Reply With Quote
That's some reach there.
May 13, 2008
Cigarette Bill Treats Menthol With Leniency
By STEPHANIE SAUL
Some public health experts are questioning why menthol, the most widely used cigarette flavoring and the most popular cigarette choice of African-American smokers, is receiving special protection as Congress tries to regulate tobacco for the first time.
The legislation, which would give the Food and Drug Administration the power to oversee tobacco products, would try to reduce smoking’s allure to young people by banning most flavored cigarettes, including clove and cinnamon.
( hmm, are these 2 flavors primarily popular with WHITE kids?)
But those new strictures would exempt menthol — even though menthol masks the harsh taste of cigarettes for beginners and may make it harder for the addicted to kick the smoking habit. For years, public health authorities have worried that menthol might be a factor in high cancer rates in African-Americans.
The reason menthol is seen as politically off limits, despite those concerns, is that mentholated brands are so crucial to the American cigarette industry. They make up more than one-fourth of the $70 billion American cigarette market and are becoming increasingly important to the industry leader, Philip Morris USA, without whose lobbying support the legislation might have no chance of passage.
“I would have been in favor of banning menthol,” said Senator Judd Gregg, Republican of New Hampshire, who supports the bill. “But as a practical matter that simply wasn’t doable.”
Even the head of the National African American Tobacco Prevention Network, a nonprofit group that has been adamantly against menthol, acknowledges that the ingredient needed to be off the bargaining table — for now — because he does not want to imperil the bill’s chances.
“The bottom line is we want the legislation,” said William S. Robinson, the group’s executive director. “But we want to reserve the right to address this issue at some critical point because of the percentage of people of African descent who use mentholated products.”
( WTF? Robinson on the take from BigTobacco? )
Supporters of the tobacco legislation, including the Senate bill’s sponsor, Edward M. Kennedy, the Massachusetts Democrat, say the bill addresses the potential health risks of menthol by giving the F.D.A. the authority to remove cigarette additives, including menthol, if they are proved harmful.
( not the dubya pro-businesss FDA. And guess pays for nearly all product testing? the corps )
Menthol is particularly controversial because public health authorities have worried about its health effects on African-Americans. Nearly 75 percent of black smokers use menthol brands, compared with only about one in four white smokers.
That is why one former public health official says the legislation’s menthol exemption is a “cave-in to the industry,” an opinion shared by some other public health advocates.
“I think we can say definitively that menthol induces smoking in the African-American community and subsequently serves as a direct link to African-American death and disease,” said the former official, Robert G. Robinson, who retired two years ago as an associate director in the office of smoking and health at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The current lead scientist on tobacco related issues for the C.D.C, Terry F. Pechacek, said the legislation’s exemption for menthol was an issue being discussed in the scientific community. "I would just say this is an area of clear scientific interest and it merits very careful attention."
( Pechacek ing luke-warm PC wimp!probably on the take from the corps, and/or appointed by the Repugs )
The legislation could soon be up for vote in both chambers of Congress, where it has broad support. It is by no means a sure bet — though not because of the menthol exemption.
Despite the support of Mr. Kennedy and 56 co-sponsors in the Senate, the legislation faces some determined opposition from tobacco-state lawmakers who resist industry regulation. And the White House has said it opposes the legislation, arguing that F.D.A. regulation could create the false impression that tobacco is safe.
( GMAFB Since when have the Repugs and WH given a flying about product safety or consumer safety??)
The legislation is largely a result of negotiations during sessions in 2003 and 2004 between lawmakers, antismoking groups and Philip Morris — the only major American cigarette company that supports the effort to regulate the industry.
“My recollection is that we were able to eliminate the use of flavored cigarettes, strawberry, mocha, and all this stuff that is clearly targeted at young kids and to start them smoking tobacco,” Mike DeWine, the former Ohio senator who helped arrange a series of negotiations between Philip Morris and an influential antismoking group, the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, said in a recent telephone interview. “Where the compromise was made as I recall was on menthol,” Mr. DeWine said.
While Philip Morris and other tobacco companies acknowledge the health hazards of smoking, they contend that menthol does nothing to worsen those risks. One of the government’s current top public health scientists on tobacco, however, says there are few definitive answers about the health impact of menthol cigarettes. Still, he points to several studies that suggest menthol smokers may be exposed to higher levels of dangerous compounds than nonmenthol smokers.
“There are multiple lines of evidence, generally consistent, suggesting that there’s reason for concern,” said Dr. Pechacek, the associate science director of the office on smoking for the C.D.C.
