Testimony presented at yesterday's U.S. Senate Commerce Committee hearing on "light" cigarettes is at:
http://commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Hearings.Hearing&Hearing_ID=1917
A recent study by
Hammond et al at
http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/cgi/content/abstract/16/1/8
concluded that NO
cigarette emission
testing regime
(including the FTC
method) accurately
measures human
exposure, and that
none should be
relied upon for
establishing
government
regulatory
standards.
Ironically, endorsers of the Philip Morris backed FDA tobacco regulatory legislation have advocated for the FDA to:
- develop another cigarette smoke emission testing regime (despite the safer cigarette fraud resulting from other testing regimes),
- mandate reductions in nicotine (which would make cigarettes even more hazardous due to nicotine compensation), and
- mandate reductions in other smoke constituents (which would perpetuate the safer cigarette fraud).
In sum, there is no such thing as a safer cigarette, and no government agency should perpetuate this deception. Noncombustible tobacco/nicotine products are the only less hazardous alternatives to cigarettes for addicted smokers.
- - -
Light Cigarettes Just As Deadly as Regular Versions, and Tobacco Companies Knew It
Tuesday, November 13th, 2007
http://www.newsinferno.com/archives/2027
Light cigarettes are just as deadly as regular cigarettes, but tobacco companies kept that information to themselves. According to a newly released Philip Morris memo from 1975, the cigarette makers were aware that smokers of light cigarettes took longer puffs and inhaled larger amounts of tar than those who smoked other version. Now, a Senate committee is asking the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) why it still allows cigarettes to be classified as regular, light and ultra-light versions even though none of these products offer consumers an increased measure of safety.
The Philip Morris memo was released by the Senate Commerce Committee yesterday in advance of today's hearing into the FTC's oversight of cigarette marketing. The Philip Morris document said that puffs taken by smokers of light cigarettes contain more cancer-causing tar than those from regular cigarettes. It has been known for sometime that smokers assume that the "low tar" "light" and "ultralight" labels mean a cigarette is somehow safer than regular versions.
The FTC allows the cigarette companies to use the regular, light, ultra light and low tar classifications as long as they are determined by a standardized system that uses a machine that smokes cigarettes the same way every time. But people are not like machines, and some take deeper breaths and larger puffs than others. It's a known fact that smokers who switch to light cigarettes from regular cigarettes "compensate" for the lower nicotine level by inhaling more deeply; taking larger, more rapid, or more frequent puffs; or by increasing the number of cigarettes smoked per day.
As a result, smokers cancel out any potential benefit of smoking a "low-tar" cigarette. The FTC itself has raised concerns about its testing methods and has admitted in prior congressional testimony that its "ratings tend to be relatively poor predictors of tar and nicotine exposure."
Senator Frank Lautenberg, D-NJ, a member of the committee has asserted that this makes light cigarettes even more dangerous than regular versions. He is sponsoring legislation that would prohibit cigarette makers from using descriptions like "light" and "low tar" on labels or in advertising.
For their part, the tobacco companies claim that they have taken steps to inform their customers that cigarettes labeled "light" are no safer than other versions. Philip Morris, for instance, acknowledges this fact on its website. But the anti-smoking group, the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids, says that the advertising for light cigarettes often targets health conscious smokers. And the National Cancer Institute conducted a survey in
2001 that found that the smokers most likely to use light cigarettes were also the ones most concerned about the toll smoking took on their health.
In addition to the FTC cigarette ratings system, the Senate committee will be taking a hard look at the FTC's jurisdiction over deceptive marketing and advertising practices used by the tobacco industry. The committee will explore tobacco companies' marketing of light cigarettes and cigarette design changes that further undermine the accuracy of the FTC test.
