Entries from June 2008 ↓

AMA Refuses To Challenge Menthol Exemption In FDA Bill

Some health experts in the US, including seven former Federal health secretaries, have challenged the proposed exemption for menthol from the FDA tobacco legislation’s list of cigarette flavors to be banned, but the American Medical Association (AMA) refused to oppose the exception by voting on June 17th to refer the decision to its board, with AMA President Dr. Ron Davis saying removing the menthol exemption could imperil the bill’s chances of passage. The AMA vote effectively silences members who wanted the organization to challenge the exemption, which reportedly is a compromise with Philip Morris USA, the only industry player backing the legislation and whose Marlboro Menthol is the second largest menthol brand in the country.

The past few weeks have been filled with speculation regarding the fate of H.R. 1108 especially in light of the exemption of menthol in the flavor ban. Philip Morris states, ” Based on our scientific judgment, menthol does not increase the inherent hazards of smoking”. What are your thoughts? Why does the menthol share continue to grow? Why do folks smoke menthol? What affect does this recent development have on the proposed FDA regulation? Do you think tobacco companies use flavors to attract children to smoke? Or is it to offer it’s adult users variety like other consumable industries? If your a retailer do you focus more on the menthol segment today compared to the past? Are you seeing growth in your menthol business?

In a press release issued on Wednesday, Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) - a Washington, D.C.-based national anti-smoking group - called banning smoking in homes the next front in the war on smoking and cited a new survey showing that a majority of people in Ireland expressed support for a total ban on smoking in homes and cars.

According to the press release: “A clear majority wants smoking banned in all homes, even if children are not present, and even if the smoke is not drifting into an adjoining dwelling. This could expand the latest front in the war to protect nonsmokers, says the man who started the nonsmokers’ movement by getting smoking first restricted and then banned on airplanes and then in workplaces and public places, and who is racking up victories in the battle to ban smoking in private dwellings and cars.

What are your thoughts? Will this ever materialize? How will this affect the industry? 

Tommieboy, you raise a good point and one which goes to the heart of this issue.

How do you produce a less harmful cigarette and who stands in the way?

The answer; almost everybody. The lawyers will have a field day and the cigarette companies know it. The Federal government has no clue how to go about this and the public health community derides anything to do with cigarettes.

Not particularly helpful to our cigarette smokers, who would benefit from having a choice.

The technology exists today to produce a less harmful cigarette. Let’s be clear - I didn’t say safe - I said, less harmful.

This is the very essence of PREPs (Potentailly Reduced Exposure Products.)

Whether you agree with government intervention or not - the Federal government is the only one capable of establishing the framework.

Perhaps this could be done under FDA.

Logically if FDA requires benchmarking of tar, nicotine, CO and other smoke constituents then the next future step could be reductions in specified smokes contituents. Unless the FDA (or similar) mandates it then the arguments for not doing it will continue.

In this context the public health community should do the public health of smokers a favor and back off - permitting development and sale of PREP-like products. Would cigarettes be instantly safer? No! Would it be the first step - absolutely. Is this worth doing? Yes.