ThinkProgress Home
ThinkProgress
ThinkProgress Logo

Stories tagged with “Tobacco Industry

Health

CDC Launches A New, Graphic Antismoking Ad Campaign

Federal health officials are launching a new graphic antismoking ad campaign in an effort to persuade more adults to quit smoking. The “Tips from Former Smokers” campaign, which was spearheaded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) along with the Obama administration, looks at “the harsh reality of illness and damage suffered as a result of smoking and exposure to secondhand smoke.” The $54 million campaign features anecdotes and tips from former smokers who are currently living and struggling with smoke-related illnesses and disabilities:

One print ad depicts a 50-year-old throat-cancer patient named Shawn, exposing his neck as he shaves. “Be careful not to cut your stoma,” the ad reads. A TV spot portrays a 51 year-old former smoker named Terrie from North Carolina, who shows how she gets ready in the morning: inserting dentures, donning a wig, then a cover for a stoma, a hole in the neck created as a result of a tracheotomy. “Smoking causes immediate damage to your body,” a voiceover reads, and then provides quit-ine information.

The ads are scheduled to appear on television, radio, online, in print media and on billboards and bus stops. Federal officials are projecting the ad campaign will help 50,000 people quit smoking.

According to the CDC, an estimated 45.3 million American adults smoke cigarettes. To date, smoking is the leading cause of preventable and premature death and disease in the United States, and according to the Department of Health and Human Services, is responsible for more than 443,000 deaths each year in America alone, costing a massive $193 billion in direct medical costs and subsequent lost productivity each year. Currently, over 8 million Americans are living with a disease caused by smoking.

“Tobacco is the leading preventable cause of death in this country, and hard-hitting ads are a very effective way to reduce tobacco use. [...] The evidence is very clear that they work,” said CDC Director Thomas Frieden. Former New York City health commissioner, Frieden headed a similarly aggressive antismoking campaign that has been credited with aiding in the significant lowering of smoking rates in the city. The CDC-sponsored ads will run for 12 weeks starting Monday.

Fatima Najiy

LGBT

Making Sense Of The LGBT Community’s High Rates Of Substance Use

Our guest blogger is Jerome Hunt, Research Associate for LGBT Progress.

Last week, the Center for American Progress released a new issue brief on “Why the Gay and Transgender Population Experiences Higher Rates of Substance Use” and what can be done to reduce these rates.  Specifically, the brief mentions that an estimated 20 to 30 percent of gay and transgender people abuse substances, compared to about 9 percent of the general population.

According to the brief, there are three main factors that contribute to these higher rates of substance use in the gay and transgender population.  The first factor is minority stress that comes from social prejudice and discriminatory laws in everyday life such as employment, relationship recognition, and health care.  Second, the lack of cultural competency in the health care system not only discourages gay and transgender individuals from seeking treatment, but can lead to inappropriate or irrelevant service.  Finally, targeted marketing by alcohol and tobacco companies are exploiting the fact that bars and clubs are not only safe spaces for socialization for gay and transgender individuals but provide easy access to tobacco products and alcohol.

As a result, gay and transgender people turn to tobacco, alcohol, and other substances as a way to cope with the challenges. The data that are available about substance abuse show just how much of an impact this is having on the gay and transgender population.  For example, gay and transgender people smoke tobacco up to 200 percent more than their heterosexual counterparts.  Additionally, twenty five percent of gay and transgender people abuse alcohol, compared to 5 to 10 percent of the general population.

The brief also mentions a number of administrative and legislative recommendations that if employed could help to reduce the high rates of substance abuse within the gay and transgender population, including several outlined by the Center for American Progress last year that the Department of Health and Human Services could take.   The legislative recommendations included the passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), the Housing Opportunities Made Equal Act, The Respect for Marriage Act, and the Health Equality Act.

 

 

 

NEWS FLASH

STUDY: Gay Adults More Likely To Smoke, Less Likely To Quit | A new study from the University of Colorado Cancer Center reveals that not only are gay adults more likely to smoke cigarettes than the general public, but they are also less inclined to quit. According to the survey, 70 percent of LGBT smokers said that they were not planning to quit, compared to 60 percent of the general public who say they are planning to quit or are at least considering it. These results jibe with a study published in December that found that members of the LGBT community are twice as likely to smoke and an issue brief published last year demonstrating how tobacco companies specifically target the LGBT community with advertisements.

