|
On July 30, the House of Representatives voted, by a vote of 326 to 102, to regulate tobacco products through the FDA.
This landmark legislation would drastically change the way tobacco is
marketed, regulated and sold in the U.S. However, its passage is not
assured in the Senate, and the White House has said it opposes the
bill.
All
of the major tobacco control advocates and public health organizations,
such as the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, the American Public Health
Association and the American Lung Association support the bill. Many
of the concerns that the public health community has been advocating
for years are addressed:
- The bill would ban all outdoor tobacco advertising within 1,000 feet of schools and playgrounds
- It requires prior FDA approval before the introduction of any so-called “reduced harm” tobacco products
- Requires adoption of stronger, more specific health warnings, with more graphic images
- Bans fruit or candy-flavored cigarettes
- Calls
on the FDA to write an action plan in regards to the advertising and
promotion of tobacco products in youth, particularly in minority
neighborhoods.
Health Disparities Concerns
One
issue in the bill that is divisive, however, is the ban on all fruit or
candy-flavored cigarettes, with the notable exception of menthols. The
reasons that the ban does not include menthol are complex, and touch on
racial, health and social issues that have been discussed in the public
health community for years. Seventy-five percent of African-American smokers smoke menthols.
The
authors of a paper from the Harvard School of Public Health, published
in 2005, found that “tobacco manufacturers are more likely to advertise
mentholated brands in areas with disproportionately higher minority
populations, to feature non-White models in advertisements for
mentholated cigarettes and to advertise mentholated cigarettes in
magazines with higher minority readerships.”
The
exclusion of menthol from the ban has angered members of the
Congressional Black Caucus, as well as other antismoking advocates.
Two former secretaries of Health and Human Services, along with the
leader of the National African-American Tobacco Prevention Network,
wrote a scathing letter to Rep. Waxman (D-CA), the sponsor of the bill,
arguing that continuing the sale of menthols "would have the effect of
discriminating against the health interests of African-Americans."
But
excluding menthol from the bill may be about political expediency. The
support of Philip Morris, Inc. is crucial to the bill’s passage, and
without the compromise of menthol, that support will be lost. Several
lawmakers and Caucus members, most notably Rep. Waxman, have indicated
that they are not willing to risk derailing the bill over the menthol
issue. Many are advocating for incremental changes. A change in the
bill does call for a scientific advisory committee to provide
recommendations on menthol within a year.
Read Leading Tobacco Control Advocacy Groups’ Statements on the FDA Bill:
Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids
American Public Health Association
Hyperlinks to agencies and organizations do not imply an endorsement of views by TReND participants and sponsors
Discussion Questions:
All comments posted should be respectful.
Sponsors of the TReND site reserve the right to remove comments deemed inappropriate.
Advertising is not permitted.
 |
