Position on FDA & the Regulation of Tobacco

Did I miss something?? Wasn't Altria fighting against this measure? So confused.

(exerpt)
Altria and Philip Morris USA (PM USA) welcome this congressional action and applaud the Senate and House sponsors, Senator Mike DeWine (R-OH) and Edward Kennedy (D-MA) and Representatives Tom Davis (R-VA) and Henry Waxman (D-CA) for their leadership and ongoing efforts to pass FDA regulation of tobacco.

PM (Altria) has been pushing FOR FDA regulation for the past year or two. RJR is against it, as are other companies smaller than PM.

Wow.

Any reason why (after so many years of resistence) they now support FDA "interference" of the only consumer product not currently overseen by the FDA?

Couldn't the industry just voluntarily stop making candy-flavored cigarettes or voluntarily add contents labels to packs? They need a federal law to do this!?

Excuse my pessimism, but is there some horrible loophole implanted in this bill?

Actually the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) only oversees food and drugs (including drug delivery devices, lotions, cosmetics, etc.), not all consumer products. Tobacco is neither a food or a drug, and even David Kessler and his Big Pharm pals didn't try to regulate it as such but rather tried to argue that the nicotine in tobacco was an addictive drug and that cigarettes (NOT tobacco) should be regulated by the FDA as a "drug delivery device." I guess they would have gone on to regulate coffee machines as "drug delivery devices" too.

PM is the biggest of the western cigarette manufacturers. They can afford to lose business more than the smaller companies can. Ergo, they were for the MSA, and now they are being very, very cosy with the antis--I mean, of course, the professional antis, not the loonies who are used by the pros.

Guess you haven't been paying attention to the FDA stuff.

Ah, The Phantom Of The Opera & Big-head Ted again-Kennedy has killed more people with his car than I have with ETS.

quote:

Originally posted by Wanda Hamilton:
Guess you haven't been paying attention to the FDA stuff.

You are right. That's why I come to talk with the pro's- like yourself, Wanda.

quote:

That's why I come to talk with the pro's- like yourself, Wanda.

I'm flattered, but since I haven't ever received a dime for all the research and hard work I've done on the tobacco issue, I'm hardly a "pro." I think to be a "pro" you have to get paid. The real antis are, in fact, "pros" because they DO it for the money. I do it because I wanted to find the truth and because I want to share what I've learned. Though I'm not a "pro," I am very knowledgeable about the tobacco war and have, on my own, followed the money and found how corrupt the anti-tobacco movement is--what a fraud it and its junk science are--and how the REAL anti-tobacco pros do it for the money and only for the money. It's NOT a "health" issue, but a political and money-making venture disguised as a "health" issue. As such, it's despicable.

Wanda,
I was wondering. Are you planning on writing a book on the Tobacco War? With all the info you have access to, it seems it would be the next step to write an expose and get it published and into bookstores. I would really like to have a book I can shake in some people's faces, with all the facts and references to all the studies. Also a book I could refer to others to get a real grass-roots info campain moving.

quote:

Originally posted by Wanda Hamilton:
I haven't ever received a dime for all the research and hard work I've done on the tobacco issue.

You and me both.

quote:

Originally posted by NicoNazi:

quote:

Originally posted by Wanda Hamilton:
I haven't ever received a dime for all the research and hard work I've done on the tobacco issue.

You and me both.

Reading off of an anti-tobacco pamphlet is neither research or hard work.

I'll give you some work credit for graduating from Anti-Tobacco School.

As I stated in a letter to the editor once, it's the only education where students come out dumber.

squeeker, squeeker, squeeker.

I do not seek validation from you. Thank you for your observation, tho.

Squeezer's right, NicoNazi. You have done no independent research on your own but have simply uncritically swallowed the anti-tobacco industry's policies and soundbites.

That's one of the BIG differences between us. I didn't take anyone's word (either the antis or the tobacco industry's) for anything but instead went about the long and difficult process of finding out the truth for myself. I actually researched the issue, reading studies, getting information through the Freedom of Information Act, and ultimately getting copies of many of the antis' very nasty documents.

You, on the other hand, WANT so very badly to believe what the antis say that you do no searching for the truth because you suspect the truth won't be to your own personal liking.

Perhaps we should nickname you "ostrich."

Shrike, I certainly have more than enough material for a book (or three or four), but there already exist several really good ones. On anti corruption there are several by Drs. Bennett & DiLorenzo ("Cancer Scam," e.g.). On the tobacco wars in general there is Jacob Sullum's "For Your Own Good," Don Oakley's superb and comprehensive, "Slow Burn." And, though he is very much against the tobacco industry, Richard Kluger's Pulitzer prize-winning "Ashes to Ashes" is quite revealing about the anti movement and the LACK of convincing evidence about ETS. I might also mention Forces' "ETS for Dummies" and Michael McFadden's "Anti-Brains."

