__ Hey Addicts! - FDA to Regulate Tobacco as a Drug !! <= you lose cig-suckers! __
Reality_CheckŠ
Wed Apr 2, 2008 6:29pm EDT
(Adds reaction, paragraphs 9-10, 16)
By Kim Dixon
WASHINGTON, April 2 (Reuters) - A U.S. House of Representatives committee on
Wednesday passed a bill for the first time that would give the Food and Drug
Administration broad authority to regulate tobacco.
Funded exclusively by millions of dollars of user-fees levied on the
industry, the bill would give power to the FDA over cigarettes and other
forms of tobacco, an idea backed by public health groups, some tobacco
companies and many Democrats.
Supporters cited the grim public health toll of smoking, which is the
biggest preventable cause of death in the United States, responsible for
400,000 deaths and $100 billion in health care costs annually.
"It's hard to believe that the FDA regulates toothpaste but not cigarettes,"
New Jersey Democrat Frank Pallone said in backing the bill. "This will force
companies to substantiate claims" about the risks of cigarettes, he said.
The bill passed the House Energy and Commerce committee in a 38-12 vote and
would authorize the FDA to police cigarette labeling, restrict sales,
prohibit flavored cigarettes and recall tobacco products seen as
unreasonably harmful.
The FDA would also have to approve all new cigarettes and other tobacco
products, and set standards for so-called reduced-risk products. The agency
would not be empowered to ban cigarettes or require nicotine levels of zero
under the bill.
Total fees to fund the new activities would be ramped up from $85 million in
the first year to $712 million in the tenth year and beyond. The fees would
be assessed based on market share per product for each tobacco company.
The bill's most vocal proponent from industry has been the nation's largest
cigarette maker, Philip Morris, a unit of Altria Group Inc (MO.N: Quote,
Profile, Research). The legislation has recently won support from a host of
smaller tobacco companies and retailers.
After a decade of failed efforts in the House, backers said the tide has
turned with most of the public opposed to smoking, and lawmakers less tied
to tobacco interests.
"It's a different day in Congress on tobacco," said Gregg Haifley, director
of federal relations with the Cancer Action Network. "Finally public health
is winning."
The bill is expected to pass the full House, but will face a tougher fight
in the Senate where it is procedurally easier to block bills.
Last August, a Senate committee endorsed a similar bill with the support of
health groups and Altria.
Since then, the bills have picked up significant bipartisan support on
Capitol Hill. The House measure now has about 220 co-sponsors, while the
Senate version has at least 55.
Some companies say the bill could spur industry consolidation because bigger
companies would be best able to comply with it. A provision was added to the
House bill requiring the Federal Trade Commission to study the impact the
law would have on competition in the industry.
FDA RESOURCES
Some tobacco companies have opposed FDA regulation and the White House is
wary of the idea.
A U.S. Health and Human Services spokesman said the Bush Administration has
"significant concerns" about the bill, and is worried it would load new
responsibilities on the FDA and possibly create a misconception that tobacco
is safe.
FDA Commissioner Andrew von Eschenbach, a Republican appointed by President
George W. Bush, has said the bill would be extremely difficult to implement.
Reynolds American Inc (RAI.N: Quote, Profile, Research), maker of Camel
cigarettes, staunchly opposes the bill, saying, like many Republican
lawmakers, that the FDA is already stretched thin just regulating drugs and
food.
Reynolds has been running advertisements in districts of lawmakers with
tobacco interests.
"It's not the FDA's role in my opinion to be the cigarette cops on the
beat," said Rep. Joe Barton of Texas, the ranking Republican on the
committee.
Barton and some other Republicans suggested that another agency, such as the
Federal Trade Commission, would be a more appropriate authority.
Parts of the bill giving smaller tobacco companies more time to comply and
requiring foreign tobacco products to be subject to the same rules won over
some prior opponents.
"In my home district of eastern North Carolina, tobacco is more than just an
agricultural product, it is a livelihood," said Rep. G.K. Butterfield, a
Democrat who now supports the bill. (Additional reporting by Kevin
Drawbaugh, editing by Gerald E. McCormick and Tim Dobbyn)
The BIG N
> UPDATE 1-US House panel backs bill giving FDA tobacco power
> Wed Apr 2, 2008 6:29pm EDT
> (Adds reaction, paragraphs 9-10, 16)
>
Yah, we're worried vox. You silly, angry, troll
Let me fire one up to sooth my anxiety. LOL!
The BIG N - lovin' it when the trolls get angry.
Real titty_Chuck@-T＃$
"Reality_CheckŠ" <Rea...@Check.it> wrote in message
news:65io2uF...@mid.individual.net...
> UPDATE 1-US House panel backs bill giving FDA tobacco power
Yes, This is what we wanted all along.!
Maybe now the purity of the tobacco will inprove.
The filters will not longer contain cotton seeds.
Pharmaceutical labs will process the tobacco and filters along
with the paper and give us a better overall product.
Best of all the scraps will be used in the medicines used to treat
the indiginant folks that expect good quality for free.
