FDA Regulation of Tobacco

Forum Index > Smokers Rights > FDA Regulation of Tobacco > Post a New Reply

Share/Bookmark this Topic:

Message

Author

Do you favor FDA regulation of tobacco?

A. Yes, I want to know what's in my cigs and don't mind paying more for the information.

[ 1 ] 5%

B. No, I favor Burr and Hagan's bill to set up a new agency for tobacco regulation.

[ 3 ] 15%

C. No, I just want them to leave my cigs alone and stop raising the prices.

[ 15 ] 78%

Total Votes : 19

by libertarian99 on Sun May 31, 2009 10:36 pm

Has anyone heard what's going on with the Senate debate over FDA regulation of tobacco? The last reports from the media said a Senate panel had approved it, and it was moving to the floor of the chamber for debate.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124286548829541521.html

Of course, FDA regulation will be funded with several billion dollars in user fees collected from the tobacco companies over the next decade, which means even higher cig prices in the future.

Senators Burr and Hagan from North Carolina seem to be the lone hold-outs, offering their own bill with a new agency set up just for tobacco regulation. I wonder how that debate is going. Has anyone heard?

libertarian99 Enthusiastic Smoker

Enthusiastic Smoker Joined: May 01, 2009 Posts: 453

by Slearwig on Tue Jun 02, 2009 7:28 am

In some ways it might be a good thing to keep the artificial additives like ammonium carbonate out of the product, though I have to go back to the 1970's when ready-mades were good and raspy-sweet, so those are the cigarettes that I want to smoke and the adage "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!" applies with or without additives. As for ammonium carbonate, this particular additive is what causes the tobacco in a pack of cigarettes to smell like a semi-dry graham cracker instead of like a full sweet raspy raisin as the lighter ready-made grades of cigarette tobaccos commonly do. The more ammonium carbonate added, the more pronounced and drier the "graham cracker" smell when you first open the pack.

However, Senator Kennedy is out of line in prohibiting flavors other than menthol in tobacco products and doing so not because the flavors are potentially dangerous, but because the flavors make tobacco products "attractive". That is so totally wrong to outlaw flavors that, as far as I know, are actually safe.

Slearwig

Enthusiastic Smoker Joined: Mar 28, 2009 Posts: 209

by libertarian99 on Tue Jun 02, 2009 5:58 pm

It's probably too late to do anything about FDA regulation, but I sent this email to Senators Burr and Hagan today. If anyone wants to use any of the copy, feel free to borrow and modify my writing.

Dear Senators Burr and Hagan,

I don't know if it's too late to stop FDA regulation of tobacco, but if it's not too late, then I hope you will not give up your fight to gain support for an alternative bill that would set up a separate agency to regulate tobacco. There needs to be an agency designed specifically to address the needs of smokers and tobacco farmers in a way that allows tobacco farmers to continue providing a safer product to the people who love tobacco.

Yes, there are still people out here who love tobacco, even though most of us have been shamed into silence by government denormalisation efforts. Denormalisation is clearly a violation of human rights, but that's a whole different issue, so I will stick to FDA regulation here.

Please do not give up. The FDA is not set up to deal with the special needs of smokers because they don't have any concept of harm reduction for tobacco. They want to force smokers to choose between quitting or dying instead of working with the tobacco farmers to create a product that would minimize the risks of smoking.

The government can throw away as much money as they want pushing Puritanical behavioral ideals, but most people refuse to live that way and ultimately the government can't force them to. Smokers derive a great deal of enjoyment from tobacco despite the risks involved, and smoking really does help them cope with the viscitudes of daily life.

Smokers are counting on you to push for legislation that would address our special needs in relation to harm reduction. We care about tobacco farmers because they're just human beings like ourselves, and we truly enjoy their product even though we would like the harm reduced as much as possible.

There are millions of people out here who support you and care about your state and your farmers. We all just want to enjoy life as safely as possible. The FDA doesn't care about our needs and it would really take a special agency designed specifically for tobacco to produce a safer product.

Thanks for all your hard work on this issue. Please don't forget the millions who support your efforts.

libertarian99 Enthusiastic Smoker

Enthusiastic Smoker Joined: May 01, 2009 Posts: 453

by Asmoker2 on Tue Jun 02, 2009 7:21 pm

libertarian99 wrote:

That statement is fuel for the antis. There are risks only if you are predisposed to a certain illness. More and more research concludes (as I have heard over and over over lol) that lung cancer and other cancers are caused by HPVirus.

And if you're predisposed to breathing problems, you're gonna get them whether you smoke or not.

Just my two cents for what it's worth. Otherwise it's a great letter.

Asmoker2

Smoker Joined: Mar 24, 2009 Posts: 143

by libertarian99 on Tue Jun 02, 2009 8:03 pm

Asmoker2 wrote:

I did the best I could. The letter can be personalized to reflect people’s individual thoughts. I thought it would be more convenient for people to write if they had some copy to get them started.

Here are links to the Web sites of Senators Burr and Hagan:

http://burr.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.Home

http://hagan.senate.gov/?p=welcome

(The link to contact Senator Hagan is on the far right side of the page)

I got this reply from Senator Hagan, so apparently it is not too late to write about it. The full Senate hasn’t debated it on the floor yet.

Dear Friend,

Thank you for your message expressing opposition to proposals giving the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) the authority to regulate the use of tobacco products. Like you, I oppose giving the FDA this authority.

