Why Strawberry Jam is More Regulated than Cigarettes
August 29, 2008(PhysOrg.com) -- While jams and other consumer products are strictly regulated and are required to pass stringent tests before they can be sold, tobacco has no restrictions and manufacturers can, and do, add anything they want into the product.
Published in Respirology by Wiley-Blackwell, the invited editorial “Regulation of Consumer Products: The Bizarre Case of Strawberry Jam and Cigarettes” discusses the issues surrounding tobacco regulations and how the industry could be more effectively governed.
“The establishment of regulation is a political process and occurs slowly. However, with the gradual but prolonged and massive epidemic of tobacco-related diseases, regulation of the industry’s products – specifically the constituents of tobacco smoke – has to begin now”, says author Dr. Nigel Gray, member of the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Tobacco Regulation Study Group.
Despite the complexities of regulating cigarette manufacturing, the Tobacco Regulation Study Group, or TobReg, has proposed practical means to begin the progressive process of tobacco regulation. As a first step, it has suggested setting mandatory levels for some of the major carcinogens and toxicants in cigarettes. In addition, regular reviews must also be conducted as initial toxin levels are considered generous by industry standards for many countries.
“There is no need for an expensive bureaucracy to oversee this regulation. Countries can simply mandate TobReg’s recommendations and publicize them as advice from the world’s central public health board. Countries without cigarette manufacturing facilities can simply refuse to import cigarette that do not meet these standards”, says Dr. Gray.
He adds, “International standards are highly desirable as large amounts of cigarettes are traded between countries with differing national standards. It is timely for WHO to set standards and offer world leadership – particularly as their Framework Convention on Tobacco Control is now in its implementation process, albeit much slower than most public health advocates would desire. Singapore, Australia and New Zealand are ideally placed to pioneer the introduction of these measures.”
This paper will be published in the September 2008 issue of Respirology (Vol. 13, Issue 6).
Provided by Wiley
Sep 04, 2009 |
not rated yet |
0
Such action causes accelerated mitosis for faster, larger leaves. In the human body the residual reaction can cause CANCER!
Alcohol could be described in the same way, but as we saw during prohibition, outlawing the item failed. We had numerous deaths and other harm from adulterated "moonshine". We re-leagalized the item, taxed and regulated its production, and have accepted that there are always going to be those who wish to consume alcohol. Human behavior in regard to desire and addiction needs to be addressed in ways that encourage access to behavioral modification support programs rather than believing that simply banning will resolve the problem users.
Even heavy regulation could have similar effects to an all out ban.
Oh, and this is politics, not science.
Automobiles can also be seen in the same way. They are one of the leading causes of preventable deaths, but the government knows it wouldn't be feasible to simply ban them. Instead, the government affects the fact that a certain portion of people will die while driving, and the government attempts to regulate the industry to ensure that vehicles are as safe as reasonably possible. Drivers then accept the risk of driving and are able to decide how much they will pay for a safer car that exceeds government regulations.
Few things in the world must be taken to their extremes.
Patently false, cigs significantly raise your chances of lung cancer, They will not "kill you no matter the dose". It's a risk assessment, and your analogy to the red light is apples to oranges.
However an analogy to simply diriving on the road and having the risk of an accident at some point is perfectly valid. Wanna ban cars?
Moreover let's ban cigs and have another drug war, that's a brilliant plan isn't it, since the current moralistic tirade of people thinking they have the right to force others to do things they don't think is right is working SO well.