That cool, throat-numbing sensation some smokers find in their cigarettes could go the way of other products the federal government has deemed dangerous.
Menthol, a natural compound found in the mint plant, soothes sunburns, tempers coughs and helps tame an achy tummy, but on cigarettes, some health experts argue, it's a ruse. It makes the poison that is tobacco go down more smoothly, tricking the youngest and most foolhardy smokers.
Last year, Congress passed far-reaching tobacco regulations that, among other things, banned chocolate- or strawberry-flavored cigarettes, saying they lured kids to smoke by dressing up cigarettes as candy.
Cigarettes which contain menthol are considered to be more addictive than regular cigarettes. Regular cigarettes are Vogue cigarettes and Camel cigarettes.
But Congress passed on regulating menthol cigarettes, which account for one-third of cigarettes sold in the United States. Instead, it called for a study and more discussion by the Food and Drug Administration.
The FDA took the debate to Raleigh, N.C., on Wednesday, when big tobacco executives met public health officials in a conference room at the Marriot Hotel downtown to discuss the new law on cigarettes and how the FDA would go about enforcing it.
Outside, dozens of workers from Greensboro, N.C., who make their living manning machines that make menthol-laced cigarettes, paced in the bitter cold. For Lorillard Tobacco workers, who produce Newport cigarettes, menthol is an ingredient that makes their brand pop with flavor, and those cigarettes have been their ticket to a middle class life.
"This is about my livelihood. I've got responsibilities," said Darsey Campbell, who has logged 40 years at Lorillard Tobacco, cleaning and servicing equipment. "We have to worry when the government starts messing with one more thing. Don't they have enough to do?"
The conundrum for federal officials is clear: Cigarettes are bad; jobs are good. Can there be a winner?
"Undeniably, this is a very controversial issue with a lot of moving parts," said Jeff Ventura, spokesman for the FDA.
With cigarettes, the federal government is now engaged in an awkward dance. On one hand, America needs jobs more than ever, and government officials want to avoid jeopardizing the product, and market share, of a major U.S. manufacturer. Cigarette makers who use menthol insist that banning menthol will simply push production overseas or into an unregulated black market.
But the government also doesn't want people to smoke; it is the No. 1 preventable cause of death in the U.S. Smoking attacks the lungs, making smokers prone to chronic sickness and heavily reliant on health care. The FDA is adamant about not wanting kids to pick up a cigarette and start the habit.
Public health officials want cigarettes to taste as bad as they are for a smoker's health, and menthol undermines that. The product, which can be made synthetically, tempers the burn cigarettes bring to the throat. If kids feel that burn, they may never pick up another cigarette, some health officials argue. Studies show that the biggest consumers of menthol cigarettes are young people and members of minority groups.
Campbell, the Lorillard worker, smokes Newports flavored with menthol. She has almost all her life and wants government to stay out of her business.
"I'm grown. It's my choice," she said.
Campbell's biggest concern, though, isn't her smoking habit but rather her job. She's one of about 2,000 people working for Lorillard in Greensboro, where generations of families have found jobs that pay enough for them to buy homes and take care of their families.
Lorillard executives won't predict what would become of the Greensboro plant should the FDA ban menthol in cigarettes. The company just started making a menthol-free Newport last month, but it's too soon to say whether it will catch on, said Bob Bannon, Lorillard's director of investor relations.
Lorillard's corner of the cigarette market depends on menthol, which workers spray on tobacco before rolling it in paper. They make a third of the menthol cigarettes sold in the U.S., accounting for about 10 percent of the total cigarette market.
"It's tough to say what impact we'll feel," Bannon said. "We're trying to measure what adult smokers' reaction would be in the scenario that it disappears. We just don't know, but we think the number of people who would quit altogether would be low."
FDA officials say they are a long way from having an answer to the menthol question. And they may simply decide to not answer it. Congress obliged them to study, and scientists have been meeting to do just that. A report is due to the FDA in March, but after that, there are no deadlines or expectations.
"The FDA has made no statements about potentially banning menthol," said Lawrence R. Deyton, director of the FDA's Center for Tobacco Products.
Campbell and about 30 of her co-workers didn't want to take chances. Outside the Marriot on Wednesday, they pushed signs into the air, reminding tobacco executives and FDA officials that they, too, have a stake in the future of menthol in cigarettes.
THE POWER OF MENTHOL
Menthol has been commonly used to flavor cigarettes since the 1950s. About 30 percent of all cigarettes sold in the U.S. contain menthol. A third of those are made by Lorillard Tobacco in Greensboro, N.C., which produces Newport cigarettes.
Scientists have reported that menthol dulls the senses and makes smoking easier for new smokers and harder for regular smokers to quit.
How does menthol do it?