And there are a number of other books on the tobacco issue--enough so that there is no market for one more at this point.

quote:

Originally posted by Wanda Hamilton:
Squeezer's right, NicoNazi. You have done no independent research on your own but have simply uncritically swallowed the anti-tobacco industry's policies and soundbites.

That's one of the BIG differences between us. I didn't take anyone's word (either the antis or the tobacco industry's) for anything but instead went about the long and difficult process of finding out the truth for myself. I actually researched the issue, reading studies, getting information through the Freedom of Information Act, and ultimately getting copies of many of the antis' very nasty documents.

You, on the other hand, WANT so very badly to believe what the antis say that you do no searching for the truth because you suspect the truth won't be to your own personal liking.

Shucks. I do more researching than you give me credit for. Again, I do not seek validation from you, nor anyone else. Although I admire your effort, I feel you are betting on the wrong horse.

Although it doesn't need to, my "research" could go no farther than my father, an otherwise very healthy person ailing from a chronic cough and headaches associated with a lifetime of closet smoking.

quote:

Perhaps we should nickname you "ostrich."

Call me anything but late for dinner. I thought you'd get a kick of 'Nazi,' your own term. Thought I'd save y'all some time.

Ah, I see. Personal anecdote as proof. Well, most of the world's record holders for longevity are smokers. I guess that proves --anecdotally--that smoking causes good health and longevity.

As I said, you don't want to find out that your faith and beliefs can't be supported by the facts, so you won't look at them.

Well, we're all human and don't like to have our cherished beliefs shattered. But it's just not in me not to question and challenge "received" truths, especially when well-funded do-gooders are trying to force them down my throat.

quote:

Originally posted by NicoNazi:
Although it doesn't need to, my "research" could go no farther than my father, an otherwise very healthy person ailing from a chronic cough and headaches associated with a lifetime of closet smoking.

Smoker. Not passive smoker. Big difference. Not too many people say smoking's a healthy habit.

BTW, a chronic cough and headaches aren't too bad of things when my daughter is taught in school that if she smokes SHE WILL DIE of lung cancer.

How old's your dad? Seems to me you said you purchased land in 1960. Assuming that's correct and assuming you had to be 18 to buy it, makes you at least 62 years old. Then let's say your father was at least 15 when you were conceived. That would make him at least 77. And he has a cough? Wow!

BTW, my mom smoked till she was 63 and she turns 80 in less than 2 weeks.

quote:

lifetime of closet smoking

You mean he had to hide the fact that he smoked? From whom and why?

My dad smoked from the time he was 16 and died from heart failure at 80. He led a very interesting and full life, not a careful life, and always thought for himself. Would he have lived longer if he hadn't smoked? Would he have lived longer if there weren't times in his life that were "excessive"? Would he have lived longer if he hadn't run away from home and worked in coal mines when he was 16? Would he have lived longer if he hadn't strived to become a business owner and successful self-made man? Maybe, but then he wouldn't have been the great man he was and he still would have died. I miss him still, but I wouldn't have changed a thing about him.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Wanda Hamilton,

quote:

Shrike, I certainly have more than enough material for a book (or three or four), but there already exist several really good ones. On anti corruption there are several by Drs. Bennett & DiLorenzo ("Cancer Scam," e.g.). On the tobacco wars in general there is Jacob Sullum's "For Your Own Good," Don Oakley's superb and comprehensive, "Slow Burn." And, though he is very much against the tobacco industry, Richard Kluger's Pulitzer prize-winning "Ashes to Ashes" is quite revealing about the anti movement and the LACK of convincing evidence about ETS. I might also mention Forces' "ETS for Dummies" and Michael McFadden's "Anti-Brains."

Thanks for the links, Wanda.

With all respect, I dont think anyone should smoke in a closet. I always keep a fan on or a window open when I smoke.

quote:

Originally posted by Wanda Hamilton:

quote:

lifetime of closet smoking

You mean he had to hide the fact that he smoked? From whom and why?

He didn't want this wife, kids, or friends to lose respect for him, nor set a bad example, nor smell like an ashtray.

To this day, both he and my mother will not smoke in front of their friends. Not because they are doing it out of politeness, but because they are ashamed. They literally threaten my sisters and me not to expose their "little secret."

They don't want others to know, they are ashamed of it, and have to more or less smoke in the closet. Interesting dynamics.

How sad for them to feel shame for themselves, and I mean that sincerely. That's a terrible way to live--with shame and guilt. So very sad.

If it were me, I'd be ashamed of YOU for being so against me as your parent.

I'm sorry but I can't believe this story is true. It is not reasonable to think that a mother and father of the generation that NN purports his parents to be would have been "ashamed" to be smokers for decades and decades. I do not have the best of BS detectors, but mine is going off here. Sorry, NN, I don't believe you. If what you say is in fact really true, then your parents have all my sympathy. They don't deserve spawn like you and your sisters. Interesting dynamics indeed.