Author Topic: U.S. Makes New Push For Graphic Warning Labels On Cigarettes  (Read 448 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Gefn

  • "And though she be but little she is fierce"-Shakespeare
  • Cat Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,361
  • Gender: Female
  • Quos Deus Vult Perdere Prius Dementat
U.S. Makes New Push For Graphic Warning Labels On Cigarettes
« on: August 16, 2019, 10:50:12 am »
https://patch.com/us/white-house/u-s-makes-new-push-graphic-warning-labels-cigarettes


Pictures in article

I still see quite a number of people buying cigarettes though I never see anyone smoking anymore only vaping
 

G-d bless America. G-d bless us all                                 

Adopt a puppy or kitty from your local shelter
Or an older dog or cat. They're true love❤️

Offline Gefn

  • "And though she be but little she is fierce"-Shakespeare
  • Cat Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,361
  • Gender: Female
  • Quos Deus Vult Perdere Prius Dementat
Re: U.S. Makes New Push For Graphic Warning Labels On Cigarettes
« Reply #1 on: August 16, 2019, 10:51:03 am »
WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. health officials are making a new attempt at adding graphic images to cigarette packets to discourage Americans from lighting up. If successful, it would be the first change to U.S. cigarette warnings in 35 years.

The Food and Drug Administration on Thursday proposed 13 new warnings that would appear on all cigarettes, including images of cancerous neck tumors, diseased lungs and feet with amputated toes.

Other color illustrations would warn smokers that cigarettes can cause heart disease, impotence and diabetes. The labels would take up half of the front of cigarette packages and include text warnings, such as "Smoking causes head and neck cancer." The labels would also appear on tobacco advertisements.

The current smaller text warnings on the side of U.S. cigarette packs have not been updated since 1984. They warn that smoking can cause lung cancer, heart disease and other illnesses. These warnings "go unnoticed" and are effectively "invisible," the FDA said in its announcement.

The FDA's previous attempt was defeated in court in 2012 on free speech grounds. A panel of judges later upheld the decision, siding with tobacco companies that the agency couldn't force cigarettes to carry grisly images, including cadavers, diseased lungs and cancerous mouth sores.

Subscribe
FDA's tobacco director Mitch Zeller said the new effort is supported by research documenting how the warnings will educate the public about lesser-known smoking harms, such as bladder cancer.

"While the public generally understands that cigarette smoking is dangerous, there are significant gaps in their understanding of all of the diseases and conditions associated with smoking," said Zeller. If the agency is sued, he added, "we strongly believe this will hold up under any legal challenges."

Reynolds American, maker of Camel and Newport cigarettes, said it supports public awareness efforts on tobacco, "but the manner in which those messages are delivered to the public cannot run afoul of the First Amendment." Reynolds was one of five tobacco companies that challenged the FDA's original warning labels.

The nation's largest tobacco company, Altria, said it will "carefully review the proposed rule." The company, which makes Marlboro cigarettes, was not part of the industry lawsuit.

Nearly 120 countries around the world have adopted the larger, graphic warning labels. Studies from those countries suggest the image-based labels are more effective than text warnings at publicizing smoking risks and encouraging smokers to quit.

Current U.S. cigarette labels don't reflect the enormous toll of smoking, said Geoff Fong, who heads the International Tobacco Control Project.

"This is a deadly product," said Fong, who studies anti-tobacco policies at Canada's University of Waterloo. "We have more prominent warnings on many other products that don't pose even a fraction of the risk that cigarettes do."

Canada became the first country to put graphic warnings on cigarettes in 2000.

Smoking causes more than 480,000 deaths each year in the U.S, even though smoking rates have been declining for decades. Approximately 14% of U.S. adults smoke, according to government figures. That's down from the more than 40% of adults who smoked in the mid-1960s.