Of 45 million smokers in this country, the American Lung Association identifies about 33 million as non-Hispanic whites and 5 million as African-American. Historically, statistics showed that a somewhat higher percentage of African-Americans smoked than whites. Recent figures, though, indicate about the same rate of smoking for both groups — in the 21 to 22 percent range.
But the use of menthol cigarettes is disproportionately an African-American phenomenon, which critics say has been reinforced by decades of advertising aimed at black consumers. Concerns about menthol have circulated since at least 1998, when the C.D.C. reported that menthol “may increase the absorption of harmful smoking cons uents.”
Four years later the C.D.C., along with the National Cancer Ins ute, sponsored a meeting in Atlanta on menthol cigarettes and disease rates in African-Americans. The official report from that meeting said the research up to that point had been inconclusive, but it called for further studies.
In five large studies of menthol to date, only one has found higher rates of cancer among menthol smokers than nonmenthol smokers, and only in men. But a growing body of evidence suggests that menthol makes it harder to kick the smoking habit — a view shared even by many scientists who say that menthol in cigarettes is not itself dangerous.
A tobacco company spokesman, Brendan J. McCormick, said menthol was “an ingredient and a flavor preference that is widely preferred by more than a quarter of adult smokers out there, and it’s got a long history of use.”
( "So?"
lung cancer as leading cancer death and lying, predatory cig mgs ALSO have long histories )
Mr. McCormick works for the Altria Group, the parent company of Philip Morris USA, whose Marlboro Menthol is the second-largest menthol brand in this country and also the fastest growing.
Last year, to counter concerns about menthol, a mint extract that can also be made synthetically, Philip Morris scientists published a 26-page paper in Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, a peer-reviewed scientific journal. After examining dozens of studies on menthol, the company’s scientists said they found little evidence that menthol cigarettes were any more harmful or addictive than other types or that they encouraged people to start smoking at younger ages.
Its support of the tobacco legislation has put Philip Morris at odds with other cigarette companies, which generally oppose regulation. As the American industry’s biggest player, Philip Morris says it is willing to let the F.D.A. oversee tobacco because as the company tries to develop products that are less harmful, it wants a regulatory agency to evaluate and approve those products. The company also says it would prefer national tobacco regulations rather than a hodgepodge of state and local rules. But the company’s rivals complain that the legislation could help Philip Morris, with its best-selling Marlboro franchise, further entrench itself as the industry’s dominant player by placing new restrictions on cigarette marketing, making it difficult for rivals to use advertising to catch up. Besides banning the marketing of cigarettes on the basis of most flavorings — other than menthol — the new rules would also place additional limits on the types and placement of signs and magazine advertising for tobacco products.
Even with the menthol exemption, the legislation is opposed by Reynolds American, whose R. J. Reynolds unit sells menthol brands that include Kool and Salem. Another opponent is Lorillard, which makes Newport, the best-selling brand among African-Americans and the menthol market leader over all.
“Bottom line, the scientific publications to date have not concluded that menthol cigarettes are more hazardous or addictive than nonmenthol cigarettes,” a Lorillard spokesman, Michael W. Robinson, said in a written response to questions. Lorillard is a subsidiary of the Loews Corporation.
Scientists who study smoking have identified various disparities in the health of black and white smokers. National Cancer Ins ute data shows that African-American men get lung cancer at a rate 50 percent higher than white men — a gap that most scientists say cannot be fully explained by historically higher rates of smoking by black men.
One theory suggests that menthol in cigarettes, by providing an additional pleasurable sensory cue to smokers, reinforces addiction.
“There is evidence from different studies that it’s harder to quit menthol cigarettes,” said Dr. Neal L. Benowitz, a pharmacologist and professor at the University of California, San Francisco and one of the nation’s leading tobacco researchers. He calls menthol a “public health risk.”
In work published in 2006, Dr. Mark J. Pletcher and colleagues at that same university analyzed smoking behavior for 1,535 people over 15 years. Their findings suggested that menthol smokers were 30 percent less likely to quit smoking and 89 percent more likely to relapse than other smokers.
One African-American woman, Joya Robinson of North Brunswick, N.J., said she began smoking Newport in 1988 and developed a pack-a-day habit. After several unsuccessful attempts to quit, she is now enrolled in a tobacco dependence program. “It’s the hardest thing I’ve ever done,” Ms. Robinson, 46, said.
Dr. Pechacek, the C.D.C. official, said a combination of menthol and genetic factors that predispose African-Americans to certain cancers may be in play for black smokers.
