Tobacco Center Faculty Blog

January 16, 2019

Stanton A. Glantz, PhD

My colleagues at UCSF, Georgia State University, and Stanford just submitted this public comment to FDA.  The tracking number on Regulations.gov is 1k3-97pu-m56t.  A PDF of the comment is here.  We also submitted this comment to TPSAC for its consideration; this letter, which summarizes the main points in the comment, is available here.

The revised Swedish Match modified risk tobacco product application for General Snus fails to provide evidence that the claim is not misleading and will have a beneficial effect on the population as a whole

 

January 16, 2019

Stanton A. Glantz, PhD

My colleagues at UCSF, Stanford, and Georgia State University just submitted this public comment to FDA.  The tracking number on Regulations.gov is 1k3-97ps-3u1q. A PDF of the comment is available here.  We also submitted this comment to TPSAC for its consideration; this letter, which summarizes the main points in the comment, is available here.

FDA should not permit the U.S. Smokeless Tobacco Company to market Copenhagen Snuff with modified risk claims

 

UCSF TCORS

Benjamin Chaffee, Lucy Popova1, Lauren Lempert, Bonnie Halpern-Felsher2, Wendy Max, Victoria Churchill1, Pamela Ling, Stanton Glantz

 

University of California San Francisco TCORS

1 Georgia State University

2 Stanford University

 

January 16, 2019

 

January 11, 2019

Stanton A. Glantz, PhD

Annaliese Mathers, Ben Hawkins, and Kelley Lee just published the best overall assessment of how new tobacco products, most notably e-cigarettes and heated tobacco products, fit into the transnational tobacco companies’ business and political plans.  Their paper, “Transnational Tobacco Companies and New Nicotine Delivery Systems” published in American Journal of Public Health, includes a comprehensive global analysis of all the major brands and products and how they relate to the transnational tobacco companies in two informative tables.

January 3, 2019

Stanton A. Glantz, PhD

To much fanfare (New York Times, Washington Post, CNN), on November 15, 2018 FDA announced several actions (Statement from FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb)to address dramatic increases (link1, link2) in youth e-cigarette and nicotine use.  FDA wants to reduce kids’ access to flavored tobacco products and even talked about finally banning menthol in cigarettes and other tobacco products.

The good news is that FDA is recognizing that flavors and e-cigarettes are a big problem for kids, but, on closer inspection, most of FDA’s proposals will have little immediate impact. 

January 1, 2019

Stanton A. Glantz, PhD

Charlotta Pisinger, Nina Godtfredsen, and Anne Mette Bender recently published “A conflict of interest is strongly associated with tobacco industry-favourable results, indicating no harm of e-cigarettes” in Preventive Medicine.  The title says it all; like research funded by cigarette companies (and a range of other corporate interests), research funded by e-cigarette interests makes e-cigs look (relatively) good.  Work not funded by industry showed higher dangers.

Policymakers and practitioners need to pay attention to these conflicts when assessing what they read.

Here is the abstract:

Pages