Entries Tagged 'Snus, Snuff & Alternative Products in US Markets' ↓

I remember it clearly. It was an overcast day in June 2002 in Lancaster County, Pa., when I attended a meeting that has always left me with a lasting impression. As the tobacco buyer for a major oil company, I quietly sat (not something I’m known for) and I listened to the discussion that one day would make Lancaster County tobacco free! Quite frightening was this agenda, as it would make it illegal to grow any tobacco, market tobacco or use any form of tobacco within the county boundaries. Could this ever happen?

Today, convenience stores are faced with a future that will be greatly affected by future FDA regulation. The bill imposes major regulatory obstacles in the marketing of any new tobacco products. It treats tobacco products like medical devices. However, most of the regulatory provisions make no sense for application to tobacco products. Product changes which fueled the recent unprecedented growth of the “other tobacco” portion of the convenience channel will now need to go through cumbersome review.

Approval or denial will be given based on whether the product or its changes are deemed “in the best interests of public health.” The standards are broadly defined in the bill with the goal of reducing overall tobacco consumption. This bill will not allow the FDA to ban the product or reduce nicotine to zero but its provisions will allow for the FDA to impose any requirements or prohibitions it sees fit.

It is clear from my understanding that the FDA would have broad authority to make tobacco products highly unattractive to adult smokers and highly inaccessible to the public. All of these factors will most definitely affect the convenience store channel in a negative way.

Another area of the bill that will affect the convenience channel of trade is that the bill prevents the communication about significant differences among the levels of risk presented by different types of tobacco products. The convenience store channel needs to address this lack of good practice and realize that not all tobacco products are the same in the spectrum of risk, or in other words, some are riskier than others.

At a recent conference on “Harm Reduction” many attendees were extremely concerned that this message is being squashed by those who deny this truth and ultimately want to ban the use of all tobacco products.

If moist smokeless tobacco is safer than cigarettes why must it post the following: “Warning: This product is not a safe alternative to cigarettes”? If, like I proposed in an earlier article, “Who Said Tobacco Can’t Be Safer?” (CSD, May 2008) that one day in the future a brilliant mind cracks the code and finds a way to make tobacco safer would this legislation allow for this claim? I think not.

Would not the convenience channel of trade benefit the most from the sales of a tobacco product that truly was a safer or safe product? Wouldn’t you want to be able to communicate that message?

H.R. 1108 eliminates federal preemption of marketing and advertising which would allow states or local governments to set its own standards. They would be able to enact any restriction “that is in addition to, or more stringent than,” those in the bill. One can only imagine the nightmare this would present to national distributors and the convenience channel of trade.

A bill that one would assume would create uniformity in the industry most likely will lead to chaos. Is it not possible that a local government could one day decide to enact a much more stringent law that banned tobacco from being grown, marketed or used within its boundaries?

As I look to the past is there a glimpse of the future? The foundation of a movement was evidenced back in June 2002. If the movement succeeded and you operated a convenience store in Tobacco Free Lancaster County would your business survive? How would you replace the lost sales and profits from tobacco sales that are no longer allowed? H.R. 1108 as it is currently written puts your business at risk. H.R. 1108 needs to be opposed.

This article was recently published in the July 08 Convenience Store Decisions magazine. I’d be interested in hearing your opinions! Do you think that this could ever happen? What are you doing as a retailer today to oppose potential legislation like this that would seriously affect your business? If your a manufacturer or wholesaler what are your thoughts?

There’s real progress to be had for harm reduction in getting this news out to the general public.

There are advantages in harm reduction by smokers migrating to smokeless products. However, it would also be helpful if the relative harm for the various type of smokeless tobacco were made public. They are not all equal - but it seems quite clear that snus is the least harmful. If this is correct - we should say so.

The following information was delivered to my email the other day! Tell me what your thoughts are? Is it Possible to smoke harm free? I find this extremely interesting. What are your thoughts?

Millions of consumers who smoke cigarettes are looking for acceptable alternatives to satisfy their cravings for nicotine - anyplace and anytime. Whether consumers want to avoid the harmful byproducts of smoking tobacco or consumers want to enjoy the sensation of smoking in a public place, bar or restaurant, the Ruyan Electronic Cigarette not only simulates the experience of ordinary cigarette smoking, it also delivers nicotine to the system to satisfy the craving.

The Ruyan Electronic Cigarette Offers Significant Benefits to Users:

• Free of tar and the dangers associated with the many chemicals commonly produced by a lit, ordinary cigarette
• It does not require heat or ignition by flame
• One 16 mg cartridge is equivalent on average to 20 - 30 cigarettes
• Does not produce second-hand smoke
• Not regulated by the FDA
• It can be used in most “No-Smoking” areas and poses no fire danger

Seems like that is the question being asked lately but more importantly the questions that folks really should be asking are “What does consolidation in the tobacco industry mean to you?” As a retailer how do you think the consolidation of the cigarette/smokeless/cigar manufacturers will affect your business? If your a wholesaler what are your thoughts? Manufacturers what are your thoughts? What happens if your a manufacturer left out of the consolidation? To all, how do you plan on dealing with consolidation that seems so evident? Who do you think buys who? What leverage do you have as a retailer? Folks are talking about this but what are your thoughts?

NOW CHECK THIS OUT! In a recent edition of the Buffalo News Brad Rodu challenges the current FDA proposal as ignoring a life-saving strategy!

In an op-ed in Buffalo News, Dr. Brad Rodu, a professor of medicine with an endowed chair in tobacco harm reduction research at the University of Louisville, said the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, which aims to give the Food and Drug Administration regulatory authority over tobacco products, is “fatally flawed” because it would “effectively prevent the nation’s 45 million smokers from learning that smokeless tobacco products are vastly safer alternatives.”   

The message about smokeless tobacco products is “critical to the life-saving strategy known as ‘tobacco harm reduction,’” Dr. Rodu said.  He cited a recent article in the medical journal Lancet, which said tobacco product regulation “should promote complete cessation of nicotine product use as the preferred option, but also encourage existing smokers who are unable to stop smoking to adopt a less hazardous source of the drug,” and “should therefore apply the levers of affordability, promotion, and availability in direct inverse relation to the hazard of the product, thus creating the most favorable market environment for the least hazardous products.”   The Royal College of Physicians, whose report was the basis of the Lancet article, said that “low nitrosamine smokeless tobacco products may have a positive role to play in a coordinated and regulated harm reduction strategy which maximizes public health benefit,” Dr. Rodu noted.  The pending FDA legislation is the opposite of such a rational approach to helping smokers, and the bills fail to acknowledge that nicotine itself does not cause the diseases that kill smokers, he said.  ”Congress should rewrite those portions of H.R. 1108 and S. 625 that impose irrational and dangerous limitations on the communication of truthful information about smokeless tobacco and its relative risk vis-a-vis cigarettes,” Dr. Rodu said (Buffalo News 11/12).

IS BRAD RIGHT OR WRONG? DO YOU KNOW OF ANYONE THAT HAS USED MOIST TOBACCO TO KICK THE SMOKING HABIT? DO YOU THINK CONGRESS WILL GET THE RIGHT MESSAGE? WHAT IS THAT MESSAGE? IS THERE ANYTHING WE CAN DO? IS THERE ANYTHING WE SHOULD DO? ANY THOUGHTS ON HOW PM WILL APPROACH THIS NOW THAT THEY ARE TESTING MOIST TOBACCO? DO YOU BELIEVE AS BRAD MENTIONS THAT NICOTINE IS NOT THE EVIL? SO MANY THOUGHTS I HAVE BUT WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THIS ISSUE?