"ExxonMobil has manufactured uncertainty about the human causes of global warming just as tobacco companies denied their product caused lung cancer," said Alden Meyer, the Union of Concerned Scientists' Director of Strategy & Policy. "A modest but effective investment has allowed the oil giant to fuel doubt about global warming to delay government action just as Big Tobacco did for over 40 years."

Smoke, Mirrors & Hot Air: How ExxonMobil Uses Big Tobacco's Tactics to "Manufacture Uncertainty" on Climate Change details how the oil company, like the tobacco industry in previous decades, has

* raised doubts about even the most indisputable scientific evidence
* funded an array of front organizations to create the appearance of a broad platform for a tight-knit group of vocal climate change contrarians who misrepresent peer-reviewed scientific findings
* attempted to portray its opposition to action as a positive quest for "sound science" rather than business self-interest
* used its access to the Bush administration to block federal policies and shape government communications on global warming

ExxonMobil-funded organizations consist of an overlapping collection of individuals serving as staff, board members, and scientific advisors that publish and re-publish the works of a small group of climate change contrarians. The George C. Marshall Institute, for instance, which has received $630,000 from ExxonMobil, recently touted a book edited by Patrick Michaels, a long-time climate change contrarian who is affiliated with at least 11 organizations funded by ExxonMobil. Similarly, ExxonMobil funds a number of lesser-known groups such as the Annapolis Center for Science-Based Public Policy and Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow. Both groups promote the work of several climate change contrarians, including Sallie Baliunas, an astrophysicist who is affiliated with at least nine ExxonMobil-funded groups.

Baliunas is best known for a 2003 paper alleging the climate had not changed significantly in the past millennia that was rebutted by 13 scientists who stated she had misrepresented their work in her paper. This renunciation did not stop ExxonMobil-funded groups from continuing to promote the paper. Through methods such as these, ExxonMobil has been able to amplify and prop up work that has been discredited by reputable climate scientists.

"When one looks closely, ExxonMobil's underhanded strategy is as clear and indisputable as the scientific research it's meant to discredit," said Seth Shulman, an investigative journalist who wrote the UCS report. "The paper trail shows that, to serve its corporate interests, ExxonMobil has built a vast echo chamber of seemingly independent groups with the express purpose of spreading disinformation about global warming."

ExxonMobil has used the laudable goal of improving scientific understanding of global warming-under the guise of "sound science"-for the pernicious ends of delaying action to reduce heat-trapping emissions indefinitely. ExxonMobil also exerted unprecedented influence over U.S. policy on global warming, from successfully recommending the appointment of key personnel in the Bush administration to funding climate change deniers in Congress.

"As a scientist, I like to think that facts will prevail, and they do eventually," said Dr. James McCarthy, Alexander Agassiz Professor of Biological Oceanography at Harvard University and former chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's working group on climate change impacts. "It's shameful that ExxonMobil has sought to obscure the facts for so long when the future of our planet depends on the steps we take now and in the coming years."

The burning of oil and other fossil fuels results in additional atmospheric carbon dioxide that blankets the Earth and traps heat. The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere has increased greatly over the last century and global temperatures are rising as a result. Though solutions are available now that will cut global warming emissions while creating jobs, saving consumers money, and protecting our national security, ExxonMobil has manufactured confusion around climate change science, and these actions have helped to forestall meaningful action that could minimize the impacts of future climate change.

"ExxonMobil needs to be held accountable for its cynical disinformation campaign on global warming," said Meyer. "Consumers, shareholders and Congress should let the company know loud and clear that its behavior on this issue is unacceptable and must change."

FTC investigators said some of the companies touted their drugs saying their effects could include decreased risks of osteoporosis, Alzheimer's and cancer.

Health Canada has not authorized any of the drugs for sale in Canada.

"The marketers are required to back up the claims with the science and if they can't do that they can't make the claim. But we don't ban the products from the shelves," said FTC commissioner Deborah Platt Majoras.

The marketers of Xenadrine EFX must pay at least $8 million US and as much as $12.8 million, Majoras said, while the marketers of Cortislim must pay $12 million.

Bayer Corp will pay a civil penalty of $3.2 million while Trim Spa has been fined $1.5 million.

Majoras said the FTC will direct some of the money back to the consumers.

"We always try to get money back when consumers have been deceived," she said.

"In this instance, I'm pleased to say that I believe we're going to get millions back from some of these products to be able to return it to consumers."

She also urged people trying to lose weight to evaluate products on the market with a critical eye.

"You're not going to find weight loss in a bottle of pills," she said.

The price decline came despite an unexpected drop in U.S. oil supplies. According to information released Thursday by the U.S. Energy Department, inventories of oil fell 1.3 million barrels to 319.7 million barrels last week. Analysts had been forecasting a supply increase of over 900,000 barrels.

Observers said oil producers could be prompted to react if the weather trend continues in eastern North America.

"If the unseasonably warm weather stretches deeper into January, OPEC will need to deliver more production cuts soon to keep prices above its unofficial $60 US target," said BMO Capital Markets senior economist Bart Melek in a commentary.

"Based on every statement from the cartel and its recent actions on the ground, it seems that oil exporters are ready to act quickly to balance the market," he said.

