One Remedy from US v Phillip Morris

Handsel Art

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

2 December 2012

contact J.R. Few

handselart@gmail.com

or 870-427-1365

Tobacco Companies to Issue Corrective Statements

On November 27, 2012 Judge Gladys Kessler clarified remedies of her 2006 ruling  in U.S. v Phillip Morris that found the tobacco industry guilty of racketeering and fraud.  Tobacco companies must publish corrective statements that they lied about the dangers of smoking and manipulation of nicotine addiction,  the hazards of secondhand smoke, and the misconception of allegedly safer “light” and “low tar” cigarettes.   This remedy promises to be the most significant action the government has taken against the tobacco industry in nearly 45 years. 

In 1999 the Department of Justice (DOJ) filed suit under RICO statutes for a decades long conspiracy by the tobacco industry to deceive the American people.  In 2005 a D.C. appellate court denied the original remedies proposed to disgorge $280 billion from tobacco companies as illegal profit. This prompted the DOJ to  reassess remedies and highlight a 25 year $130 billion national tobacco cessation program.  This was a significant setback, though not the last in the DOJ’s case.  

Begun during the Clinton Administration, many involved were surprised when the Bush administration continued the suit.  Yet just days before going to the judge, a Bush political appointee, Robert McCallum, ordered lead counsel and DOJ career lawyer, Sharon Eubanks, to reduce requested remedies for the cessation program to just $10 billion.  McCallum was subsequently rewarded for his work in the DOJ with an ambassadorship to Australia.  (The litany of political interference in this case has been well documented by Ms. Eubanks in her book, Bad Acts.) Judge Kessler’s final order in favor of the DOJ involved 4 major remedies including: disjunctive remedies designed to prevent future RICO violations, eliminating deceptive “light” and “low tar” brand descriptors, disclosure of documents and marketing data, and corrective statements financed by the industry. 

The 2007 Best Practices for Tobacco Control, Health Communications Interventions notes that, “Aggressive state and national counter-marketing campaigns that have more directly confronted the tobacco industry’s marketing tactics have also demonstrated effectiveness but have often become targets for budget cuts.”  Requiring tobacco companies to admit criminal deceit, on their own dime, takes prevention to another and hopefully more effective level.  

The  tobacco industry has a history of manipulating public policy and serious oversight should be given.  But these statements have a timely potential.  An unfortunate aspect of tobacco prevention seeks a solution in making addicts quit and preventing youth initiation while ignoring the industry. The FDA’s recent introduction of 8 Tips for Talking with Youth about Tobacco and the DHHS’  new site BeTobaccoFree.gov  are packed with information about the health effects of tobacco use and nicotine addiction.  But both sites behave as if tobacco use were simply an accident of nature and completely omit the culpability of the tobacco industry in promoting a deadly product.  This promotion, not coincidentally, resulted in a criminal conviction for which these corrective statements hope to begin to remedy.  The terrible pandemic of tobacco related disease will not be resolved on the backs of the victims but on the rogue capitalists who profit from tobacco. This remedy from U.S. v Phillip Morris is a constructive step in that direction.

###

A National Disgrace

I was coincidentally looking through the TTAC newsletter when Katherine Donald shared the link w her Coalition for a Tobacco Free Arkansas mailing list.  What I happened to fall upon in the table of contents was the link to the FDA Tobacco Products page and 8 Tips for talking to youth about tobacco. I get the FDA updates but don’t always follow up.  This is one reason why.

The CDC 2007 Best Practices for  Comprehensive Tobacco Control Health Communications Interventions makes the statement:

“Adolescents and young adults are very sensitive to perceived social norms and media presentations of smoking behavior. Nonsmoking adolescents exposed to tobacco advertising and promotional campaigns are significantly more likely to become young adult smokers. Because adolescents and young adults have been and continue to be so heavily exposed to images of smoking in the media, tobacco advertising, and promotional campaigns, public health counter-marketing campaigns are needed to focus on preventing initiation and promoting cessation.”