“There is sufficient reason to maintain a strong public health interest in it,” he said.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/13/bu...eniency&st=nyt
================
Brought to by the "free market" cigarette traffickers (untouched by socialist regulators, works about as well as unregulated mortgages and investment banking) :
"Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in the United States.
Lung cancer causes 30% of all cancer deaths.
Lung cancer is the leading cancer killer among Caucasians, African-Americans, Asians and Hispanic males.
Lung cancer will kill more people this year than:Lung cancer will kill three times as many men as prostate cancer this year.
- breast cancer
- prostate cancer
- colon cancer
- liver cancer
- kidney cancer
- melanoma...combined
Lung cancer will kill nearly twice as many women as breast cancer this year.
Over 50% of new lung cancer cases will be diagnosed at a very late stage—Stage IIIb or IV— and only 5% of them will live for 5 years."
http://www.lungcanceralliance.org/facing/facts.html
So now we have two Pres candidates: one as cancer survivor (who has lied about releasing his medical records) and one at risk from cancer.
That's some reach there.
reach?
what's a reach is the long arm of the corps into the Congress' underwear.
Well, duh... The reach is making this a race issue. If cinnamon flavored cigs were 25% of cigarette revenue and smoked almost exclusively by white people, it wouldn't be banned.
"making this a race issue"
the cig mfrs know EXACTLY their victims, which race smokes the most methol cigs, and is buying Congress to keep that race smoking menthol cigs.
There's currently only one black Senator.
Exempting menthol cigs now probably means exempting menthol cigs for many years, because cig mfrs get pretty much what they want in all 3 Fed branches.
If Menthols were not exempted, the boutons would be complaining that the gov was trying to screw over the blacks! hahaha. ing re .
The Marlboro Man hates black people[/kanye west]
This is what happens when democrats are in power. Keepin the black man down so they can keep getting their votes.
putting words in my mouth, Clanny? on your knees, I got something to put in your mouth.
Anybody want to give an innocent explanation why menthol cigs are being exempted?
didn't think so.
has nothing to do with Dems or Repugs. it's just Congress doing what business pays them to do.
To the Senate's credit, they have forced cigarette manufacturers to abandon their planned production of hog maw flavored cigarettes.
Puts a bit of a damper on the menthol conspiracy.
Just a guess, their internal numbers show menthol cigarette purchases make up the highest percentage of their sales. What am I thinking though, that sounds like a business decision...
It's a reach because clove and cinnamon are not just flavors. A clove cigarette I think has no tobacco, and does cause more serious health problems if smoked as frequently. I don't know so much about cinnamon, but I assume it's the same think. Menthol cigarettes are still tobacco, just flavored.
Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act
Was there action on the bill today that's not updated? According to Library of Congress site, the last action on the bill was 10/10/2004!S.2461
le: A bill to protect the public health by providing the Food and Drug Administration with certain authority to regulate tobacco products.
Sponsor: Sen DeWine, Mike [OH] (introduced 5/20/2004) Cosponsors (16)
Related Bills: H.R.4433, S.2974
Latest Major Action: 5/20/2004 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.SUMMARY AS OF:
5/20/2004--Introduced.
Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act - Amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to provide for the regulation of tobacco products by the Secretary of Health and Human Services through the Food and Drug Administration, including through disclosure, annual registration, inspection, recordkeeping, and user fee requirements.
Sets forth criteria by which tobacco products are deemed adulterated or misbranded.
Allows the Secretary to require prior approval of all label statements.
Allows the Secretary to restrict the sale or distribution of tobacco products, including advertising and promotion, if the Secretary determines that such regulation would be appropriate for the protection of the public health. Prohibits such regulations from: (1) limiting product sales or distribution to authorization of a prac ioner licensed to prescribe medical products; (2) prohibiting product sales in face-to-face transactions by a specific category of retail outlets; or (3) establishing a minimum age greater than 18 years of age for product purchases.
Prohibits cigarettes from containing any artificial or natural flavor (other than tobacco or menthol) or an herb or e, including strawberry, cinnamon, or coffee.
Requires the Secretary to establish tobacco product standards to protect the public health, but reserves to Congress the power to ban any tobacco products or reduce the nicotine level to zero.
Allows the Secretary to take specified actions, including public notification and recall, against unreasonably harmful products.
Requires premarket approval of all new tobacco products.
Sets forth standards for the sale of modified risk tobacco products.
Sets forth provisions regarding: (1) judicial review; (2) coordination with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC); (3) congressional review of regulations; and (4) state and local authority.
