If I smoked cigarettes I think I’d have to grow my own tobacco. There’s nothing inherently evil about the plant itself. The tobacco companies, on the other hand….but wait, I must retain my objectivity.
It’s tough to do that though with the most recent news. Harvard researchers have confirmed reports that the tobacco industry has raised the nicotine content of cigarettes steadily over the last several years—with the aim, of course, to get more people hooked on their product.
The recent study is sure to add fuel to efforts to bring tobacco regulation under the umbrella of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Legislation to do just that failed last year but there are signs it will be reintroduced in the new, Democratic congress. But is it a good idea?
That effort is endorsed by many public health groups, David Kessler, the former FDA commissioner and anti-tobacco gadfly, as well as Phillip Morris itself (some speculate the tobacco giant would keep its industry lead in a clamped down advertising environment). Most recently, the New York Times and the Washington Post added their voices to the call for FDA oversight.
I had heard rumors that at least one leader in the tobacco control area, UC San Francisco professor Stan Glantz, was more skeptical. So I called him up.
Glantz clarified that in principle, FDA regulation is a good thing. He’s just worried about the details.
“I think it’s obscene that the FDA doesn’t have jurisdiction over tobacco,” he told me, “The real question is how you do it.”
He says the law must be written very strictly to make sure tobacco companies can’t manipulate the agency—which doesn’t exactly have an airtight reputation when it comes to resisting political influence (think plan B contraception).
“The real risk is that you will end up with a process that will allow tobacco companies to claim that they have FDA approved cigarettes.” Unlike some tobacco control experts, Glantz is wary of efforts to create a special regulatory category for cigarettes, which he says could create room for a special brand of tobacco company mischief.
But he says there’s a better chance than last year that a good law will emerge, with a new party in charge. If congress does bring up the issue again, let’s hope it is serious about using the FDA to clamp down on cigarette companies.
Meanwhile, if you must smoke—I endorse backyard tobacco agriculture.
FDA-approved cigarettes? Seems like a bad idea to me. First of all, you’d have people thinking they are buying ‘safer’ cigarettes. I bet this would give some people a false sense of security and encourage them to smoke more, or at least to continue their habit. Second, it piles more work on the FDA, an agency that has much bigger fish to fry at the moment.
As for backyard tobacco, it may not have any added nicotine (other than what’s naturally in the plant), but it can be just as addictive. If you’ve ever stood in a barn with tobacco leaves hanging up to dry, you’ll never forget the delicious smell and the satisfaction of crumbling up a piece and smoking it. Even as a non-smoker, I highly recommend it.