Oil fell $2.73 US on Wednesday to close at $58.32 US a barrel.

That would be a small piece of Schwarzenegger's stated goal: to ensure medical coverage for all of the 6.5 million Californians who now have none. Experts say that could cost upward of $10 billion a year.

If successful, the governor's effort to cover all children would be a substantial political feat. Only a few states guarantee coverage for all those under 18. Schwarzenegger himself vetoed a measure to cover all children in 2005, complaining that lawmakers offered no way to pay for it.

California's Republican legislators, who blocked a more modest effort to extend health-care coverage last year, are sure to rebel against a plan that includes children of illegal immigrants.

Schwarzenegger is scheduled to announce his full health plan Monday. His office is still finalizing many parts of that package, but aides have made clear that it will be an ambitious effort to restrain health-care costs and reduce the state's uninsured population.

All sectors of the health-care industry, including hospitals, insurers, doctors, patients, businesses and government, would pay some of the costs under Schwarzenegger's plan. People familiar with the proposal say that it includes new requirements for businesses to cover employees, though the details were unclear. The more cost shouldered by employers and workers, the less the state would have to spend.

In addition, a number of measures favored by some aides, such as limiting the profits of insurers, remain undecided.

"There is no final health plan," said Adam Mendelsohn, Schwarzenegger's communications director. "As has been the case from the start, all ideas are on the table and the final touches are being applied. The administration is not confirming the inclusion of any one piece."

But several independent sources said Schwarzenegger had committed to the framework of the children's insurance portion. Administration officials have privately told people outside government that they intend to guarantee medical coverage for children of families earning up to 300% of the poverty level, or $60,000 a year for a family of four. Those families have 90% of the children without insurance. But the cutoff is not yet set in stone.

Schwarzenegger's proposal goes further than one put forward last month by Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata (D-Oakland). His plan excluded illegal immigrants. Assembly Speaker Fabian Nuņez (D-Los Angeles) incorporated children of undocumented residents into his plan, which also was announced in December.

"A lot of us are really looking to [Schwarzenegger] for leadership," said Wendy Lazarus, founder of the Children's Partnership, a nonpartisan child advocacy group based in Santa Monica and Washington, D.C. "Assuming he is going to tell us that he is going to cover all kids, this is great news for California's kids."

About 90% of California's children already have insurance, either through their parents' coverage or through state Medi-Cal programs that help the impoverished. For years, advocates have been pressing lawmakers to finish the job, arguing that the electorate would be sympathetic to the plight of children.

"It's the low-hanging fruit of the health-care reform debate," said Dr. Bob Ross, president of the California Endowment, a private foundation in Los Angeles that was created to push for expanded access to health care.

"Kids are relatively cheaper to cover" than adults, he said. "From a public health standpoint, it's smarter to cover all children regardless of immigration. You just don't want unimmunized kids surfing around in the population."

Such arguments have yet to win the day in Sacramento. Last year, Schwarzenegger backed a budget plan that would have helped fund local children's initiatives. Republican lawmakers blocked the proposal, because it would have included coverage for children of illegal immigrants.

"We believe Californians do not want to reward illegal behavior," said Assembly Republican leader Mike Villines of Clovis. "There are so many here [legally] who are hurting and trying to make ends meet, we've got to focus on them first."

The GOP is a minority in both houses of the Legislature, but most proposals involving state spending require a two-thirds vote, giving Republicans the power to stop them. However, it is possible that Schwarzenegger's plan could be molded to need a simple majority vote, like the last major piece of health-care legislation to become law.

That measure, a 2003 mandate that most employers provide insurance for their workers, was repealed by voters the following year.

Schwarzenegger has taken incremental steps to expand existing programs aimed at children's health, including the addition of $80 million to the state budget last year.

Martha Escutia, a former Democratic state senator from Whittier who pressed for coverage of all children, including those of illegal immigrants, said Schwarzenegger told her in 2004 that he agreed with her.

"I said very bluntly that there was no way we could distinguish between children based on legal status," she recalled Wednesday. "And the governor agreed. He said, 'Children are children.' I remember him saying that very clearly."

Sixty-nine percent of Californian children without health insurance in 2005 were eligible for existing programs but were not enrolled, according to the UCLA Center for Health Policy Research.

That was due to a variety of factors, including inadequate funds in some county programs to cover all those who qualified, and some of the bureaucratic requirements for entering state programs.

Many parents, for instance, are required to prove that their earnings are low enough to qualify their children.

There is disagreement about how many of the uninsured children are here illegally. A 2003 UCLA survey said that 33% were not citizens, but that does not mean that they were in the country illegally. Ross, of the California Endowment, said the number was below 15%.

Most of the other states that already guarantee coverage for all children do it through state-paid programs for those from poor families, and by allowing better-off families to cover their children by paying a portion of the costs for the same programs.

Typically, the more a family earns, the more it pays. Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, New Hampshire, New Jersey and Vermont all have such programs.

Lazarus, of the Children's Partnership, said that although California would not be the first to cover all children, it has fewer employers providing insurance and more illegal immigrants than other states, making coverage more challenging.

"For California to step up at this time when states and Congress are really focused on health-care reform means that California could have a really significant leadership role across the nation," she said.