Corpses on Cigarette Packs

Read Time:3 Minute, 54 Second

U.S. Cigarette makers sue FDA

Five tobacco companies are suing the FDA, which would

force them to include graphic pictures on cigarette packets

The Associated Press reports that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) wants to require tobacco companies to label cigarette packets with new images, will include individuals with heart disease and rotten teeth. In June, Health Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said the new labels could deter young people from starting to smoke and give adult smokers an incentive to quit. She noted that the labeling provides frank, honest warnings about the dangers of smoking. Jeff Ventura, FDA spokesperson, stated the agency did not comment on pending litigation.

If passed, new FDA regulations would include graphic images images of mouth cancer, decayed lungs, and a man exhaling smoke through his tracheotomy In the first major change in more than 25 years, graphic images include images of mouth cancer, decayed lungs, and a man exhaling smoke through his tracheotomy opening in his neck. The Department of Health and Human Services selected nine color images among 36 to accompany larger text warnings.

proposed cigarette images

Health advocacy groups praised the government plan, hoping the images would deter new smokers and shock existing smokers into quitting. The new law would force cigarette manufacturers to place the images on the upper half of the front and back of cigarette packs, and 20 percent of cigarette advertisements. They also include a toll-free, stop-smoking hotline

In response to the FDA, four of the five major tobacco companies sued the government over the proposed new law: RJ Reynolds, Lorillard, Commonwealth Brands, Liggett Group, and Santa Fe Natural Tobacco filed the suit on August 16, 2011. These companies hope to delay the law, which requires these explicit images to be required on all packs sold beginning September 2012.

Tobacco firms argue that the plan violates their constitutional right to free speech, because the images require firms promote the government’s anti-smoking message. Thus far, there is no word from the FDA. Representatives say the agency does not discuss pending litigation.

In their 41-page complaint, the five companies say the new cigarette labels illegally force their consumers to become depressed, discouraged and afraid to buy their products. The government can require warnings which are straightforward and essentially uncontroversial, but they can’t require a cigarette pack to serve as a mini-billboard for the government’s anti-smoking campaign, said Floyd Abrams who represents the cigarette corporations. He added the new labels violate the companies’ free-speech rights under the first amendment. The complaint asserts that these labels will cost millions of dollars to print.

Never before in the United States have producers of a lawful product been required to use their own packaging and advertising to convey an emotionally-charged government message urging adult consumers to shun their products the companies alleged in their federal court lawsuit.

The tobacco companies also alleged in the lawsuit that the images were manipulated to evoke strong, emotional reactions to consumers. The tobacco companies said the corpse photo is actually an actor with a fake scar and the healthy lungs were sanitized to make the diseased organ look worse.

These companies lost a similar complaint last year in the United States District Court in Kentucky/ District Judge Joseph H. McKinley Jr., ruled cigarette manufacturers could be forced to put graphic images and warnings covering the top half of cigarette packages by the fall of 2012. That ruling is now pending before the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.

The free speech lawsuit differs from a similar suit by several of the same companies over the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. The law took effect two years ago and opened the door to create the more graphic warning labels. This regulation also allowed the FDA to limit the amount of nicotine in cigarettes and banned tobacco companies from sponsoring athletic or social events, and prevented them from giving away free samples or branded merchandise.

Altria—parent company of Philip Morris and maker of Marlboro cigarettes—has not joined in any of the legal action against the FDA.

Breakdown of deaths types of 443,000 deaths in U..S. annually

The American Cancer Society expects more than 220,000 people in the US to get lung cancer in 2011. Estimated deaths for those who use tobaccos is responsible for approximately 443,000 deaths in the US each year.

The Center for Disease Control published statistics which indicate that for every person who dies from a smoking-related disease, 20 more people suffer with at least one serious illness from smoking

Do you feel that the proposed law precludes cigarette manufacturers’ first amendment rights, or is the FDA making the right decision?

About Post Author

Dorothy Anderson

I want to know what you think and why, especially if we disagree. Civil discourse is free speech: practice daily. Always question your perspective.
Happy
Happy
0 %
Sad
Sad
0 %
Excited
Excited
0 %
Sleepy
Sleepy
0 %
Angry
Angry
0 %
Surprise
Surprise
0 %
0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of

4 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Nick
12 years ago

I stopped smoking regular cigarettes two year ago when I got an e-cigarette. I like it so much that I don’t miss the old ones at all. I can’t say that these warnings will really have much impact, since I never really looked at my pack when I would reach for a cigarette. I think that if anything, it will make smoking even more cool for teens, since these warnings have a certain goth-appeal to them. If the government really wanted people to stop smoking, it would outlaw cigarettes period. However, the tobacco tax revenues generate over $100 billion for federal and state governments, very little of which goes to treating smoking-related diseases or anti-smoking programs. Too much money is made off cigarettes, and too many careers depend on people continuing to smoke, for the government to do the logical thing, Meanwhile, the FDA has been trying to ban e-cigarettes which have been the only thing that has kept me and many others away from the cancer sticks. Go figure…

Bradley Scott
12 years ago

My Father died of cancer, my Grandfather died of cancer, my two Uncles died of cancer, my brother had emphyzemia and pre-cancerous lesions on his lungs when he died. The oldest was 82, the youngest, 59. I’m 48, I’ve quit smoking, started again, quit, started. Sometimes I’ve stayed quit for years, started again for a month or few, quit again for years. It’s the one addiction that won’t seem to stay down. I’m all for the stronger, more graphic labels on cigarettes.

12 years ago

I never was a smoker while growing up but 90% of those around me were. Both my parents were smokers and died of lung cancer, mom at 59 and dad at 62. I still remember my mother telling me on her death bed, “Rick, I wish I would have listened to you about not smoking.” ( I am 62 and a non-smoker to this day, no cancer so far.) Also had a few aunts and uncles who died the same way, two of them from throat cancer. It’s a terrible way to live and to die ! Disgusting addiction. I still cringe to this day when I see young people on the street puffing away at that poisonous (dick) I mean stick, hanging out of their mouths.

jenny40
12 years ago

I am soooooo glad I quit smoking those nasty things.

Previous post 10 things you need to know about crazy Rick Perry
Next post Kobe Bryant accused of attacking man at LA Mega Church
4
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x