-Soothes the respiratory tract
-Masks harshness of smoke
-Anesthetizes the throat
-Tastes good
-Increases production of saliva
Dec 17, 2010
Heavy smokers or cash addicts? Suspects steal store's tobacco products
SAN ANTONIO -- Suspects broke into a west-side convenience store. Surprisingly, they weren't after the ATM.
This time, they got hundreds of dollars in cigarettes. The incident took place at a Valero convenience store on a major thoroughfare, right near Loop 410.
San Antonio police got the call for this alarm just after 4 a.m. Wednesday in the 7300 block of Culebra Road.
The store was selling brands like Pall Mall cigarettes or Winston cigarettes.
They arrived to find that the thieves pried the door open and walked in. Once inside, they broke into the cigarette cabinet and raided the place of other tobacco products.
Clerks are still taking inventory of the stolen merchandise. The items will likely be sold on the black market. Retailers sell cigarettes for close to $6 a pack. No one is sure how much the bandits could make off of this illegal yield.
Either way, police believe a video camera caught the tobacco theft.
This time, they got hundreds of dollars in cigarettes. The incident took place at a Valero convenience store on a major thoroughfare, right near Loop 410.
San Antonio police got the call for this alarm just after 4 a.m. Wednesday in the 7300 block of Culebra Road.
The store was selling brands like Pall Mall cigarettes or Winston cigarettes.
They arrived to find that the thieves pried the door open and walked in. Once inside, they broke into the cigarette cabinet and raided the place of other tobacco products.
Clerks are still taking inventory of the stolen merchandise. The items will likely be sold on the black market. Retailers sell cigarettes for close to $6 a pack. No one is sure how much the bandits could make off of this illegal yield.
Either way, police believe a video camera caught the tobacco theft.
Dec 2, 2010
The ugly truth
We already know that tobacco can kill us. So why is the federal government about to require all cigarette packages and advertising to include graphic — if not downright gruesome — reminders of that fact?
Well, we already know what’s in a box of breakfast cereal or a can of chicken noodle soup, too. That doesn’t stop purveyors of those products from dressing up their appearance to make them appear more delectable than the next brand on the shelf.
Image matters. It moves people to buy things. Now, finally, we’ll have laws to move people not to buy things that not only kill them, but add huge costs to the health care system that non-smokers pay for. The tobacco companies have long known that images matter. They didn’t invest all that money in Joe Camel and the Marlboro Man just to throw money at graphic artists and rugged actors.
So, now that Congress has finally given the Food and Drug Administration the power to really regulate tobacco sales and marketing, the FDA and its parent agency, the Department of Health and Human Services, are rolling out the proposals for the new warning labels for packs and ads.
They include photos and drawings that illustrate directly and sometimes harshly what happens to smokers: A skeletal cancer patient obviously on death’s door. A body with a huge scar down the middle of its chest. A person who has already lost his larynx to throat cancer and still smokes. A middle-aged man clutching his chest, his face twisted in pain.
By the proposed rules, now out for public comment, cigarette packs sold after Oct. 22, 2012, will have to devote half of the surface of every cigarette pack to one of those images. Cigarette advertising will have to include the images, too.
It’s about time.
For years, the tobacco industry has used its considerable clout over Washington to keep its products free of the same level of regulation that has long been considered minimal for everything from baby food to automobiles. The result has been an industry devoted to marketing a product that kills 1,200 Americans every day.
An outright ban on tobacco products would be unworkable. There are too many addicts out there, and any attempt to put the law between them and their smokes would create a black market the size of a small nation.
But it is clearly in the public interest for the government to act in ways that help smokers quit and, more importantly, stop the next generation from picking up the habit. We just can’t afford it.
Well, we already know what’s in a box of breakfast cereal or a can of chicken noodle soup, too. That doesn’t stop purveyors of those products from dressing up their appearance to make them appear more delectable than the next brand on the shelf.
Image matters. It moves people to buy things. Now, finally, we’ll have laws to move people not to buy things that not only kill them, but add huge costs to the health care system that non-smokers pay for. The tobacco companies have long known that images matter. They didn’t invest all that money in Joe Camel and the Marlboro Man just to throw money at graphic artists and rugged actors.
So, now that Congress has finally given the Food and Drug Administration the power to really regulate tobacco sales and marketing, the FDA and its parent agency, the Department of Health and Human Services, are rolling out the proposals for the new warning labels for packs and ads.
They include photos and drawings that illustrate directly and sometimes harshly what happens to smokers: A skeletal cancer patient obviously on death’s door. A body with a huge scar down the middle of its chest. A person who has already lost his larynx to throat cancer and still smokes. A middle-aged man clutching his chest, his face twisted in pain.