Nowhere in the FDA ‘tips’ for talking to youth is there any mention of tobacco advertising, tobacco promotion, marketing, or even the words “tobacco industry.” Instead, it focuses on how the young individual must decide, regardless if they are 11 years old or not, if they will become a nicotine addict.  This is just another example of how and why the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act is a national disgrace.

How is it that the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids, the American Cancer Society, the American Heart Association, the American Lung Association, and a wealth of popular public health groups, not including the National African American Tobacco Control Network and Americans for Nonsmokers’ Rights, could support such a terribly flawed bill?

That is a huge question. How, or will, these groups rectify and apologize for their misspent support?  The greater issue is: how will the rest of us redeem a federal law that institutionalizes tobacco unlike never before?

SOS launches another youth activity, yawn.

A major aspect the tobacco industry uses to justify marketing and promotion of a deadly addictive drug is that consumers make a responsible adult choice.  In litigation, when victims have sued, almost invariably the argument industry takes is that you can’t be sure tobacco killed you and even if it did you knew better and chose to smoke.  I mean we’ve had this warning on the pack since 1965.  What were you thinking?

Phillip Morris funds ostensible tobacco prevention programs to keep kids from starting to smoke with the message that smoking is a choice only an adult should make.  Can you think of a better way to get kids to smoke?  It’s an adult choice.  So what if most smokers make that choice a few years early?  The tremendous capacity for nicotine to addict is fairly much a neglected aspect of the product.  It’s all about choosing.

And along comes the latest Stamp Out Smoking essay contest.  The theme this year is My Reason to Write.  Students are encouraged to write a letter thanking someone for their smoke free example or encouraging someone to quit.  Notice anything?  It’s all about choosing. In fact, the heading of the page says “We can all say NO to tobacco.” 

Undoubtedly we’ll see the same tired pleadings to addicted family members and blustering pledges to never start so they can make the team.  In fact one of the suggestions is to organize a pledge drive.  (I would welcome any legitimate research able to show that no smoking pledges are worth any more than the paper they are printed on.)  In the first case the focus is on a role model in their lives.  They may be an addict but they are still role models so something must be OK about nicotine.  In the second instance, the industry line about choice being the significant aspect of smoking is parroted.  Success with youth focused tobacco control programs are often frustratingly short term.  With efforts like this it is no wonder.

I am fond of saying that tobacco has not been a benign weed by the side of the road for 400 years.  But this is what is depicted when young people are told that the individual's choice to be tobacco free will make the difference.  In the tips for parents and teachers on how to talk to kids about tobacco nowhere is the tobacco industry mentioned.  Nowhere does it say that tobacco marketing, promotion, and public use are the result of multi-national corporations’ demand for profit. Instead these talking points would have us believe that being tobacco free was like choosing one cereal over the other for breakfast.  Characterizing the issue like this makes it seem that smoking is a normal part of their day, they shouldn’t do it, but it's normal.  When the very opposite should be our message.

In 1996 Dr. Stanton Glantz wrote in the American Journal of Public Health, 

“Finally, the public health community should realize that the best way to keep kids from smoking is to reduce tobacco consumption among every one.  The message should not be “we don’t want kids to smoke”; it should be “we want a smoke-free society.”  As the tobacco industry knows well kids want to be like adults, and reducing smoking sends a strong message to kids about social norms.”

That was 16 years ago.  Dr. Glantz spoke at the CTFA conference just last week.  Was anybody  responsible for this campaign there?  Have they ever been?  It is bad enough to have Burson Marsteller’s only U.S. based affiliate paid to run campaigns like this. The revolving door of personnel without actual tobacco control experience in the TPCP program makes ineffective messaging like this even more unfortunate.