Justice

Why Do Tobacco Companies Get A Better First Amendment Than Doctors?

The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of 2009 instructed the FDA to develop new cigarette labels that include “color graphics depicting the negative health consequences of smoking.” Yesterday, a federal judge in DC struck down these labels on the ground that they violate the First Amendment’s protections against compelled speech:

A fundamental tenant of constitutional jurisprudence is that the First Amendment protects “both the right to speak freely and the right to refrain from speaking at all.” . . . In the arena of compelled commercial speech, however, narrow exceptions do exist and allow the Government to require certain disclosures to protect consumers from “confusion or deception.” Indeed, courts apply a lesser standard of scrutiny to this narrow category of compelled speech through which the Government may require disclosure only of “purely factual and uncontroversial information.” . . .

[A]fter reviewing the evidence here it is clear that the Rule’s graphic-image requirements are not the type of purely factual and uncontroversial disclosures that are reviewable under this less stringent standard. To the contrary, the graphic images here were neither designed to protect the consumer from confusion or deception, nor to increase consumer awareness of smoking risks; rather, they were crafted to evoke a strong emotional response calculated to provoke the viewer to quit or never start smoking.

As a matter of constitutional law, this is not crazy. The First Amendment does provide robust protections against compelled speech, and there is no exception to the First Amendment simply because a lot of people don’t like the plaintiff.

Sadly, however, many federal judges don’t seem to get this, at least in the context of abortion. A few weeks ago, the Fifth Circuit upheld a Texas law mandating government-compelled speech by doctors. Texas law requires doctors to tell their patients medically-irrelevant information, such as stating that the fetus has a heartbeat and discussing “the presence of external members and internal organs,” before they may perform an abortion. In other words, the law forces Texas doctors to advocate for the government’s anti-abortion agenda no less than the FDA labels require cigarette companies to advocate for an anti-smoking agenda, and yet the Fifth Circuit upheld the law on the grounds that the First Amendment is weaker in the face of laws that “express[] a preference for childbirth over abortion.”

Nor is this case an isolated incident. The Eighth Circuit upheld a law requiring doctors to tell their patients that abortion will “terminate the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being,” a statement that is both controversial and of uncertain factual basis — and thus would easily fail First Amendment scrutiny under the standard articulated by the judge in the tobacco case.

Simply put, if it is unconstitutional to require tobacco companies to print graphic anti-smoking labels, than it must also be unconstitutional to force doctors to parrot the state’s views on the abortion debate. America does not have one constitution for wealthy corporations and another, inferior constitution for everyone else.

NEWS FLASH

Study: Smoking Cessation Programs Produce $3 In Savings For Every $1 Spent | A new study from George Washington University found that a smoking cessation program in Massachusetts saved three dollars for every dollar spent. The study did not take into account the benefits of avoiding cancer, but did find that individuals who quit smoking produced savings in heart-related hospitalizations. A report released last year by the United Health Foundation found that smoking in the United States decreased by 3.4 percent between 2010 and 2011.

NEWS FLASH

Missouri Researchers Find LGBT Community Smokes More | Researchers at the University of Missouri found that 35-40 percent of the LGBT community smoke compared to just 21 percent of the general population. Responding to the data, the Missouri Foundation for Health is investing in smoking cessation and education programs that specifically target the LGBT community. The Center for American Progress released an issue brief in May pointing out how tobacco companies disproportionately advertise menthol cigarettes in LGBT venues and to other minority communities.

Health

As Top Restaurant Industry Lobbyist, Herman Cain Partnered With Big Tobacco To Promote Indoor Smoking

Herman Cain might be known best as the former CEO of Godfathers Pizza, but he served an equally substantial role as a lobbyist for the restaurant and fast food industry. As reporter Mike Elk notes at In These Times magazine, Cain, as head of the National Restaurant Association (NRA) in the ’90s, led an aggressive campaign to stop a hike in the minimum wage; and was successful in exempting servers from being included in the 1996 minimum wage law. Although Cain avoids explicitly calling attention to his role as a lobbyist on the campaign trail, he does cite his work as a restaurant association representative in fighting against President Clinton’s health reform plan as his most formative political experience.

As a lobbyist for the NRA, Cain represented a trade association for McDonalds, Burger King, and other fast food establishments. But a little known history, uncovered by ThinkProgress using the University of California, San Francisco archives, shows that Cain also lobbied on behalf of tobacco industry giants like R.J. Reynolds and Phillip Morris.