By the proposed rules, now out for public comment, cigarette packs sold after Oct. 22, 2012, will have to devote half of the surface of every cigarette pack to one of those images. Cigarette advertising will have to include the images, too.
It’s about time.
For years, the tobacco industry has used its considerable clout over Washington to keep its products free of the same level of regulation that has long been considered minimal for everything from baby food to automobiles. The result has been an industry devoted to marketing a product that kills 1,200 Americans every day.
An outright ban on tobacco products would be unworkable. There are too many addicts out there, and any attempt to put the law between them and their smokes would create a black market the size of a small nation.
But it is clearly in the public interest for the government to act in ways that help smokers quit and, more importantly, stop the next generation from picking up the habit. We just can’t afford it.
Nov 30, 2010
Taxes Spurring Smokers to Quit
New research indicates that the recent tax rate rise on tobacco products has greatly increased the number of New Zealanders who are trying to quit smoking.
The number of New Zealanders attempting to quit smoking has risen 93 percent since the April tobacco tax rate increase. This assessment was released on November 17th in new research published by The Quit Group. Paula Snowden, Chief Executive of the Group, commented on the findings, saying, “The majority of smokers wish they had never begun smoking and our survey shows that an increase in tobacco prices provides the trigger some smokers need to begin their quitting journey.”
In the month following the latest tobacco tax increase 4 000 New Zealanders registered with Quitline, a telephone service designed to aid individuals in their attempts to quit smoking. According to the report, the number of callers was almost double that of the same period in 2009. Over 25 percent of those calling claimed that they had never attempted to quit smoking within the previous 12 months, and over 66 percent cited the tax increase as one of the reasons they decided to quit.
Paula Snowden praised the development, and the Government’s upcoming supplementary tax rate increases, but claimed that there were still more work to be done. She urged the Government to accept a proposal mandating the use of plain packaging on all tobacco products and banning the display of any tobacco products.
The number of New Zealanders attempting to quit smoking has risen 93 percent since the April tobacco tax rate increase. This assessment was released on November 17th in new research published by The Quit Group. Paula Snowden, Chief Executive of the Group, commented on the findings, saying, “The majority of smokers wish they had never begun smoking and our survey shows that an increase in tobacco prices provides the trigger some smokers need to begin their quitting journey.”
In the month following the latest tobacco tax increase 4 000 New Zealanders registered with Quitline, a telephone service designed to aid individuals in their attempts to quit smoking. According to the report, the number of callers was almost double that of the same period in 2009. Over 25 percent of those calling claimed that they had never attempted to quit smoking within the previous 12 months, and over 66 percent cited the tax increase as one of the reasons they decided to quit.
Paula Snowden praised the development, and the Government’s upcoming supplementary tax rate increases, but claimed that there were still more work to be done. She urged the Government to accept a proposal mandating the use of plain packaging on all tobacco products and banning the display of any tobacco products.
Nov 24, 2010
Higher prices mean less smoking, less tobacco production/importation
New Zealanders are smoking 1.3 billion fewer cigarettes a year than ten years ago, according to data produced by Statistics New Zealand for the Smokefree Coalition.
In the last quarter, since tobacco's tax rise, New Zealanders consumed 280 million manufactured tobacco products, and 243 tonnes of loose tobacco.
Smokefree Coalition Director Dr Prudence Stone said last year's fourth quarter result was 757 million or so cigarettes, while this fourth quarter it was 405.5 million.
"That's 351.5 million fewer cigarettes consumed than the same quarter last year."
Dr Stone believes the drop in consumption resulting from April's excise tax increase, has also led to significant drops in production and imports for domestic consumption.
"Consumption looked to be slowly climbing at the end of 2009's financial year with production and imports reaching NZ$3.4 billion (up from $2.8 billion in 2008). The tax increase has nipped that frightening trend in the bud.
"That the last significant drop in production levels occurred in 2000 when tobacco's excise tax was also increased significantly, by 20 percent, shows how effective price is as a tobacco control measure."
Dr Stone says she's confident the next tobacco tax increases scheduled for January 2011 and 2012 will force similar drops in tobacco production and imports over the next two years.
In the last quarter, since tobacco's tax rise, New Zealanders consumed 280 million manufactured tobacco products, and 243 tonnes of loose tobacco.
Smokefree Coalition Director Dr Prudence Stone said last year's fourth quarter result was 757 million or so cigarettes, while this fourth quarter it was 405.5 million.
"That's 351.5 million fewer cigarettes consumed than the same quarter last year."
Dr Stone believes the drop in consumption resulting from April's excise tax increase, has also led to significant drops in production and imports for domestic consumption.
"Consumption looked to be slowly climbing at the end of 2009's financial year with production and imports reaching NZ$3.4 billion (up from $2.8 billion in 2008). The tax increase has nipped that frightening trend in the bud.
