Cigarette companies manipulate legislation, profs. say

Federal regulation of cigarettes will not ultimately result in a safer cigarette or decrease the number of smokers, partially due to the large part tobacco companies played in drafting the legislation, professors said.

For example, the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, signed into law on June 22, allows the FDA to ban fruit and candy flavored cigarettes and prohibits tobacco companies from using terms such as “light” on the packages.

Harvard School of Public Health professor Gregory Connolly said the bill is merely regulating a lethal product under the approval of the tobacco industry instead of developing a safer cigarette at a discussion with three other panelists on Friday at the School of Public Health to an audience of about 50 attendees.

“This law has moved the responsibility from the hands of the industry to the hands of the FDA,” Connolly said.

American Legacy Foundation founding President and chief executive officer Cheryl Healton agreed that the federal regulation of cigarettes is quite unusual.

“If tobacco was invented tomorrow, it would never be a legal product,” Healton said. “The fact that it kills 33 percent of its lifetime users is odd. What is more odd is that the FDA wants to regulate it.” 

Many tobacco companies acted before the bill was passed, changing names and package design to follow future FDA regulations, Connolly said. The former Salem lights are now Salem gold; the ultra lights are orange. 

“What the industry says publicly contradicts their internal documents,” Connolly said. “Internal documents note that the use of light colors on the box projects the image of a lighter cigarette.”

The legislation also requires tobacco companies to reduce the number of carcinogens in their products.

BU School of Public Health professor Michael Siegel said this approach would make sense if cigarettes were composed of three chemicals instead of 10,000.

“There is no way of knowing which chemical actually make a difference,” Siegel said. “Instead of companies saying that their cigarette now have reduced carcinogens, now the FDA is mandating it, potentially giving the impression that cigarettes are now safer.”

BU School of Public Health graduate student Dan Lustick said he enjoyed the discussion on how corporate influence in Congress affects the final draft of the bill. 

“It was interesting to hear about the influence of corporations since that it is almost taboo to talk about it,” Lustick said. 

Democracy Institute founding director Patrick Basham said FDA regulation of cigarettes is essentially preventing the creation of a safer cigarette. 

“The new FDA regulation does not accommodate the fact that smoking is here for the long run,” Basham said. “It practically guarantees that no safe cigarette can reach the public.”

Siegel said this law was not worth passing because the companies had too much influence on the outcome.

“A deal with the devil has been made based off of political compromises with tobacco companies,” Basham said. 

Be the first to comment on this article!

Add comment


I am not posting spam. I understand posting spam or other comments that are unrelated to this article will cause my comment to be flagged for deletion and possibly cause my IP address to be permanently banned from this server.

Enter the characters in the image above:

log out