Add new comment

Comment: 

Hi Stan,
I think you give me too much credit for being a “litmus test” for proposed tobacco control policies.
I think a better litmus test is the reaction of the cigarette company financial analysts to the announcement. They unanimously viewed the regulations as being very positive for the cigarette industry, predicting that as a result of these regulations, future cigarette consumption will be far higher than it would otherwise have been. This is the reason that I think FDA could have done better.
Also – you should know that it’s not that I am opposed to FDA regulation. It’s just that I think they could have done a lot better than this. They did not regulate marketing to kids. They did not regulate where e-cigarette companies can place their ads (such as youth-friendly venues or media with high youth audiences). They did not ban the exploding batteries. They did not ban the use of diacetyl in e-liquids. They did not ban devices which heat e-liquids to a high temperature to prevent formaldehyde and other carbonyl compounds from forming and getting into the aerosol. These are all things I would have done if I were in Mitch’s shoes. Ironically, while you may view me as unconcerned about the health risks, I actually believe that my proposed approach would do a far better job of regulating the health risks, and doing it immediately, than the FDA’s ridiculous scheme of these crazy pre-market applications.
Also, keep in mind that if you are going to <strong;really</strong; use me as a litmus test for tobacco control policies, you will have to tell your blog readers that they should oppose:
<ul;
<li;Complete bans on smoking in all workplaces, including bars and casinos;</li;
<li;Increased cigarette taxes with all the money going to comprehensive tobacco control programs with hard-hitting media campaigns that directly attack the tobacco industry;</li;
<li;More funding for state tobacco control programs;</li;
<li;Penalties on cigarette manufacturers based on rates of youth smoking of their brands, with the money going to an aggressive national anti-smoking campaign;</li;
<li;Requiring the MPAA to explicitly consider depiction of smoking in its ratings;</li;
<li;Raising the age of all tobacco sales to 21;</li;
<li;Banning the use of menthol in cigarettes (and not just as a characterizing flavor); and</li;
<li;Gradual elimination of nicotine in cigarettes using a phase-out approach.</li;
</ul;
I will submit this as a comment to your blog in case you wish to share with your readers what my positions <strong;really</strong; are on these issues.
Best regards,
Mike

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.