A new petition from SumOfUs, an international consumer group, is urging the German government to ban outdoor cigarette advertisements.
The group issued a press note yesterday saying that children who regularly saw tobacco advertisements were twice as likely to start smoking as those who didn’t.
It said that, because of the effect they had on children, tobacco billboards had been banned in every country of the EU, except Germany.
Today, advertisements for regular and electronic cigarettes could be placed anywhere in Germany, including near or next to schools.
In a preamble to a petition, the group said that parliamentarians of the centre-right CDU/CSU parties knew how deadly effective these advertisements were but preferred to keep tobacco corporations and their lobbyists happy than keep children safe.
The group said, however, that dissent was brewing in the German government, and that the federal drug commissioner had recently spoken in favour of a ban. By gathering as much public support as possible, there was ‘a real chance of getting a vote on the table – and winning’.
Smoking was a serious problem in Germany, the group said, especially among young people. More than 110,000 ‘children’ smoked every day, ‘a higher rate than the European average’. ‘More and more of them are trying e-cigarettes, which Phillip Morris and co. promote as a cooler, healthier tobacco alternative,’ the group said in promoting the petition.
‘Smoking kills nearly 125,000 Germans every year. We can’t let Big Tobacco keep profiting off those deaths while continuing to sign up new recruits with its billboards. A couple of years ago, the German government almost banned the ads – including ads for e-cigarettes – but it got thwarted at the last minute.
‘Every other country in the EU has put its foot down. It’s time Germany did as well.
‘If the SumOfUs community comes together, we can show the holdouts in the German government that they’re on the wrong side of history. It worked earlier this year, when we convinced the EU commission to stand up to Bayer’s lobbyists and ban three of the worst bee-killing neonicotinoid pesticides. With tobacco corporations, we’re up against a $346 billion juggernaut – but as we’ve proven time and time again, our people power is stronger than the industry’s money.
‘We know that given enough public pressure, the CSU/CDU will start valuing kids’ health over the interests of Big Tobacco. It’s up to us to make the government go cold turkey on the lobbyists.’
Category: Regulation
Call for advertising ban
Crackdown on smoking
Police officers in the Philippines have arrested more than 291,000 individuals in three months for violating local laws in Metro Manila, according to an ABS-CBN News story citing government figures.
Most of the violations had to do with smoking tobacco in places where smoking is banned.
According to the National Capital Region Police Office, the majority of those arrested between June 13 and September 24 broke local laws in Metro Manila’s largest conurbation, Quezon City, where police arrested 156,017 people.
More than 66,500 people were arrested in the areas under the jurisdiction of the Eastern Police District, and more than 29,200 were arrested in Manila City.
The intensified operations against people violating city ordinances began in June when President Rodrigo Duterte issued a directive and called loiterers “potential trouble for the public”.
The police figures show that most of those arrested, 97,685, violated the smoking ban, while 22,407 were arrested for being ‘half-naked in public’.
About 21,700 people were arrested for violating the curfew on minors, 15,140 were arrested for drinking in public places, and 134,576 were arrested in connection with violations of other ordinances.
Of the people arrested, 205,004 or 70 percent were warned, 52,823 were fined, while 33,680 were charged.
At least 32 ordinance violators were still in police custody when the story was published yesterday.Research funding
The US Food and Drug Administration says that the Tobacco Centers of Regulatory Science’s (TCORS) 2.0 program will continue to provide data on the following scientific domains related to its regulatory authority for tobacco products:
- Approaches that test the toxicity of tobacco smoke, aerosol, or specific constituents
- Effects of tobacco product characteristics on addiction and abuse liability
- Short- and long-term health effects of tobacco products
- Understanding of knowledge, attitudes and behaviors related to tobacco product use
- Understanding of how to effectively communicate the health effects of tobacco products
- Influences of tobacco marketing
- Understanding of the impact of potential FDA regulatory actions.
‘Findings from TCORS research are expected to inform the FDA’s mission to protect public health through regulation of the manufacture, distribution, and marketing of tobacco products,’ the FDA said in a note issued through its Center for Tobacco Products.
‘The TCORS program is one example of research supported by the Tobacco Regulatory Science Program, a partnership between FDA and NIH [National Institutes of Health] to foster tobacco regulatory research.’
