Entries Tagged 'Tobacco Harm Reduction' ↓

In an historic first for public health, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) of the UK’s National Health Service overwhelming approved tobacco harm reduction as a key component in England’s ten year plan to reduce cigarette smoking by half.  The US FDA should follow the UK’s lead.  The announcement and a news excerpt are below, the press release is attached, and the full report “A Smokefree Future” is at http://www.dh.gov.uk/dr_consum_dh/groups/dh_digitalassets/@dh/@en/@ps/documents/digitalasset/dh_111748.pdf

Interesting development in the UK.

What are your thoughts?

Do you see the FDA following suit?

In a recent interview with ECigaretteDirect.co.uk Carl Phillips, Associate Professor at the University of Alberta in Canada, told us that the electronic cigarette was an order of magnitude safer than regular cigarettes and that an FDA study into the electronic cigarette was “pure propoganda”.

The electronic cigarette carried, he estimated, around one percent of the risk of regular cigarettes.

While he acknowledged that the electronic cigarette carried traces of carcinogens, he pointed out that banning the electronic cigarette based on the very low levels of carcinogens contained within would also mean “banning half the foods available.”

Given that, he argued, the FDA’s stance on the electronic cigarette was motivated by propoganda and not by science.

You can read the full interview here: Electronic Cigarette Interview with Carl Phillips.

Wouldn’t it be ironic if the Altria juggernaut, the one that worked with the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids to create the FDA regulation and its ban on characterizing flavors, except menthol and something called “tobacco flavor,” ultimately ended up by creating an FDA regulatory scheme that defined “tobacco flavor” so narrowly as to eliminate the vanilla, cocoa, licorice and other flavors that go into burley “toasting” and that were recently banned in Canada?  Now that the World Health Organization’s TobReg group is meeting this weekend in Jordan to lock down definitions of things like “tobacco flavor” as part of their work on Articles 9 and 10 of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control wouldn’t it  be ironic if they came out against the American Blend cigarette?  Could it be that the success of Marlboro Lights as the kids’ cigarette of choice is due to the smoothness of an American Blend product?  What if the tobacco control world only wants harsh products on the market as the next stage in reducing tobacco consumption? Talk about Altria having opened up a pandora’s box.  No wonder they want the regulators to focus on flavored little cigars which are rarely if ever smoked by kids.

Prof. Michael Siegel of Boston University School of Public Health welcomed Action on Smoking and Health UK’s statement (http://www.ash.org.uk/files/documents/ASH_715.pdf) supporting the use of e-cigarettes by smokers who are otherwise unable to quit smoking, as it represents one of the first major anti-smoking groups that is in favor of allowing the product on the market.  ASH UK’s statement says it supports a “harm reduction approach to tobacco,” and for those who do not wish to stop smoking or find it difficult to quit, products that deliver nicotine in a safe way should be made available. Since most of the smoking-related diseases are caused by inhaling smoke, the e-cigarettes, which deliver nicotine without the harmful toxins in cigarette smoke, are “likely to be a safer alternative to smoking,” ASH UK said. ASH’s US counterpart has called for a ban on e-cigarettes. Siegel said anti-smoking groups in the US support a policy of banning e-cigarettes, though such an approach would result in ex-smokers returning to cigarette smoking (tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com 10/15).

Congress is working through the FDA bill which will ultimately regulate the Tobacco Industry. It’s likey to pass this year but even if it doesn’t most view it as only a matter of time – although we’ve been saying this for over ten years now.

What’s not encouraging is how little the bill has changed in this time. The bill has become a piece of history apparently frozen in time.

According to reports Congressamn Waxman had to ask what MSA stood for – which certainly conveys the impression he’s not entirely in the loop.

As written the bill favors the status quo. That’s great if you’re PM USA, but things change and there are other stake holders.

No word is included about tobacco harm reduction – in fact for cigarettes the bill almost precludes it by setting the bar so high as to be unattainable.

There’s no language differentiating or explaining relative risk for tobaco products. All will carry similar health warnings. The general public will not be informed and will not know that smokeless tobacco products can be greater than 90% less harmful than combustible products.

The bill needs serious amendment. Whether that will happen at this late stage is debatable.

Contact your congressman and ask him to amend the bill to include language on relative risk and at least the possibility to enable development of a lower risk cigarette at sometime in the future. Smokers deserve nothing less.

The e-cigarette was almost unknown a little over a year ago – not so today. It is the hottest and most controversial product to hit the tobacco industry in recent history – and it’s kicking up a storm!

It is a game changer on several front and sits squarely in the front line (read firing line) of tobacco harm reduction.

Congress wants to ban it. FDA may do so – on the basis it is a drug-delivery device (nicotine) not a tobacco product.

The traditional tobacco industry sees competition as does big pharma which sees it as a threat to its highly profitable  NRT (Nicotine Replacement Therapy) products – which are considerably more expensive.

Public Health officials cite untested and unproven technology and efficacy. True; in the strictest sense, while completely ignoring the greater issue of protecting public health in self-protecting its own fiefdom. Even the most preliminary research shows it is likely to be considerably safer than cigarette smoking.

Most importantly comsumers want it.

Now you can have your say. Use this forum to make your case.

Use the link to particapte in this survey. Help at least keep the arena competitive, lively and provide consumers with choice.

http://www.ecigarettedirect.co.uk/research/survey.html 

Good luck and have fun.

In a letter to ECigarette Direct, Brad Radu, a professor of medicine and holder of an endowed chair in tobacco harm reduction research at the University of Louisville, criticizes Tobacco Free Kids for opposing safe alternatives to smoking and for supporting the Kennedy tobacco bill due to enter the senate next week.

According to the Professor, the stance taken by the organization was not a rational position but a moralistic one:

“There is no public health justification for denying smokers information about and access to safer sources of tobacco and nicotine. But the war against tobacco, conducted by Tobacco Free Kids and their allies, is not about public health. It has become the latest in a long line of misguided American moral crusades.”

The letter was itself a comment upon an open letter to Tobacco Free Kids, which the Professor predicted there would be no reply to. He was also gloomy on the prospects of the Kennedy tobacco bill being defeated, remarking:

“The American legislative process is closed to all but a few powerful interests, who will soon be gloating over their “success” in passing FDA regulation of tobacco.”

Ultimately, the professor thought, the actions of groups like Tobacco Free Kids and similar groups would costs lives.

“I am convinced that these anti-tobacco extremists will eventually be held partially responsible for the deaths of millions of uninformed smokers.”

We forwarded both the open letter and Brad Radu’s reply to Tobacco Free Kids, but have yet to receive a comment.

What do you think? Is the position of the bodies like Tobacco Free Kids a blind crusade against tobacco, or a practical stance taken to protect the young against the dangers of nicotine addiction?