Experts suggest ways to reduce morbidity, mortality caused by tobacco use

NewsGuard 100/100 Score

The full implementation of traditional public health control strategies and integration of new regulatory authorities has the potential to significantly reduce tobacco-related deaths in the U.S., according to experts at the George Washington University (GW) School of Medicine and Health Sciences (SMHS) and the Center for Tobacco Products (CTP) at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

In a paper published by The Lancet as part of a series of papers on tobacco control, authors Lawrence "Bopper" Deyton, M.D., clinical professor of medicine at GW SMHS and professor of health policy at the GW School of Public Health and Health Services, and Corinne Husten, M.D., senior medical advisor at the CTP, outline how the FDA currently regulates tobacco use.

While the U.S. has a rich history of employing public health efforts to reduce morbidity and mortality from tobacco use, progress in decreasing the prevalence of tobacco use has slowed. Funding for many traditionally effective public health interventions has been cut and implementation of these programs has become increasingly challenging. However, with the enactment of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (Tobacco Control Act) in June 2009, the FDA, for the first time, has broad authority to protect public health by regulation of the manufacturing, marketing, and distribution of tobacco products in the U.S.

"Now that the FDA has authority to regulate tobacco products to protect public health, new tools exist to decrease the morbidity and mortality caused by tobacco use," said Deyton. "The medical and public health communities need to fully understand the FDA's new roles and, in addition to supporting traditional public health approaches to tobacco control, scientists and clinicians must become active participants in the FDA's regulatory processes to assure their data and perspectives are integrated in the FDA's regulatory work."

The authors elaborate on the FDA's six major areas of regulatory authority to protect and improve public health: Regulation of tobacco product manufacturing; regulation of the advertising, marketing, and promotion of tobacco products; regulation of the distribution and sales of tobacco products; enforcement of the provisions of the Tobacco Control Act and tobacco regulations; regulatory science to support FDA authorities and activities; and public education about the harms of tobacco products and to support FDA regulatory actions.

In their paper, Deyton and Husten conclude that "tobacco product regulation has the potential to be a game-changer for tobacco prevention and control. However, regulation of tobacco products in isolation cannot solve the public health problem caused by tobacco use. It is only with the full implementation of both traditional public health strategies and the new regulatory authorities that we will ensure that tobacco-related morbidity and mortality is part of the USA's past, not its future."

Comments

  1. Kevin Mulvina Kevin Mulvina Canada says:

    Tobacco Control continues to be, and refuses to be any effort beyond, making the lives of smokers as miserable as possible. In effect the work of what are perceived to be bigots and hypocrites. It is the working of a shell game dealing with symptoms and pointing fingers at the victims, while the root of the problem is continually ignored. If tobacco kills we could expend at least some time or effort working to make tobacco safer such as supporting the tremendous reductions of histamines and carcinogens by flu curing methods demanded in future legislation.  Acceptance of e-cigs as a safer alternative to smoking and recognition of the fact that if alternatives such as patches and gum lessen the chances of quitting compared with quitting without them, they are indeed doing harm. There is a great deal of work to be done, beyond as this article suggests, cheer-leading the status qua as a lobby group, that operates within a government agency. TC ideas are stale and outdated while continually ever more De-humanizing. Putting yourself behind a label as a bigot I am sure is neither the place any one wants or will willingly accept. Unfortunately far too many proxies have been abused and used to aid a targeting of those in the lower socioeconomic community, with digressive punishments, knowing full well that the effect has been not cessation, but increased levels of poverty. Even calling for support of public officials while venturing so low as to having people evicted from public housing if they smoke. Mark my words, this will not go without consequence and all that has been gained, will be transformed, to mistrust of all the players at the table. The tide is turning don't get swept up in it.

The opinions expressed here are the views of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of News Medical.
Post a new comment
Post

While we only use edited and approved content for Azthena answers, it may on occasions provide incorrect responses. Please confirm any data provided with the related suppliers or authors. We do not provide medical advice, if you search for medical information you must always consult a medical professional before acting on any information provided.

Your questions, but not your email details will be shared with OpenAI and retained for 30 days in accordance with their privacy principles.

Please do not ask questions that use sensitive or confidential information.

Read the full Terms & Conditions.

You might also like...
Aging too quickly? Biological clock linked to heart disease and early death