that more attention be given to controlling and eliminating noise.

REFERENCES 1.

2.

3. 4.

5.

Clark, R. E., and R. W. Cumley. The Book of Health, Princeton, New Jersey: D. Van Nostrand Co., Inc. 1962. Flexner, A. E. “How Noise Affects School Work,” American School Board Journal, 84: 85-86 1939. Watson, F. R. Sande, G. Noise Levels in University Teaching and Study Areas, brbana, Illinois, Unpublished Master’s Thesis, University of Illinois, 1962. Cochran, W. G., and G. M. Cox. Exfierimental Designs, New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1957.

“becibels and Noise,” School Science and Muth, 36: 58-61 1936.

* * * * *

A REPORT ON THE NATIONAL INTERAGENCY COUNCIL ON SMOKING AND HEALTH

HEB~ERT JONES University of Maryland, Alternate Representative of the

A S H A to the Council

The January 11-12 anniversary meeting of the National Interagency on Smoking and Health in Washington, D.C. is over, but the work of the Council has just begun. The two-day meeting, held one year from the date of the releaae of the Surgeon General’s Report on Smoking and Health, was initiated by four addresses outlining the activities during the preceding year.

An idea of the activities, their flavor and tenor, may best be illustrated by the following quotes. Dr. Terry, speaking about “One Year Later” stated that findings from recent surveys show that “nearly one out of four adult men has given up cigarettes and there are now nearly as many men who are non-smokers as there are smokers.” The figures on women smokers, while not as large, show a 2 3 % decline, the first downward trend ever recorded. Dr. Terry suggested that a more important change occurring might be the attitude change, the precursor of behavioral change. He concluded by stating, “The facts and figures cited are en- couraging. They offer real hope for the future. However, we are only at the beginning of the beginning. The real job lies ahead.”

Dr. Malcolm Merrill, Director of Public Health, California reported on state action to combat the smoking problem. In 45 states and the District of Columbia, activities concerned with the smoking problem are much in evidence. These activities range from simply providing pam- phlets and films, to complex programs of adult and youth education, cessation programs, and behavioral research. Between 1958 and January 1964, 10 states had formed interagency councils to collaborate on the smoking problem. Today the figure stands at 29. This means new and concentrated efforts to approach and solve the problem.

TfIE JOURNAL OF SCHOOL HEALTH 216

Senator Maurine Neuberger (Democrat, Oregon) briefed the Council on the fate of legislation during the past year. The Surgeon General’s request for $1.9 million died in Committee. This figure waa proposed to finance various educational endeavors and should be compared to the $200 million spent annually by tobacco companies for cigarette advertising. The effective date of the Federal Trade Commission’s enforcement of its rule requiring appropriate warnings on cigarette packages and advertising was delayed from January 1, 1965 to July 1, 1965, at the request of Con- gress. Legislation stronger than the FTC’s proposed rules had been introduced by Senator Neuberger but was not accorded a hearing in either House. “Thus, one year from the delivery of the Surgeon General’s unequivocal verdict against the cigarette, Congress has provided no funds for smoking education, no regulations to warn the smoker or potential smoker of the hazards of smoking, no laws to inhibit cigarette advertising campaigns, nothing, in short, but a directive to the FTC to undo the steps which it had forcefully taken to fulfill its mandate to protect the consuming public.”

The newly elected chairman of the Council, Emerson Foote, began by stating that “Cigarette smoking is today responsible for at Zeast 125,000 deaths each year in the United States. Cigarette smoking may be respon- sible for as many as 300,000 deaths per year in this country.” This is why the 17 organizations which make up the NIC have before them such a great opportunity to save lives and improve the level of health. He continued by saying that outlawing the sale of cigarettes or even the out- lawing of cigarette advertising was not the answer. In his opinion, the best approach would be for the tobacco companies voluntarily to suspend cigarette advertising. The belief is that the tobacco industry still does not believe the indictments against smoking or this voluntary suspension would be in existence. “It is only because we feel certain that continued cigarette smoking adversely affects the health of a very large proportion of those who smoke cigarettes, and cause the premature death of a sub- stantial proportion, that we believe special and unusuaJ steps should be taken. And that is why the Council was formed in the firat place.”

The afternoon session on January 11 was devoted to an exchange of information on various state programs. This meeting included repre- sentatives from 25 of the 29 state Interagency Councils, in addition to the NIC members. A panel, with members from Florida, California, North Dakota, Pennsylvania and Vermont, presented ideas on organization and problems encountered in programming. The programs, as outlined by the panel, ranged from very extensive to very minimal. Certain similari- ties in programming were noted however:

1. All reported excellent cooperation from interested agencies. 2. The medical profession seemed to be solidly behind the efforts of

the various state organizations, even taking the lead in some instances.

3. Special programs were being held for youth leaders and institutes were being developed to prepare better teachers.

4. The development of materials (kits) seemed to be the most com- mon project.

216 THE JOURNAL OF SCHOOL HEALTH

The January 12 session was a business meeting of the Board of Direc- tors of the National Interagency Council. Several matters of importance to the American School Health Association were discussed.

The NIC has amended its constitution and it was accepted as amended by the voting membership. Several new material aids were presented and received the endorsement of the NIC. Among these materials were a filmstrip on facts for teachers (NTA) and films on cancer and smoking produced by the NTA and ACS. It was decided that the focus of new materials on smoking should be on younger children (fifth and sixth grade) and on adults with small children. These materials are to be made available through organizations comprising the NIC.

Dr. Harold Diehl was appointed chairman of the legislative committee which has as its concern advertising and labeling and budget for educa- tional programs about the hazards of cigarette smoking. The role of the NIC in legislative hearings was a prime topic for consideration. The question of each Council member being able to speak for the member agency was raised. It was requested that members be solicited for testifying at Congressional hearings in support of or in opposition to various legislation dealing with the problem.

Our American School Health Association has a vital role in the action of the National Interagency Council. It is our duty and responsibility to support the efforts of the state and national councils whenever possible. The concentration of so many resources to combat the smoking problem can lead to a better understanding of its complexities and to successful plans of action to handle the matter.

* * * * *

GIFTED CHILDREN GROW BIGGER . . . SO DO THEIR SIBLINGS.* The statement has been made that gifted children are general1 bigger and healthier than ordinary children. An analysis of the studies on which ths statement is based showed that the majority of intellectually brilliant children come from homes of relatively high cultural and educational status where standards of child care are much superior to those of the average home. To test whether these factors are responsible for superior physical health and vigor, com arisons were made of the physical status of children of superior intelligence and tgose of average or inferior intelligence from the same homes. No significant differences were found between the ifted pupils and their less gifted brothers or sisters in any of five standard physi- cal %aracteristics: 1) weight, 2) height, 3) biacromial diameter (skeletal width at the shoulders), 4) bi-iliac diameter (skeletal width a t the pelvic irdle, and 5 ) leg cir- cumference (maximum circumference of the left calf). The fata collected do not show statistically significant support for the claim that gifted children are bigger than ordinary children from the same homes. These data do not negate previous studies which have shown that children with extraordinarily high tested intelligence tend to surpass unselected children in the population at large. Rather they raise a question as to what goes into physical development and whether physical su eriority would continue to show up if economic and social conditions were controlle8. They suggest that the statement, “The gifted child is bigger than his friends,” should read instead, “The gifted child probably comes from a home where . . . children grow bigger.” children and their less gifted siblings. Child Development, March 1964). Medical Association, Health Education Service for Schools

(Frank La;ycock and J. S. Caylor: “Physiques

January, 1965, p. 3.

* * * * *