- - -
Lautenberg: Beware light, low-tar cigarettes
By Bill Cahir, Gloucester County (NJ) Times
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
http://www.nj.com/news/gloucester/local/index.ssf?/base/news-8/119503148725 3800.xml&coll=8&thispage=1
WASHINGTON - People who smoke light or low-tar cigarettes have been deceived by a lax regulatory system that fails to provide accurate information to consumers and neglects to inform them that the health risks associated with so-called low tar or light tobacco products may be as great or even more damaging than regular cigarettes, according to testimony delivered at a Senate hearing Tuesday.
"There is a substantial, longstanding body of evidence demonstrating that light' or low-tar' cigarettes do not reduce smokers' exposure to hazardous compounds or their risk of disease," said Dr. Cathy Backinger, acting chief of the Tobacco Control Branch of the National Cancer Institute.
Witnesses told the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee that the tar and nicotine testing method developed for cigarettes, first developed in 1967, did not accurately measure how many carcinogens a cigarette would deliver to the smoker or accurately assess how a smoker would behave to satisfy a nicotine addiction.
The Federal Trade Commission first developed an automatic cigarette testing machine 40 years ago. But cigarette makers have modified designs to prevent the machine, long regarded as obsolete, from accurately measuring the amount of tar and nicotine provided by a cigarette, witnesses told U.S.
Sen. Frank Lautenberg.
Companies actually poke tiny holes to ventilate their cigarettes or make other changes to render the FTC test method pointless. And the machine's inhalations do not mimic those of a smoker, witnesses said. People tend to take deeper breaths, smoke more low-tar cigarettes than regular ones and hold low-tar smoke in their lungs for added time to satisfy their nicotine cravings.
The net effect: Smokers who buy light or low-tar cigarettes wind up doing serious damage to their lungs even while believing they have purchased a product that poses a lesser health risk.
"A light cigarette may not only be as a bad as a regular cigarette, but often, it's worse for your health. I want to repeat that. A light cigarette can often be more deadly than a regular cigarette," said Lautenberg, a New Jersey Democrat and tobacco industry critic.
Lautenberg invited witnesses from the Altria Group, the parent company of Philip Morris, and R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, but both firms declined to provide witnesses.
William Kovacic, a member of the Federal Trade Commission, ducked any responsibility for the inaccurate testing of cigarettes. He urged Senate lawmakers to strip the FTC of any authority to test cigarette nicotine and tar levels.
The commission, Kovacic testified, first recommended in July 1999 that Congress tap one of the nation's science-based public health agencies to conduct cigarette testing. He renewed that recommendation on Tuesday.
"The commission brings strong market-based expertise to the scrutiny of consumer protection matters, yet we lack the specialized scientific expertise needed to design and evaluate scientific test methods," Kovacic said.
Philadelphia lawyer Stephen Sheller testified that he has filed 40 lawsuits against tobacco companies in 22 different states. The tobacco industry, he said, has never been held accountable for misleading marketing practices due to the fact that its low-tar and light cigarettes have tested by the FTC or according to an FTC-approved method.
"They go into court and say, well, the FTC is regulating us," Sheller stated. That claim tends to block consumer lawsuits, Sheller testified.
Doctors said they fear that consumers were jumping to improper conclusions about government testing of cigarettes and making poor personal health decisions.
"The concern is that people move to a lower-yield product instead of doing what they should do, which is quit," stated Dr. Jonathan M. Samet, chairman of the Department of Epidemiology at the John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Health.
U.S. Sen. Edward Kennedy, a Massachusetts Democrat, has drafted a bill that would afford the Food and Drug Administration the authority to regulate tobacco products, including cigarettes.
The Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee approved the bill on Aug. 1, but Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., has not scheduled it for floor action.
House and Senate lawmakers have approved a separate measure that would increase spending on the State Children's Health Insurance Program, or SCHIP, by $35 billion over five years.
That measure would increase the federal tobacco tax by 61 cents, to $1 per pack. But President Bush has vetoed that legislation.
"We're going to pursue any opportunity we have to curb smoking, to help addicts find their way out of addiction by developing an understanding of what risk they are taking," Lautenberg said.
(end)