Under the 2009 law that first gave the FDA oversight of the tobacco industry, Congress ordered the agency to develop graphic warning labels that would cover the top half of cigarette packs. The FDA proposed nine graphic labels, including images of rotting teeth and a smoker wearing an oxygen mask.

But a three-judge panel ruled that the FDA's plan violated companies' right to free speech. The judges said the images were problematic because they were "crafted to evoke a strong emotional response," rather than to educate or warn consumers.

The FDA said it would develop a new batch of labels, but when new ones didn't appear, eight health groups sued the agency in 2016 for the "unreasonable delay."

Under a court order earlier this year, the FDA was required to propose new labels by August, with final versions by next March.

___

By MATTHEW PERRONE AP Health Writer

Follow Matthew Perrone on Twitter: @AP_FDAwriter

___

The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all c
G-d bless America. G-d bless us all                                 

Adopt a puppy or kitty from your local shelter
Or an older dog or cat. They're true love❤️

Offline Smokin Joe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 56,678
  • I was a "conspiracy theorist". Now I'm just right.
Re: U.S. Makes New Push For Graphic Warning Labels On Cigarettes
« Reply #2 on: August 16, 2019, 11:40:34 am »
Where is the "Oh geez....guy when you need him?"

Smokers don't even get to ride in the back of the bus, unless they specifically chartered it.  You won't see many people smoking in public, because most jurisdictions have banned it from restaurants (even those which had installed expensive separate HVAC systems to keep the air from smoking sections separate from non smoking sections) and bars, and commonly from inside spaces in general. Add to that the laws prohibiting smoking within X feet of a building entrance and the smokers have been herded off into little areas, usually out the back door. Be that as it may, there is the growing push to legalize pot, which to me stinks far worse (skunk smell, anyone?) and has far more questionable effects. 

The canard that smoking tobacco has no beneficial effects is oft repeated by pencil necks I would gladly have thrashed in my youth, but I went and had a cigarette instead. Aside from having a paradoxically calming effect (considering nicotine is a stimulant), the effects include constriction of the peripheral blood vessels, which is why all the movies of wounded soldiers in wartime commonly show them having a cigarette--that reroutes blood flow to the body's core and helps ward off hypovolemic shock. As a fireman I have seen tobacco used in the same regard when people suffered psychogenic shock after an particularly bad accident, despite not being injured severely themselves, often in response to injury of loved ones.
Years later, while tending bar (and obviously some time ago), I observed people who ordinarily did not smoke 'bumming' cigarettes from other patrons, and smoking. Noting that they were intoxicated led me to discover that the effects of the nicotine (constriction of peripheral blood vessels) offset the effects of alcohol (dilating those same blood vessels), at least to some extent. While it didn't make those patrons any more sober (and likely contributed to their hangover in the morning), there was a definite physiological reason they became temporary smokers.
Antidepressant effects have been noted, and it is possible that many smokers were just self-medicating for more mild or transient forms of depression. Considering no drug is without side effects, lung damage being just one of consistent tobacco smoking, the user must weigh the immediate benefits against the long term damage and potential complications.
 
One warning I haven't seen on the side of cigarette packs (because it wouldn't be correct):
Quote
In 2004, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a black-box warning on antidepressants indicating that they were associated with an increased risk of suicidal thinking, feeling, and behavior in young people
source Nor the warning that:
Quote
Despite limited clinical study, numerous drugs contain FDA-required warnings to doctors or patients about the possibility of aggressive or violent acts. Among the drugs with warnings about aggressive behaviors are varenicline, zolpidem, montelukast, and all antidepressant drugs. (emphasis mine)
Prescription Drugs Associated with Reports of Violence Towards Others

As a former smoker, and now smokeless tobacco user, who has never randomly harmed anyone, I'll take my chances. Back when people walked a mile for a Camel, no one was shooting up public places, even if those 'Tareyton smokers would rather fight than switch'...
How God must weep at humans' folly! Stand fast! God knows what he is doing!
Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

C S Lewis