CTFA Holds Successful 10th Anniversary Conference

Handsel Art

16 September 2012

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

contact J.R. Few

handselart@gmail.com

or 870-427-1365

CTFA Holds Successful 10th Anniversary Conference

Dr. Stanton Glantz

Over 160 advocates from around the state celebrating public health successes from the past decade gathered for the Coalition for a Tobacco Free Arkansas’ 10th annual Striking Out Tobacco in Arkansas conference in North Little Rock September 13th, 2012.  Attendees were treated with presentations from some of the most distinguished tobacco control authorities in the nation.

Dr. Greg Connelly, from the Harvard School of Public Health, was influential in getting the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act passed in 2009. This law gave limited authority over cigarettes to the Food and Drug Administration. An original member of the FDA’s Tobacco Products Scientific Advisory Committee, Connolly has since resigned and had little to recommend about the law today. He encouraged the audience to put pressure on the FDA to act more quickly regarding a decision about menthol.  The original bill banned characterizing fruit and candy flavors in cigarettes but neglected to include menthol in these restrictions.  The Committee concluded that menthol in cigarettes made initiation of nicotine addiction easier and quitting more difficult. Their March 23rd 2011 report stated, “removal of menthol cigarettes from the marketplace would benefit public health in the United States”.  The FDA’s final decision was due 90 days after the submission of the report but has not acted.  80% of African American smokers consume menthol cigarettes.

Keynote speaker, Dr. Stanton Glantz, a founding member of the group Americans for Non Smokers’ Rights and Director of the Center for Tobacco Control and Research at the University of California at San Francisco, recounted how the tobacco free movement had evolved in California.  He called attention to the statewide media campaign emphasizing that nicotine was addictive, secondhand smoke will kill you, and the tobacco industry lies. He noted that focusing on a corrupt industry creates a ‘social un-acceptability‘ quotient  that could be as effective as tobacco taxes in decreasing use.

Glantz pointed out that he and Dr. Connolly had been on opposite sides of the law giving the FDA authority over cigarettes. Noting that the industry was now offering soluble nicotine products to sidestep smoke free laws and keep people addicted he added, “One thing I think we should be pressing for at the FDA,  if they should ever grow a back bone, which is unlikely, but if they should they should prohibit co-branding of these non cigarette products, so they can’t say Use Marlboro snus on the plane and smoke Marlboro cigarettes when you can.” 

He concluded that tobacco control efforts really do work.  Over 15 years the California  tobacco control program cost $1.4 billion.  But health care costs from an almost immediate reduction of heart disease deaths and asthma attacks, and 14% decreased incidence of lung cancers over a decade, saved the state $86 billion.  “So when politicians say we don’t have enough money for tobacco control, everything they cut from that, they are paying over and above that in health care costs and it’s not 20 years from now.”

Recognizing  Arkansas’ deeply flawed clean indoor air law, Glantz suggested that activists work locally to rectify exemptions.  He complimented advocates for a 30% drop over the last 3 years in cigarette sales in Arkansas.  “You’ve got to realize that every little success you have is dollars out of a multi national corporation’s pocket, and they don’t like that,  and are going to do everything in their power to stop that.”

Additional speakers included representatives from the National Latino Tobacco Control Network, the American Lung Association, and the University of Wisconsin. “CTFA always does a great job addressing disparities,” says Julie Andersen from Marion County.   “This year was no different with speakers focusing on Latinos, the LGBT community, and nicotine dependence among those living with a mental illness. Excellent conference!”

The Coalition for a Tobacco Free Arkansas is a statewide network of organizations with a shared mission to challenge the tobacco industry.  More information can be found at www.arfreshair.com 

Renowned Speakers to Address CTFA Conference

Handsel Art

19 August 2012

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

contact J.R. Few

handselart@gmail.com

or 870-427-1365

Renowned Speakers to Address CTFA Conference

In 2003, when the Coalition for a Tobacco Free Arkansas (CTFA) held the first Striking Out Tobacco in Arkansas conference, it was for many of the statewide group of advocates their first opportunity for tobacco prevention education.  While the conference is only a facet of the advocacy CTFA offers, the 2012 event, September 13th at the Wyndham Riverfront in North Little Rock, will include a collection of some of the most respected tobacco control advocates ever gathered in Arkansas.  Featured speakers include two of the most influential tobacco free advocates in the world, Dr. Stanton Glantz and Dr. Gregory Connolly.