Documents reveals a long partnership between Herman Cain, then-head of the National Restaurant Association, and the tobacco industry. Above, one of the many Cain-related meeting notes from R.J. Reynolds.

Cain met frequently with representatives of R.J. Reynolds and other cigarette companies to find areas of mutual concern. In 1993, when President Clinton proposed a health care overhaul, the expansion of coverage included a cigarette tax and a requirement for many businesses to cover their employees. The tobacco industry reached out to form an alliance against the Clinton plan, and Cain obliged given the fast food industry’s opposition to the so-called “employer mandate.” A fax, sent from the tobacco industry’s public relations firm Burson-Marsteller on July 13, 1994, proposes a positive article about Cain’s “BITE BACK” campaign against health reform and smoking bans.

As Cain rose through the ranks of the National Restaurant Association to become its CEO, his bond with tobacco giants continued. In 1997, R.J. Reynolds executive David Fishel filed a memo about a meeting between Cain and tobacco lobbyists shortly after Cain became the NRA CEO. “Cain gave every indication that the NRA and RJR have the same views with regard to excessive government regulations and the importance of letting restaurateurs determine their own smoking policies,” Fishel wrote. R.J. Reynolds and other tobacco giants were at the time engaged in a massive lobbying effort to crush local, state, and federal efforts to regulate smoking in restaurants and other places of public concern.

The relationship blossomed. At one point, Cain even signed up to help out with an international pro-tobacco publicity tour.

Blurring the lines between restaurant industry caretaker and tobacco company representative, Cain accepted hefty donations from tobacco corporations. Cain worked to snuff out a Senate bill that would have reigned in smoking at restaurants and other facilities around the country. The lobbying drive, which defeated the bill in 1998, occured just after the NRA started to see money coming in from tobacco firms.

As Cain gained political connections in the lobbying world, he let some of his associates in on his dream of becoming president. “What IS a little interesting,” remarked tobacco lobbyist Rob Meyne in a January 22, 1999 e-mail to his colleagues, “is that Cain has informed key NRA leaders … that he is, in fact, going to run for President.” Meyne mused that Cain probably couldn’t win, but could make some type of impact. Cain would be a positive addition to the Republican field because he is “good on our issues,” added Meyne.

NEWS FLASH

Big Tobacco Sues FDA: New Warning Labels Violate Our First Amendment Rights | “Four big cigarette makers sued the Food and Drug Administration, seeking to void as unconstitutional new graphic labels and advertising that warn consumers about the risks of smoking and induce them to quit,” Reuters reports. “The notion that the government can require those who manufacture a lawful product to emblazon half of its package with pictures and words admittedly drafted to persuade the public not to purchase that product cannot withstand constitutional scrutiny,” said Floyd Abrams, a prominent First Amendment specialist representing the cigarette makers, in a statement. Pictures of the new labels that will appear no later than Sept. 22, 2012:

NEWS FLASH

MAP: Cigarette Taxes Across America | The American Cancer Society’s Cancer Action Network (ACS CAN) has released its progress report on state efforts to reduce incidences of cancer. The report concludes that states are passing up “opportunities to control health care costs and expand access to treatment.” For instance, as of July 1, “35 states, the District of Columbia” require 100 percent smoke-free workplaces and/or restaurants and/or bars. And while these laws “cover nearly 80 percent of the U.S. population,” many states still have loopholes that “allow for smoking in ventilated areas, casinos, bingo parlors, hookah bars, or cigar bars, at certain times of day in some venues, or for certain events.” Taxes on cigarettes — which have been shown to significantly reduce youth smoking — also vary greatly across the nation. New York has the highest tax of $4.35, while Missouri has the lowest at just $0.17. New York City has the highest combined city and state cigarette tax in the country, with a total tax of $4.85 per pack:

NEWS FLASH

Second-Hand Smoke Can Conribute To Hearing Loss | “Children who are exposed to secondhand smoke face an increased risk of a litany of problems, including asthma, respiratory infections and sudden infant death syndrome, according to the American Academy of Pediatrics.” The study, which estimated that “more than half of U.S. children are exposed to secondhand smoke,” also found “a correlation between cotinine in the blood and severity of hearing loss.”

Older

Switch to Mobile