Stay Informed

Sign up for news & alerts

Already signed up?
Login here
What Can I Do?


Get Help
Need alcohol or drug help for yourself or someone else? GET HELP
Resources
Resources
Find useful publications, online documents & more.


DrugScreening.org


 

Both Sides Sound Off During FDA Tobacco Hearings
March 1, 2007

Email
Email
Print
Print
SubscribeSubscribe
News Summary

Lawmakers heard a wide variety of viewpoints from religious leaders, prevention experts and other members of Congress during this week's hearings on a bill that would empower the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to regulate tobacco products, the Lexington Herald-Leader reported Feb. 27.

A trio of Republican senators argued that the FDA, with its mission to protect the public health, is the wrong agency to regulate tobacco. "Isn't that giving it an FDA stamp of approval?" said Sen. Michael Enzi (R-Wyo.), the ranking Republican of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. The bill prevents the tobacco industry from mentioning FDA regulation, but Enzi said it would be implied.

 Alan Blum, director of the University of Alabama's Center for the Study of Tobacco and Society, made a similar argument.  "Placing it under the FDA is unwise," he said. "(Consumers) are going to believe a problem has been taken care of. They are going to assume the harm has been reduced. ... There is no evidence this bill will save any lives at all. It could well be renamed the Marlboro Protection Act and will prove destructive to the public health."

Sens. Richard Burr (R-N.C) and Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) suggested that regulation of tobacco was better left to the Federal Trade Commission or the U.S. Department of Justice, but Sen. Jack Reed replied, "What I sense is that finding fault with the FDA is a way of stopping any progress. The perfect is the enemy of the good, but around here 'fairly adequate' might be progress."

Appearing before the Senate committee, Dr. Richard Land, president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, called on Congress to pass the "live-saving legislation."

"We are particularly concerned about deceptive advertising to children, but it has also seeped into the consciousness of the faith-based community that this is a very, very destructive product," said Land.

Greg Connolly of the Harvard School of Public Health charged that the industry has ramped up its marketing to women and children since signing the Master Settlement Agreement (MSA) with states in 1998. "This industry is clearly going after the at-risk population," he said. "Has the industry changed after the MSA? Yeah, and not for the better."

Matt Myers, president and CEO of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, said 69 percent of voters support FDA regulation of tobacco, with strong backing even from voters in tobacco-growing states.

 

COMMENTS ON THIS ARTICLE:

Your Turn! Post a public comment (read guidelines):

Name:

Comment:
(limit 200
words)

Enter this word
(help):
Change

GUIDELINES: 
To keep this feature useful for everyone, please:

  1. Keep it clean, courteous, focused, and on-topic. Comments are meant for thoughtful discussion of the article published above.

  2. Do not post personal requests for help or general promotions for your organization (Get help).

  3. Proof your comments carefully, use good spelling and punctuation, and don't use ALL CAPS. Comments are published immediately and cannot be edited.

Deceptive, slanderous and commercially-motivated posts are prohibited. We reserve the right to remove comments not conforming to these guidelines. (Report a comment).

Have questions or feedback? Contact us.