A year ago this week, I was celebrating with health advocates across the country when they won their 20-year battle to get the federal government to regulate dumb and deadly cigarettes. I can't believe it took that long to convince Congress that nicotine, the powerful addictive drug in tobacco, should be treated like any other drug sold to the public.
After years of marketing cancer sticks to kids and denying that they manipulated the amount of nicotine in their products to hook smokers, shameless tobacco companies at last had to answer to the Food and Drug Administration. They were given a year to stop their clever tricks such as making candy-flavored smokes and using labels like "light" and "low-tar" to make cigarettes sound less harmful.
On Tuesday, the new rules will take effect. But those devoted to the anti-smoking cause know the toxic battles are far from over. With a $12.8 billion marketing budget, tobacco companies will find subtle new ways to attract new smokers.
"They are always just one step ahead of us," said Margo Sidener of Breathe California. "The tobacco companies have the best advertising people in the world, unfortunately."
Smoking on the screen
It doesn't help that cigarette makers get lots of free advertising in movies and on TV. When Sigourney Weaver infamously puffed on a cigarette in "Avatar," it wasn't just a ridiculous endorsement of smoking for the most massive worldwide audience of children and adults ever. Worse, it made no sense. This is supposed to be the future. Do we really think that brilliant scientists will be smoking in their labs in outer space?
In the Bay Area, we live in a smoke-free bubble, as I'm darkly reminded whenever I travel to other parts of the country. It's unsettling to walk into a hazy restaurant and be asked if I want a smoking or nonsmoking table. Or to check into a hotel and find out there are only slightly smelly smoking rooms available. Another reason to be happy to get back home.
While 20 percent of American adults smoke, the number in Santa Clara County is only 10 percent.
And because so many local cities ban smoking in business districts and other public places, smokers have been forced underground.
More kids are puffing
Still, the number of county teens who smoke has inched back up to 13 percent, from a low of 9.5 percent in 2004. And smokeless tobacco, which can cause mouth cancer, is catching on with high school boys.
"I think the public has the misconception that because they don't see as many kids out there smoking, that they aren't doing it," Sidener said. "But they are."
The county recently received a $7 million federal grant for tobacco education. Unfortunately, it's still pretty easy for local kids to buy cigarettes. One way our cities could deal with that problem would be to require stores that sell tobacco to be licensed. Then, if they got caught selling to kids, they would lose the right and the revenue.
And there still is a lot more that the FDA could do. I would like to see the agency exercise its new, long-overdue power by limiting the amount of nicotine in tobacco products to make them less addictive, just as it decrees how much codeine there is in prescription cough medicine.
That way if kids start smoking because they think it's cool, at least they'll be able to quit when they realize it's killing them.
понедельник, 21 июня 2010 г.
понедельник, 14 июня 2010 г.
Big Tobacco Takes On New York Smoking Regulation
New York City used to be the "murder capital" of the country. These days, it looks more like the nation's health club and spa.
In 2003, the Big Apple outlawed smoking in all bars and restaurants, and in 2006 banished trans fats from local eateries. In 2008, the city began requiring chain restaurants to post the nutritional content of their offerings, meaning New Yorkers would never look at a Big Mac the same way again. And earlier this year, a state assemblyman from Brooklyn introduced legislation that would prohibit restaurants from using salt "in any form" when preparing food.
New York has gotten its share of good-humored ribbing about its "nanny state" tendencies over the past few years. But the city's latest regulation is getting more serious pushback from a determined source: the tobacco industry.
For the past six months, New York has required retailers to display posters with nauseating photos that show the effects of prolonged tobacco use. The placards include the typical warnings that smoking "causes lung cancer" or "causes tooth decay" but also feature photos of, for example, a blackened lung or a rotted tooth, to drive the point home in an extremely visceral fashion.
On Wednesday, three leading tobacco companies -- Philip Morris, R. J. Reynolds, and Lorillard -- filed a lawsuit contending the signs improperly usurp the federal government's role of regulating tobacco packaging. The companies also argue that the law violates the First Amendment, since it forces storeowners to display the signs even if they disagree with their message. The New York State Association of Convenience Stores, a non-profit trade association made up of 250 companies, also joined the suit.
"The mandated signs crowd out other advertisements and otherwise dominate the point of sale in many smaller establishments, to the exclusion of merchandise or other messages chosen by the store owners," the suit says.