Glantz, Director of the Center for Tobacco Control and Research at the University  of California at San Francisco, has been involved in tobacco control since 1978.  A founding member for the advocacy group, Americans for Nonsmokers’ Rights, he has been a leader in helping establish the most effective means to challenge the industry at all levels of policy. His research covers a wide range of issues including the effects of secondhand smoke on the cardiovascular system and the public health benefits of smoke free legislation.  Additionally, Glantz has been instrumental in establishing the Legacy Tobacco Documents Library making 50 million pages of previously secret industry documents available to the public. 

Dr. Connolly is the Director of the Center for Global Tobacco Control at the Harvard School of Public Health.  Originally trained as a dentist, Connolly is an appointee to the World Health Organization’s panel on Smoking and Health and led the highly successful Massachusetts Tobacco Control Program for nearly 2 decades  His work in tobacco control is internationally recognized and has included research on tobacco product design, reduced risk products, tobacco interventions and prevention of tobacco related disease.

These speakers alone would be significant for any conference.  However, CTFA has also secured Dr. Bruce Christiansen from the University of Wisconsin, an authority on treating tobacco dependence,  National Director of the National Latino Tobacco Control Network,  Dr. Jeanette Noltenius,  and Linda Cullers, Senior Director of Health Promotions, American Lung Association for the Plains-Gulf Region. 

Katherine Donald, Executive Director for CTFA says, “Tobacco free advocates know that education is one of our greatest assets.  This promises to be a tremendous opportunity for public health advocates, activists, teachers, parents, policy makers, or anyone concerned with tobacco prevention in Arkansas.”

Tobacco continues to be the leading cause of death in Arkansas, and secondhand smoke, the third leading preventable cause, kills over 500 of our neighbors annually. Unfortunately, prevention funding is at a 10 year low while the tobacco industry spends $129.5 million marketing each year in Arkansas alone.

Registration is $50 per person. Forms and information are available at www.arfreshair.com .  As a special incentive, registration fees will be waved for any policy maker or candidate for public office.  This is one event you do not want to miss.

###

Dr. Stanton Glantz, the American Legacy Foundation Distinguished Professor of Tobacco Control at the University of California, San Francisco will be one of several prestigious speakers at the Coalition for a Tobacco Free Arkansas’ Striking out Tobacco in Arkansas conference at the Wyndham Riverfront in North Little Rock September 13.

Cigars, Candy, Litigation, and Laws

Cigars, Candy, Litigation, and Laws

In 2009 Congress passed the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act with support from major public health groups, and tobacco giant Philip Morris. Lauded by supporters as a landmark, the bill gave the Food and Drug Administration limited authority over tobacco.  But three years after passage, the bulk of the FSPTCA has been delayed or repealed by tobacco industry litigation.  Requirements that tobacco advertisement near where children are present be limited to black on white has been struck down.  Large graphic package warnings, scheduled to go in effect in 2012, are still delayed.  And most recently authority preempting local control over point of sale warnings has been delivered a setback in a New York appellate court.

While many consider the omission of menthol in the list of restricted cigarette flavorings a serious flaw in the FSPTCA, banning fruit and candy flavors have not been thwarted in the courts.  Unfortunately, pro tobacco forces in Congress have introduced a serious challenge in the Traditional Cigar Manufacturing and Small Business Jobs Preservation Act of 2011.  Purportedly focused on high end cigar products, this bill would remove cigars from FDA regulatory authority.  However, that includes the smaller candy and fruit flavored cigars that are a significant feature of the tobacco cartel’s growth market.  These small cigars are more accessible to youth not only because they are sold in flavors but they are also sold individually and often the most inexpensive tobacco product available.  The 2012 Surgeon General’s Report on Youth and Young Adult Tobacco Use notes that 1 in 5 white male high school seniors is a current cigar smoker and that most typically consume more than one type of tobacco product. 