Requires the Secretary to establish a Tobacco Products Scientific Advisory Committee.
Amends the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act to change cigarette warning label and advertising requirements.
Amends the Comprehensive Smokeless Tobacco Health Education Act of 1986 to change smokeless tobacco warning label and advertising requirements.
Is the New York Slime trying to create more of a racial issue this election season?
Is Wild Cobra looking at the wrong Senate bill from the wrong Congress?
I don't think so. I didn't find anything newer. Have you?
About 1/3 the way down spoutons copy/paste:
The article was three days ago. I should have been able to find something. It is possible I missed it, but I think unlikely. The text of the legislation I found matches the gist of the article.The legislation is largely a result of negotiations during sessions in 2003 and 2004 between lawmakers, antismoking groups and Philip Morris — the only major American cigarette company that supports the effort to regulate the industry.
It's basically the same bill. It just died or expired a few times before.
For the 110th Congress it's S.625/H.R.1108
'sounds like a business decision"
meaning? business sacred? untouchable? unqestionable? amoral? immoral? As long as money is made, all is right with the world?
The cigarette "business" is selling proven poison, high toxicity and disease-causing at typical dosage, unregulated except a label that says "It's Bad For Ya".
But it's just business, and business can do no wrong, except to lose money.
Why exempt menthol cigarettes while not objecting the majority on non-menthol cigarettes going under regulation?
I suggest: the cig mfgs could see they couldn't avoid regulation, so rather than fight the whole deal, they gave in, claiming an exemption for menthol.
The decline of smoking in US and western Europe has chased the cig mfrs into the poor continents they hook billions on their oison.
http://www.cancer.org/docroot/AA/con...sp?sitearea=AA
Thank-You
The part I quoted still has the same meaning. Just added more specific flavors:
For anyone wanting to read them:A cigarette or any of its component parts (including the tobacco, filter, or paper) shall not contain, as a cons uent (including a smoke cons uent) or additive, an artificial or natural flavor (other than tobacco or menthol) or an herb or e, including strawberry, grape, orange, clove, cinnamon, pineapple, vanilla, coconut, licorice, cocoa, chocolate, cherry, or coffee, that is a characterizing flavor of the tobacco product or tobacco smoke.
HR 1108
S 625
I just hate it when people continually quote a story without seeing and posting the source material themselves. I would say the article and legislation do not match.
Bouton's goes on to add remarks as if it's racist. I would not conclude that as there are other possibilities for the flavoring ban. Besides, maybe they wanted to ban menthol also, but didn't want to hear the cries of banning the 2nd most popular type of cigarette?
They exempt both menthol and non-menthol cigarettes from the flavoring ban, i.e. menthol is the only allowable flavor additive. It's still a cigarette.
But why keep menthol?
They're all cigarettes.
Banning menthol additive could prevent black kids from getting started, could make it easier black smokers to stop.
The cig mfrs are primarily run by conservative/Repug mgmt, imo, so they don't care about pissing off blacks in an election year.
Any menthol-excepted bill has bi-partisan support, so it's not really a partisan issue, although the Dems have more to lose than the Repugs by banning menthol, perhaps causing pissed-off blacks to stay away from the polls.
The cig mfrs care ONLY about revenu, not any smoker's health.
Of course it's racist when menthol cigs are so popular with blacks, who are often poor, uneducated, and guided by example of menthol-smoking blacks than any anti-smoking campaign. Same reason the US/Euro cig mfrs are moving into other continents where they can hook poor, ignorant people on their poison.
It's about $$$ being more important than black health.
Last edited by boutons_; 05-17-2008 at 01:08 AM.
You are delusional
boutons, should marijuana be legalized?
Probably not to piss off the high quan y of smokers that like menthol cigarettes. I don't know about cigarettes other than the regular, clove, and menthol. Clove is mostly clove. Little if any tobacco. Both regular and menthol are primarily tobacco. Where other flavors fit in, I can only guess. I do know that smoking clove cigarettes is far more harmful than smoking tobacco cigarettes.
Another reason to ban the others, and not menthol could be that most other flavored cigarettes are imported. Maybe someone is greasing the hands of politicians to ban the compe ion?
I don't really know and I don't really care. I'm not going to waste time researching the issue. I do think they should be banned by merit of health risk over any other concern if they are to be regulated farther. Still, I don't care if others wish to shorten their life. Shouldn't they be free to do as they please?
Yes, are you delusional?
They will still smoke. They will simply buy regular cigarettes if menthol cigarettes were banned.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