Floyd Abrams, a First Amendment lawyer who is representing the retailers, told The New York Times on Friday that the city "doesn't have the right...to force other people to adopt its expression."
Sarah Perl, assistant commissioner for tobacco control at New York's Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, told the Times in December that the posters are intended to target consumers "at the point-of-sale moment." Perl added that customers have learned to tune out the generic Surgeon General's warnings that appear on all cigarette packs and advertisements, in large part because those warnings haven't changed much since their introduction in 1966.
Regardless of the outcome, the suit will have far-reaching consequences even outside New York. Massachusetts, which was in the process of implementing a law requiring similar signs, has a special interest in the case.
"Any education and cessation material we can get out there, we would like to get out on a state level," Jennifer Manley, a spokeswoman for the Massachusetts Department of Public Health, told Boston.com on Sunday. "We're going to keep watching New York City closely to see what the outcome is."
And even if the tobacco companies win this round, they'll take a hit in 2012, when federal standards will begin mandating more conspicuous warnings on cigarette packages. Unlike the subtle black-and-white boxes currently featured on the sides of cigarette boxes, the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act requires that warnings cover at least 50 percent of the package and that the word "warning" appear in capital letters.
The Act was signed into law by President Obama, himself an occasional smoker, last June.
In 2003, the Big Apple outlawed smoking in all bars and restaurants, and in 2006 banished trans fats from local eateries. In 2008, the city began requiring chain restaurants to post the nutritional content of their offerings, meaning New Yorkers would never look at a Big Mac the same way again. And earlier this year, a state assemblyman from Brooklyn introduced legislation that would prohibit restaurants from using salt "in any form" when preparing food.
New York has gotten its share of good-humored ribbing about its "nanny state" tendencies over the past few years. But the city's latest regulation is getting more serious pushback from a determined source: the tobacco industry.
For the past six months, New York has required retailers to display posters with nauseating photos that show the effects of prolonged tobacco use. The placards include the typical warnings that smoking "causes lung cancer" or "causes tooth decay" but also feature photos of, for example, a blackened lung or a rotted tooth, to drive the point home in an extremely visceral fashion.
On Wednesday, three leading tobacco companies -- Philip Morris, R. J. Reynolds, and Lorillard -- filed a lawsuit contending the signs improperly usurp the federal government's role of regulating tobacco packaging. The companies also argue that the law violates the First Amendment, since it forces storeowners to display the signs even if they disagree with their message. The New York State Association of Convenience Stores, a non-profit trade association made up of 250 companies, also joined the suit.
"The mandated signs crowd out other advertisements and otherwise dominate the point of sale in many smaller establishments, to the exclusion of merchandise or other messages chosen by the store owners," the suit says.
Floyd Abrams, a First Amendment lawyer who is representing the retailers, told The New York Times on Friday that the city "doesn't have the right...to force other people to adopt its expression."
Sarah Perl, assistant commissioner for tobacco control at New York's Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, told the Times in December that the posters are intended to target consumers "at the point-of-sale moment." Perl added that customers have learned to tune out the generic Surgeon General's warnings that appear on all cigarette packs and advertisements, in large part because those warnings haven't changed much since their introduction in 1966.
Regardless of the outcome, the suit will have far-reaching consequences even outside New York. Massachusetts, which was in the process of implementing a law requiring similar signs, has a special interest in the case.
"Any education and cessation material we can get out there, we would like to get out on a state level," Jennifer Manley, a spokeswoman for the Massachusetts Department of Public Health, told Boston.com on Sunday. "We're going to keep watching New York City closely to see what the outcome is."
And even if the tobacco companies win this round, they'll take a hit in 2012, when federal standards will begin mandating more conspicuous warnings on cigarette packages. Unlike the subtle black-and-white boxes currently featured on the sides of cigarette boxes, the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act requires that warnings cover at least 50 percent of the package and that the word "warning" appear in capital letters.
The Act was signed into law by President Obama, himself an occasional smoker, last June.
понедельник, 7 июня 2010 г.