This proposed legislation should alarm local tobacco free advocates because 3 of Arkansas’ Representatives are co-sponsors.  Additionally, retailers in Arkansas are not yet required to place all tobacco products behind the counter. Product placement, like placing small cigars next to bubble gum, has long been a tactic in a sophisticated strategy making tobacco seem normal and desirable in stores where youth frequent.  

For all its flaws, the FSTPCA may show most promise in the potential for point of sale regulation. The new law allows state and local restrictions on the “time, place, and manner” but not “content”  of tobacco marketing. One locality, Haverstraw, NY, has become the first U.S. municipality to restrict tobacco displays, mimicking tactics public health advocates have employed in other countries.   

Protecting the marketing and promotion of inexpensive candy flavored tobacco with bill titles like “Small Business Jobs Preservation” would be silly if the cost to public health were not so tragic.  The Surgeon General’s Report  notes that 80% of high school smokers will go on to smoke into adulthood.  Half will die prematurely.  It is this compelling interest that should drive policy makers to recognize the tobacco cartel’s continued profit at the public’s expense, and end it.  

###

World No Tobacco Day 2012

Handsel Art

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

13 April 2012

contact J.R. Few

handselart@gmail.com

or 870-427-1365

World No Tobacco Day 2012

In 2003 the World Health Organization (WHO) adopted the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), recognizing tobacco as the leading global cause of death and disease. To date there are 170 parties to the treaty focusing on key tobacco prevention strategies including: adopting tax increases to reduce prevalence, banning tobacco advertising, creating tobacco free spaces, placing prominent warnings on packaging, and combating tobacco smuggling. Responding to a growing tobacco pandemic, the FCTC represents the world’s first global health treaty and affirms the right of all people to the highest standard of health. That has not prevented the tobacco industry from aggressively trying to undermine the efforts of the FCTC. The WHO has selected “Tobacco Industry Interference” in the FCTC as the theme for this year’s World No Tobacco Day, May 31_st.

In this country, 50 years of the tobacco industry’s sophisticated efforts opposing the public health gained a federal court conviction for racketeering and fraud in 2006. Today, the growth market for tobacco extends beyond our borders but industry efforts are no less deceitful and manipulative. Front groups and public relation firms have promoted the same pseudo-science regarding secondhand smoke and tobacco globally. Internal documents have shown the industry makes extensive use of media to manipulate research and public opinion to oppose tobacco taxes, marketing reform, and tobacco free space all over the world. One of the most infamous evidences of industry interference was a 1999 paper, commissioned by Philip Morris, stating that in Czechoslovakia smoking was actually beneficial because a decreased lifespan saved pension funding.

Litigation continues to be one of the tobacco industry’s strengths. In countries from Uruguay to Germany, tobacco industry lawyers have hindered and thwarted challenges to tobacco prevalence. Graphic warnings in the U.S., plain packaging in Australia, and regulating displays in the U.K. are all being challenged in their respective courts.

Perhaps the most heinous industry tactic is the infiltration and manipulation of otherwise well intentioned advocate groups. Youth tobacco education programs, funded by the tobacco industry, employed all over the world, show little success in preventing initiation and can actually enhance tobacco use. Project Sunrise, revealed by industry documents, exposes a plan to collaborate with, and manipulate, public health groups, legislation, and individuals to compromise and weaken tobacco free efforts.

The lengths to which the tobacco industry will go is perhaps limitless. The message of World No Tobacco Day 2012 is that challenging tobacco necessitates that public health advocates understand a paradigm shift recognizing a profit driven pandemic unlike any the world has ever known.

####