News Article Comments : Group's challenge could delay smoke ban

RE: Group's challenge could delay smoke ban

CONFUSION STILL RAGES. From ASH: FDA Chief warns of tobacco regulation downside   Government regulation of tobacco could backfire by leading smokers to light up more often and inhale more deeply, the Food and Drug Administration chief said Tuesday.   Dr. Andrew von Eschenbach said that if the FDA reduced nicotine levels in cigarettes, people would change their smoking habits to maintain current levels of the addictive drug. Bipartisan legislation introduced last month would give the FDA broad regulatory authority over tobacco and its ingredients, including nicotine.   "We could find ourselves in the conundrum of having made a decision about nicotine only to have made the public health radically worse. And that is not the position FDA is in; we approve products that enhance health, not destroy it," said von Eschenbach, a urologic surgeon and oncologist who was confirmed as FDA commissioner in December.   A nicotine expert said von Eschenbach's fears may be unfounded. Dr. Neal Benowitz of the University of California, San Francisco, said a study sponsored by the National Cancer Institute - which von Eschenbach once led - suggested gradually reducing nicotine levels doesn't force smokers to compensate by smoking more or inhaling more deeply. In fact, Benowitz said, a gradual reduction can wean smokers from the habit.   And a backer of the legislation said von Eschenbach misunderstood its thrust: "The bill gives the FDA the authority to adjust nicotine levels - if doing so is demonstrated to save lives," said Matthew Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. "The status quo is the tobacco industry decides how much nicotine and other toxic substances are in tobacco products."  .

This post replies to Robert Feal-Martinez > RE: Group's challenge could delay smoke ban

RE: Group's challenge could delay smoke ban

well done.......

a good piece but the point of the article doesnt hit you until the last sentence.

Out of interest are UKIP donating any money towards the Review?

This post replies to this thread

RE: Group's challenge could delay smoke ban

Sorry Dave I'm not with you. As for UKIP, we haven't asked and they haven't offered, the alliance is purely recipricol. Deafening silence on here though from the usual crew. I guess all the shouting and screaming of the last few days about the JR have left them drained.

This post replies to Dave Robinson > RE: Group's challenge could delay smoke ban

RE: Group's challenge could delay smoke ban

Well so the Albert's are now a Queens Counsel or at the very least an award winning Judicial Review Lawyer. I think Iain O'Neil who actually interviewed Jaswinder Gill can confiorm they are his words.

This post replies to Robert Feal-Martinez > RE: Group's challenge could delay smoke ban

RE: Group's challenge could delay smoke ban

Robert,

what i mean is that surely success for FTC would bring success for UKIP and vice versa, that has to be the strategy behind it otherwise the partnership would be pointless? - so as you are advising people to vote UKIP shouldnt they providing support to FTC? Surely its in UKIP's best interest for a successful campaign from you and your team and the best way to help you would be funding surely?

reading the article that's the only message that comes out of it. you need more funding

This post replies to Robert Feal-Martinez > RE: Group's challenge could delay smoke ban