U.S. cigarettes triples the risk of cancer
U.S. cigarettes are most harmful of colleagues manufactured in Australia, Britain or Canada. It comprises a variety of nitrosamines (carcinogenic) very high, which increases the risk of cancer, up to threefold. The research supports the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), conducted by Dr. Jim Pirkl and published in “Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers and Prevention. Scientists worked with 126 smokers, considering the brand of “blondes” like and subjecting them to tests to assess the presence of nitrosamines in the lungs, urine and oral cavity. It should be noted that the researchers chose smoking faithful to a single brand and consumers of popular national brands.
The CDC investigation concluded as U.S. cigarettes were the most capable in promoting cancer, and this for two main reasons. First of all, they are made with dark tobacco, while the varieties British, Australian and Canadian tobacco exploit “blond.” In addition, producers of the U.S. favor a particular system of tanning and flavoring, can further increase the percentage of nitrosamines. Doctors involved hope their work can help company to produce safer cigarettes, even if they admit it big and how far from simple. Nor is it certain, in fact, if a reduction of nitrosamines would lead to a reduction of cancer among smokers, since they are involved in the process other chemicals.
Explains Professor John Spangler, of the Faculty of Medicine of Wake Forest University: “There are at least two dozen other carcinogens in cigarettes, not to mention the other 4000 chemicals that can contribute to heart disease and also cause respiratory” . Source: “Study: U.S. Cigarettes Have More Cancer Agents”, CBS News, 1/06/010
WARNING: The article below is the result of research and development of news published on the Web and / or received. The author, preparation and properties, not necessarily endorse the thinking and the validity of what is published. Without any liability on the above, invite the reader to a review at the accredited sources and / or having the title.
вторник, 1 июня 2010 г.
Women Smokers Targeted on 'World No Tobacco Day'
Although cancer death rates for women are generally on the downswing, statistics indicate that female lung cancer fatalities are rising, the American Lung Association (ALA) says.
Click here to find out more!
More than 170,000 American women die every year from tobacco-related illness, the ALA estimates. And chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), including chronic bronchitis and emphysema, kills more women than men.
To draw attention to the harmful effects of tobacco use and tobacco industry marketing as it pertains to women and girls, the ALA and the World Health Organization are observing World No Tobacco Day on May 31.
The organization hopes awareness of World No Tobacco Daywill encourage female smokers to kick the habit, perhaps with the help of the ALA's "Freedom from Smoking Online" program, which provides both men and women assistance with quitting.
"Quitting smoking is the single most important thing that most individuals can do to improve their health, and World No Tobacco Day is a great day for all to stop using tobacco products," Mary H. Partridge, ALA's national board chair, said in a news release.
In addition to underscoring the importance of quitting, the ALA also seeks to highlight the ways in which the marketing tactics of tobacco manufacturers target women.
"The tobacco industry has a long and shameful history of targeting women and children," said Partridge. "The most recent example is R.J. Reynolds' Camel No. 9 cigarettes, a pink-hued version that one newspaper dubbed 'Barbie Camel' because of marketing that appealed to girls. Advertised as 'available in stiletto' with promotional giveaways of flavored lip glosses and pink purses, it seems clear who R.J. Reynolds was targeting.
Click here to find out more!
More than 170,000 American women die every year from tobacco-related illness, the ALA estimates. And chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), including chronic bronchitis and emphysema, kills more women than men.
To draw attention to the harmful effects of tobacco use and tobacco industry marketing as it pertains to women and girls, the ALA and the World Health Organization are observing World No Tobacco Day on May 31.
The organization hopes awareness of World No Tobacco Daywill encourage female smokers to kick the habit, perhaps with the help of the ALA's "Freedom from Smoking Online" program, which provides both men and women assistance with quitting.
"Quitting smoking is the single most important thing that most individuals can do to improve their health, and World No Tobacco Day is a great day for all to stop using tobacco products," Mary H. Partridge, ALA's national board chair, said in a news release.
In addition to underscoring the importance of quitting, the ALA also seeks to highlight the ways in which the marketing tactics of tobacco manufacturers target women.
"The tobacco industry has a long and shameful history of targeting women and children," said Partridge. "The most recent example is R.J. Reynolds' Camel No. 9 cigarettes, a pink-hued version that one newspaper dubbed 'Barbie Camel' because of marketing that appealed to girls. Advertised as 'available in stiletto' with promotional giveaways of flavored lip glosses and pink purses, it seems clear who R.J. Reynolds was targeting.
Подписаться на:
Сообщения (Atom)