Meanwhile, in the same note, the FDA said that ‘the following research investigators and organizations had been awarded TCORS for fiscal years 2018-2022’:- Thomas E. Eissenberg. Ph.D., and Alison Breland, Ph.D., Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond
- Stanton A. Glantz, Ph.D., University of California-San Francisco
- Stephen T. Higgins, Ph.D., University of Vermont and State Agriculture College, Burlington
- Suchitra Krishnan-Sarin, Ph.D., and Stephanie S. O’Malley, Ph.D., Yale University, New Haven
- Rafael Meza, Ph.D., and David T. Levy, Ph.D., University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
- Richard J. O’Connor, Ph.D., and Maciej Goniewicz, Ph.D., PharmD., Roswell Park Cancer Institute Corporation, Buffalo
- Mary Ann Pentz, Ph.D., and Adam M. Leventhal, Ph.D., University of Southern California, Los Angeles
- Rose M. Robertson, M.D., and Aruni Bhatnagar, Ph.D., American Heart Association, Dallas
- Andrew A. Strasser, Ph.D., and Cristine Delnevo, Ph.D., University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
Awarded by the NIH with funding from FDA, this second round of TCORS represented a significant investment in federally funded research, with more than $151 million total funding planned for the next five years, the FDA said.
‘With co-ordination from NIH’s Office of Disease Prevention, these awards are administered by three NIH institutes — the National Cancer Institute, the National Institute on Drug Abuse, and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute,’ it said.Government urged to act
The Hong Kong-based consumer advocate factasia.org is urging the Government to allow the sale of regulated vaping products. It says that consumers have the right to choose what they buy and use, according to a story at harbourtimes.com.
Factasia backed its call on Tuesday with the results of a survey conducted by market researcher Ipsos. The survey showed that out of 1,000 smoking and non-smoking participants in Hong Kong, 65 percent said there should be tax and regulatory policies to help people switch from combustible cigarettes to alternative products, while ensuring those products were kept away from the young people.
Vaping devices seem to occupy a gray regulatory area in Hong Kong where the Government is considering its position in respect of these devices.
Heneage Mitchell, co-founder of Factasia, was quoted as saying that alternative products were less harmful than were combustible cigarettes.
“It should be a personal choice for people to use these products to improve their quality of life,” he said. “These products mimic smoking without causing the harmful effects.”
The survey found also that 60 percent of participants believed that if the consumption of a new product were scientifically proven to be potential less risky than smoking, adult smokers should have the right to access this information.A Swiss solution
Swiss producers of electronic cigarettes and several retail outlets that sell such products have agreed to a voluntary ban on their sale to minors until a law-change comes into effect, according to a story at swissinfo.ch.
The code of conduct produced by the consortium of tobacco manufacturers and large retailers will go into force on October 1.
About 38 companies had previously signed up to an earlier charter initiated by the Swiss Vape Trade Association, which also seeks to prevent minors obtaining such products.
The signatories of the latest agreement have undertaken not to sell any e-cigarette devices or liquids that can be vaporised to persons under the age of 18.
The Federal Food Safety and Veterinary Office welcomed the decision, saying it would better safeguard the health of youngsters.
In April, Switzerland’s Federal Administrative Court overturned a ban on sales of electronic cigarettes with nicotine. The court accepted the argument that such products are freely sold in the EU.
Currently, e-cigarettes containing nicotine are considered a commodity under Swiss law and are not included within restrictions on conventional cigarettes. However, pending new laws would include e-cigarettes under a list of tobacco products that should not be sold or marketed to under-18s.Identifying a problem
A Danish member of the EU Parliament has asked the Commission whether the requirement for unique, tobacco-product identifiers will be waived in the case of products manufactured in the EU but intended for export to countries that do not allow such markings.
In a preamble to his questions, Bendt Bendtsen said the rules of the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/574 of December 15, 2017, on technical standards for the establishment and operation of a traceability system for tobacco products required in Article 6(1) that manufacturers marked each pack produced in the Union with a unique identifier.
‘What does the Commission intend to do in order to ensure that no tobacco products produced in the EU are prevented from being imported into non-EU countries as a result of the new Track and Trace rules, which require all EU-manufactured products to show a mandatory unique identifier?’ he asked.
‘Does the Commission intend to take steps to suspend said requirement for products manufactured for import into countries which, as of 20 May 2019, do not allow imports of tobacco products produced in the Union as a result of the EU requirement of a unique EU identifier?’
The Commission is due to answer in writing.Vaping evidence highlighted
An Irish member of the EU Parliament has asked the Commission whether it will be taking account of the contents of a UK parliamentary report and a letter signed by four academics – both of which come out in favor of vaping – when the Commission produces its implementation report on the Tobacco Products Directive.