"That the last significant drop in production levels occurred in 2000 when tobacco's excise tax was also increased significantly, by 20 percent, shows how effective price is as a tobacco control measure."
Dr Stone says she's confident the next tobacco tax increases scheduled for January 2011 and 2012 will force similar drops in tobacco production and imports over the next two years.
Nov 19, 2010
FDA Continues Fight to Regulate Electronic Cigarettes
The Food and Drug Administration has authority to regulate so-called "electronic cigarettes" that vaporize nicotine but do not contain tobacco, a Justice Department lawyer argued today in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
Last year, a federal judge in Washington ruled the government improperly blocked an inbound shipment of e-cigarettes into the United States, saying that the FDA doesn’t have authority to regulate the product because it is not marketed for therapeutic uses such as to treat smoking addiction.
DOJ’s Alisa Klein of the Civil Division today tried to convince a three-judge appeals court panel to reverse the trial judge’s issuance of an injunction against the FDA. The appeals court stayed enforcement of the injunction pending resolution of the dispute.
Garre_gregory_kagan_#3056D6Latham & Watkins partner Gregory Garre (at left), who chairs the firm’s Supreme Court and appellate practice group, represented Scottsdale, Az.-based Sottera, which sells e-cigarettes under the brand “NJOY.”
E-cigarettes are battery-powered devices that resemble real cigarettes. The FDA blocked the importation of e-cigarettes on the ground that they are unapproved drug devices under the federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. Tobacco products are generally exempt from the drug and device provisions of the FDCA.
The Tobacco Control Act of 2009 gives the FDA authority to regulate “tobacco products,” a term that was closely scrutinized today by the appeals court panel consisting of Judges Merrick Garland and Brett Kavanaugh and Senior Judge Stephen Williams.
Klein of the Justice Department said the FDA has long regulated nicotine products that include smokeless cigarettes, nicotine lollipops and nicotine inhalers. In 2008, the FDA refused to allow the importation of “Nicogel,” a hand gel made of liquefied tobacco. The FDA said the gel was an unapproved drug.
“If electronic cigarettes are a safe method of nicotine maintenance, that could be approved if the science supports it,” Klein said in court.
Garland questioned what he called the “unique” procedural element of the case. The government’s position in the litigation is established in a blocking order—stopping the shipment of electronic cigarettes—and not in a detailed administrative record. Kavanaugh and Williams examined the extent to which Congress can step in to fill a regulatory void to clarify the scope of FDA regulatory authority.
Garre, arguing for NJOY, said the product is not marketed as a smoking cessation device. He said if the FDA could show that the e-cigarettes are marketed for therapeutic reasons, the injunction against the FDA would not apply.
Last year, a federal judge in Washington ruled the government improperly blocked an inbound shipment of e-cigarettes into the United States, saying that the FDA doesn’t have authority to regulate the product because it is not marketed for therapeutic uses such as to treat smoking addiction.
DOJ’s Alisa Klein of the Civil Division today tried to convince a three-judge appeals court panel to reverse the trial judge’s issuance of an injunction against the FDA. The appeals court stayed enforcement of the injunction pending resolution of the dispute.
Garre_gregory_kagan_#3056D6Latham & Watkins partner Gregory Garre (at left), who chairs the firm’s Supreme Court and appellate practice group, represented Scottsdale, Az.-based Sottera, which sells e-cigarettes under the brand “NJOY.”
E-cigarettes are battery-powered devices that resemble real cigarettes. The FDA blocked the importation of e-cigarettes on the ground that they are unapproved drug devices under the federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. Tobacco products are generally exempt from the drug and device provisions of the FDCA.
The Tobacco Control Act of 2009 gives the FDA authority to regulate “tobacco products,” a term that was closely scrutinized today by the appeals court panel consisting of Judges Merrick Garland and Brett Kavanaugh and Senior Judge Stephen Williams.
Klein of the Justice Department said the FDA has long regulated nicotine products that include smokeless cigarettes, nicotine lollipops and nicotine inhalers. In 2008, the FDA refused to allow the importation of “Nicogel,” a hand gel made of liquefied tobacco. The FDA said the gel was an unapproved drug.
“If electronic cigarettes are a safe method of nicotine maintenance, that could be approved if the science supports it,” Klein said in court.
Garland questioned what he called the “unique” procedural element of the case. The government’s position in the litigation is established in a blocking order—stopping the shipment of electronic cigarettes—and not in a detailed administrative record. Kavanaugh and Williams examined the extent to which Congress can step in to fill a regulatory void to clarify the scope of FDA regulatory authority.
Garre, arguing for NJOY, said the product is not marketed as a smoking cessation device. He said if the FDA could show that the e-cigarettes are marketed for therapeutic reasons, the injunction against the FDA would not apply.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)