Health Officer's follow-on Editorial (May '98): The health-wise answer to this whole tobacco issue
is to authorize the FDA to exercise absolute control over the content of nicotine — a
powerfully addictive
drug (and poison*) — in all processed tobacco, gradually
eliminating nicotine from all tobacco products, thereby making it easy for anyone using
tobacco products in any form to quit without having to deal with nicotine-induced
addiction. This has been the recommendation of the last two President's Commissions on
Tobacco Legislation. According to the FDA, tobacco companies have had the technology
for over 35 years to remove nicotine from cigarettes. But then, who would smoke?
**
*Nicotine is one of
the most toxic of all poisons and has a rapid onset of action. Apart from local
caustic actions, the target organs are the peripheral and central nervous systems. In the
span of a few hours, a mere 60 mg of nicotine (1/500 of an
ounce) is lethal to a 150 pound human (10 mg of nicotine is lethal to a child
...1/3,000 of an ounce!) The minimum lethal dose (MLD) of tobacco
is 5 gram, or about 1/6 of an ounce... see Nicotine.
Nicotine is the only active ingredient
in some of our most effective insecticides, but its use has been limited because of its
toxic properties. Nine nicotine containing pesticides are registered for use in the U.S.,
and none of the product labels list nicotine at more than 14% (insects have never
developed a tolerance for nicotine).
ADDENDUM,
January 2007: Big Tobacco Boosting Nicotine in
Cigarettes:
(Study shows consumers have been unaware of
the trend, researchers say.)
ABC World News (1/18, lead
story, 2:50, Gibson) reported, "Researchers from Harvard University have been
monitoring nicotine levels in more than 100 brands of cigarettes for years now, and the
potency of addictive nicotine in cigarettes has been steadily on the rise. And the
nicotine levels fly in the face of tobacco companies' promises to help people quit
smoking." ABC (Weir) added, "The author of this study tells me that Big Tobacco
is deliberately trying to make it more difficult." Prof. Gregory Connolly, the
study's author, was shown saying, "In fact, the industry does control nicotine to
remain addictive among smokers." Weir continued, "From 1997 to 2005, the study
found an 11 percent nicotine increase across all major brands and all styles, from
menthols to ultra-lights. Both Philip Morris and RJ Reynolds disputed the findings today,
with Reynolds blaming the 'natural variability of tobacco crops' and 'errors in the
machine-test method.'" Weir continued, "But even if tobacco companies
deliberately changed the formula to hook more smokers, they broke no laws, because
cigarettes are the one drug not controlled by the Food and Drug Administration." Weir
added, "In Florida alone, thousands of patients are suing the tobacco companies.
Legal scholars I spoke to said this study will help the plaintiffs there, proving to
juries that big tobacco has not changed its ways since the epic landmark judgment of a
year ago."
The New York Times (1/19, A16, Harris)
reports that Dr. Connolly "said there was nothing random about the growth in nicotine
yields, which occurred across all cigarette brands and makers," and "Dr. David
Kessler, who as commissioner of the FDA during the Clinton administration sought to impose
regulatory authority over cigarette makers, said cigarette makers had been manipulating
nicotine levels for decades." The study has "led to renewed calls Thursday for
greater federal oversight of the industry," with Senator Edward M. Kennedy,
(D-Mass.), chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee,
promising "to reintroduce within weeks a bill that would allow the Food and Drug
Administration to regulate cigarettes." Philip Morris released a statement
"saying the company supported Mr. Kennedy's bill."
The Washington Post (1/19, A9) notes,
"To boost amounts of nicotine inhaled by smokers, cigarette makers intensified the
concentration of nicotine in their tobacco and modified cigarette designs to increase the
number of puffs per cigarette."
Washington
Post lauds Senator Kennedy's bill. The Washington Post (1/19, A18)
editorializes, "For years, the federal government has tried, ineffectively, to
litigate away the effects of smoking on people and the public purse," and "the
new Democratic majority has a chance to finally pass" the "needed reform"
of "giving the Food and Drug Administration -- which already scrutinized everything
from aspirin to Alpo -- the authority to regulate tobacco products." Besides dealing
with advertising targeting children and changing warning labels, "the FDA would have
the power to require reasonable changes in the composition of the product so that it would
be less dangerous to smokers and those around them. As it stands, tobacco companies are
generally loath to alter their products, especially if doing so is merely to protect the
health of their customers." Giving these powers to the FDA "is a good idea that
has languished for too long."
**ADDENDUM,
2009:
Monday, June 22, 2009 — President Obama signed into law H.R.
1256/S. 986, the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act.
APHA’s executive director Georges Benjamin joined the president at the
signing ceremony at the White House. This new law gives the Food and
Drug Administration (FDA) the authority to regulate tobacco products.
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC),
tobacco use is responsible for about 438,000 deaths each year in the
United States. In addition to this staggering statistic, tobacco use
costs more than $96 billion each year in health care expenditures and an
additional $97 billion per year in lost productivity. The law creates
FDA authority to effectively regulate the manufacturing, marketing,
labeling, distribution and sale of tobacco products, including the
authority to:
-
Stop illegal sales of tobacco products to children
and adolescents;
-
Require changes in tobacco products, such as the
reduction or elimination of harmful chemicals, to make them less
harmful and less addictive;
-
Restrict advertising and promotions that appeal to
children and adolescents;
-
Prohibit unsubstantiated health claims about
so-called “reduced risk” tobacco products that discourage current
tobacco users from quitting or encourage new users to start;
-
Require the disclosure of tobacco product content
and tobacco industry research about the health effects of their
products;
-
Require larger and more informative health warnings
on tobacco products;
-
Study and address issues associated with menthol
tobacco products; and
-
Fully fund the FDA’s new tobacco-related
responsibilities with a user fee on tobacco companies so no funding
is diverted from existing FDA work.
|