The FDA is tasked with ensuring the safety of food, drugs, cosmetics, medical devices, and veterinary products used by Americans daily. In recent years, however, it has become clear that the agency is overburdened. It struggles to adequately meet its already substantial regulatory responsibilities, which are necessary to protect the nation's public health. In fact, in 2008 the FDA recalled more food products because of foodborne illnesses than in any previous year. I firmly believe that the FDA lacks the resources to handle significant additional regulatory responsibilities.

As you may know, the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (S. 982/H.R. 1256) was introduced in the House of Representatives on March 3, 2009 and then in the Senate on May 5. This legislation would give the FDA the authority to regulate the tobacco industry with strict new guidelines, which I believe to be overly burdensome. The bill would restrict advertising, require expanded government warnings on the packaging of tobacco products, and, most importantly, give the FDA wide latitude to dictate the specific contents of cigarettes. On April 2, the House passed its version of the bill by a vote of 298 - 112, and it is currently pending further consideration in the Senate.

While I oppose this legislation, I do recognize the dangers associated with smoking and the need for greater regulation of tobacco products. That is why I joined with Senator Richard Burr to introduce the Federal Tobacco Act of 2009 (S. 579). This bipartisan compromise bill would create a Tobacco Regulatory Agency to enforce strict regulations on the marketing of tobacco products. Under our legislation, consumers would be given more information than ever before about the contents and risks of tobacco products. Our legislation places a high priority on preventing children from smoking. It accomplishes these goals without imposing further responsibilities on an already overburdened FDA. I believe that this bill is a fair alternative, to ensure that the tobacco industry continues to be an important and thriving part of North Carolina's economy, and it is my hope that the Senate will have the opportunity to consider it alongside any other tobacco regulation proposals.

Again, thank you for contacting my office. It is truly an honor to represent North Carolina in the United States Senate, and I hope you will not hesitate to contact me in the future should you have any further questions or concerns.

Sincerely,

Kay R. Hagan
United States Senator, North Carolina

libertarian99 Enthusiastic Smoker

Enthusiastic Smoker Joined: May 01, 2009 Posts: 453

by activist0000 on Thu Jun 04, 2009 9:45 pm

Things don't seem to be going well for Senators Burr and Hagan.

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics/AP/story/1079345.html

activist0000 Toker

Toker Joined: May 26, 2009 Posts: 86

by activist0000 on Sun Jun 07, 2009 11:04 pm

This week is the Senate debate on FDA regulation of tobacco. If anyone is planning to write their Senator about it, now is the time.

activist0000 Toker

Toker Joined: May 26, 2009 Posts: 86

by 63westonmo on Mon Jun 08, 2009 6:40 pm

Thank-you for the information. Could it be because so many pharmacies and grocery stores sell them?

63westonmo Newbie

Newbie Joined: Jun 01, 2009 Posts: 20

by libertarian99 on Mon Jun 08, 2009 10:23 pm

63westonmo wrote:

Thank-you for the information. Could it be because so many pharmacies and grocery stores sell them?

Are you talking about cigarettes or eCigarettes?

Some other countries are already in the process of banning tobacco displays in retail stores so that people will have to ask the clerk for cigarettes, which will only be sold from under the counter. That's supposed to introduce a further element of shame in the cigarette-buying process, putting it in the same league with buying condoms or porno. It's one more step in the denormalisation process.

I've already had one run-in with a clerk over the nicotine replacement aids. I have used them routinely to get through the work day with no intention of giving up smoking. I had a Walgreens clerk smirk at me and say sarcastically, "Can't quit?" I looked her straight in the eye and said, "That's none of your business. Why does everyone suddenly feel like they have the right to comment on my personal behavior?" She back-pedaled and apologized, but I never went in that store again.

There is some interesting information out there about different tobacco curing processes that result in lower nitrosamines, so in that sense the FDA regulation could be good, although I'm sure no one will be able to afford cigarettes after they're done imposing their regulations. Apparently countries that use open-air curing methods have lower cancer rates than countries where fire-cured tobacco is sold.

Here are a few interesting links, if you want to search for more information on that.

http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/05/anti-smoking-advocate-commits-science.html

http://www.news-medical.net/news/2009/04/16/48469.aspx

http://www.cababstractsplus.org/abstracts/Abstract.aspx?AcNo=20053142615

libertarian99 Enthusiastic Smoker

Enthusiastic Smoker Joined: May 01, 2009 Posts: 453

by libertarian99 on Tue Jun 09, 2009 8:08 pm

It looks like Senators Burr and Hagan failed to get their alternative bill passed, which would have established a separate agency for tobacco regulation.

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics/AP/story/1089709.html

Next is the debate over FDA regulation. That is sure to pass because lawmakers' only concern is political correctness. I wonder if there is even one smoker among the lawmakers who vote on these bills.

Wonder how long it will take before the extra cost of the FDA regulation filters down to us. The tobacco companies will be forced to finance the whole thing, which means they'll just tack extra fees on the cigs.

The FDA will have to ban eCigs now because they can't afford to allow smokers any alternative to the expensive FDA-regulated cigs, plus the states will be looking forward to the price increase because that also jacks up their tax revenue.

We can only hope foreign countries will see the opportunity and flood the US market with more eCig-like products.

Maybe Kim Jong-il will go berserk and nuke us before things get any worse.

libertarian99 Enthusiastic Smoker

Enthusiastic Smoker Joined: May 01, 2009 Posts: 453

All times are GMT - 5 Hours

Page 1 of 4 Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4 Next Smoking Lobby Smokers Rights Forum Index ~ Smokers Rights

Smoking Lobby Forum for Smokers Rights