Best yet, since tobacco is not a drug it will free up the AF (T)
agents to chase bootleggers and firearm Kooks in colorado.
Maybe now when you buy cotton you won't have to roll out
4 yards of paper to see cotton.
Pill's will no longer contain cotton as they have a better use
for good cotton and the cheap seeded cotton will be used in the
medicines.
Scary all those gun carrying agents of the F DAT will be
chasing milk trucks and cigarette wagons to be sure the stainless
steel vessels have good liners, and check wash records.
Now if we could just turn their attention to toliet paper (Shame
Him) will agree, all you assholes will feel mush better.
Perfect.
AFT reduced to just AF What does that stand for?
So far all I see accomplished is cigarette butts litter everywhere.
Good. Now they can hire pickers for the butts.
Be certain to watch for the butt pickers in your town soon.!
Ken Dixon
March 31, 2008
A top Australian neurosurgeon says the world's heavy reliance on mobile
phones could be a greater threat to human health than smoking and even
asbestos.
Vini Khurana, who conducted a 15-month "critical review" of the link
between mobile phones and malignant brain tumours, said using mobiles
for more than 10 years could more than double the risk of brain cancer.
He has called for "immediate and decisive steps" by industry and
governments to reduce people's exposure to invisible electromagnetic
radiation emitted by handsets.
Dr Khurana also called for a "solid scientific study" observing heavy
mobile phone users for a period of at least 10-15 years.
"It is anticipated that this danger has far broader public health
ramifications than asbestos and smoking, and directly concerns all of
us, particularly the younger generation, including very young children,"
Dr Khurana said in a research paper published on the website
brain-surgery.us.
for the rest go http://tinyurl.com/2vzc5r
Be sure to read
Study says many studies suck
Research shows we are far too drunk on stupid studies that tell us what
research shows
By Mark Morford, SF Gate Columnist
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2008/02/01/notes020108.DTL
Friday, February 1, 2008
Reality_CheckŠ
"Ken Dixon" <nsvm...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:jlZIj.16635$%15....@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
> Asher Moses
> March 31, 2008
>
> A top Australian neurosurgeon says the world's heavy reliance on mobile
> phones could be a greater threat to human health than smoking and even
> asbestos.
Then stay at home you whining panty-nanny ...
Melissa Jackson
cigarettes contain the amount of nicotine they advertise on the pack, I'm all
for it. I love my cigarettes and have been studying the food industry in school,
so I don't mind the government putting in quality controls for all of the
products I use daily.
If the government actually thought that cigarettes were really bad for you, they
would just ban them.
Bruce Watson
Melissa Jackson <meli...@spam.free> wrote:
>If the government actually thought that cigarettes were really bad for you,
>they would just ban them.
Be patient.
Mike
"Bruce Watson" <anon...@nyx.nyx.net> wrote in message
news:12088165...@irys.nyx.net...
It'll be great to watch all of the anti-smokers open their new tax bills.
They're so ignorant. WTF is going to be taxed when your wish is granted?
Probably anything and everything. And, that bill is growing every day. Look
at the morons running Massachusetts. Their failed nazi-inspired health care
plan needs more funding, even though it's mandatory for everyone to sign up.
Not only do they want to raise tobacco taxes again. But another moron from
Smoke Free Mass is in on the plan. Soooo, if Mass goes smoke-free, the
nazi's will tax the common man into poverty to fund a socialist program that
was to be funded by tobacco taxes.
Nazi's are always short-sighted.
A few of the nazi's who post their garbage here must now be aware of the
impending plastic bottle bans, because it can harm human ( usually health
nut humans who think they're immortal ) tissues. Gee, when I posted about
that possibility about a year ago, they said where's the proof. The proof
supplied was called propaganda by the same nazi's.
Next it'll be your food, your new car smell ( that smell nazi's love is
actually toxic, but they'll need more proof in the form of another newscast,
as they're too friggin' lazy to loook it up ), matches, paper, plastic,
bottles, batteries, and hell, maybe even large people, short people, and on
and on. Once the nazi's started down their intolerant black and white, no
gray area path, they've opened the bottle and the genie's out.
Hey, nazi's. Why didn't you post about one of your heroes, Eliott Spitzer,
the anti smoking nazi when he fell from grace? Because nazis are always
blind to anything but their insane causes. They ignored THAT huge elephant
in the corner, by God.
Your turn will come.
(Cigar content warning).....
Hey! Has anyone seen the new "Broughton's Folly" cigars? Ha! The label is a
hoot!
Have a nice day.
M
Bigron
> "It's hard to believe that the FDA regulates toothpaste but not cigarettes,"
> New Jersey Democrat Frank Pallone said in backing the bill.
Not hard for me to believe. I have yet to hear about tobacco having
anti-freeze added to it...something that toothpaste from China was
found to have in it.
Money well spent would be to further investigate and inspect all the
potentially hazardous imported products coming through our ports.
Marc Schneiderman
<cigarm...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>It'll be great to watch all of the anti-smokers open their new tax bills.
And they're only interested in their own pocket books, not in the big
picture. Cheap, out of work, SOBs.
CigarBaron