In a preamble to his questions, Luke Ming Flanagan thanked the Commission for its answer to his previous question on vaping and the Tobacco Products Directive (E-002293/2018).
Flanagan then asked, with reference to the Commission’s statement that it continuously monitored developments, whether it was aware of the recent all-party UK House of Commons Science and Technology Committee report that was published on August 17 and that came out strongly in favor of vaping.
He asked also; was the Commission aware of the submission to the World Health Organization of a letter signed by four top academics, again outlining, in great detail, the case in favor of vaping.
And he asked whether the Commission could confirm that it would now take those reports into consideration in the implementation report it was required to submit in 2021, in line with Article 28(1) of the directive.
The Commission is due to reply in writing.Ancient rules invoked
Barnsley Council has been warned by lawyers that its plan to ban the sale of smoking goods in its new market complex is ‘legally defective’ and ‘unlawful’, according to a story in the Barnsley Chronicle.
The Council is said to stand accused of interfering with ancient rights.
Barnsley Council had intended to stop the sale of smoking-related goods in the market when traders moved in later this year, but the authority has been accused of overriding centuries-old rules covering markets.
Barnsley was granted its markets charter in 1249.
Solicitors acting for traders have written to the council warning that its plans to stop existing market traders from continuing to sell smoking-related goods when the new premises open later this year conflict with rights which, they say, allow both traders and customers to buy and sell goods in the market.
They have given details of a legal case from 1974 when a trader successfully challenged a decision to exclude him from the market and say ‘similar principles arise’.
The law firm Bury and Walker was quoted as saying: ‘The Court of Appeal previously held that the council had acted unlawfully because they had overstepped their powers; as again their actions interfered with the same ancient rights’.
Barnsley Council is due to respond to the letter shortly.Alarmism overused
‘FDA [the US Food and Drug Administration] seems to just be going around in circles,’ according to Lindsey Stroud, state government relations manager at The Heartland Institute.
Stroud was commenting on a recent FDA demand that five electronic-cigarette manufacturers address within 60 days what the agency describes as an “epidemic” of teenage vaping or face possible market restrictions on their products: blu, Juul, Logic, MarkTen, and Vuse.
‘Despite the alarmism, youth vaping dropped in 2016 and remained flat in 2017,’ said Stroud.
‘And youth cigarette smoking – it’s at an all-time low.
‘As tobacco companies have been doing for decades, electronic cigarette manufacturers are investing millions into anti-youth initiatives, and some states like Massachusetts have publicly refused to take their money.
‘Retailers in vape shops practice strict and responsible policies to ensure underage consumers are not purchasing vaping products.’
At the same time, Stroud said, the FDA had yet to approve a premarket tobacco product application. ‘Delaying such products limits companies’ ability to modify their current products to be even more child-resistant, including locks on these products,’ she said.
‘Although “protecting the children” is a laudable goal, this rhetoric is overused and threatens the millions of smokers who have quit smoking combustible cigarettes by using these products.’Sharpen your pen nibs
The US Food and Drug Administration says that by participating in its comment process the public can help shape the agency’s decisions. Such participation is, it says, an important part of the ‘notice-and-comment rulemaking and guidance development processes’.
The FDA was spotlighting public comments as part of its series of notices about Understanding Tobacco Regulation and Guidance.
‘Public participation in the rulemaking process is an essential function of good governance,’ the agency said in a statement. ‘By providing input, individuals and other stakeholders offer FDA a chance to actively listen to a wide-range of concerns, values, and perspectives, which in turn can inform regulatory decisions.
‘FDA accepts comments on documents within a defined timeframe, known as the open comment period.
‘FDA invites public comments on Advance Notices of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRMs), proposed rules (Notices of Proposed Rulemaking or NPRMs) and draft guidances, and announces the length of the public comment period in the Federal Register.
‘FDA reviews and considers the submitted comments in preparing the final documents.
‘When FDA publishes a final rule, the agency describes and responds to comments received.’
The FDA suggested ways of submitting effective comments that included providing a clear statement of whether the participant supported or oppose the proposed rule or guidance, and any comments or data that supported her position. Other tips for submitting effective comments are here.
The FDA said that it solicited information and comments, announced in the Federal Register and posted in dockets on regulations.gov, from the general public, industry, and organizations on a wide range of issues related to implementation of the Tobacco Control Act.
It said it would consider all comments, data, research, and other relevant information submitted to the docket to determine what regulatory next steps may be appropriate for a given issue. Comments may be submitted:- Online through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov.
- By mail, hand delivery, or courier to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Room 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
