HEADLINES

• Tobacco firms accused of funding shops' campaign to keep cigarettes on display
• Tobacco displays in Britain's shops should be consigned to history
• USA: Tobacco industry sues FDA on proposed menthol cigarette ban
• USA: Lance Armstrong campaigns for tobacco tax initiative to fund cancer research
• China: Shanghai’s first capsule hotel deemed a potential fire trap

• Tobacco firms accused of funding shops' campaign to keep cigarettes on display

  A shopkeepers' trade body that has helped to persuade scores of MPs to oppose a ban on cigarette displays has been accused by its members of being a puppet of the tobacco industry.

  The National Federation of Retail Newsagents, which represents 16,500 shopkeepers, has emerged as an important player in the debate over whether "power walls" – behind-the-counter displays of cigarettes – should be banned.

  Health campaigners claim that banning the displays would benefit the nation's health because it would cut the number of young people who take up smoking. But the federation, which disputes evidence for the claim and warns that the move would be bad for business, has hired a lobbying company to make its case with MPs. Emails sent to MPs by account executives at Hume Brophy, which also lobbies on behalf of British American Tobacco, suggest the federation's campaign has been a success.

  One email, sent to all MPs this month, said: "The campaign has more than 78 supporters [MPs] … on this very important issue which would have a devastating effect on the small business sector in your constituency."

  "The federation is a puppet of the tobacco industry," said Colin Finch, its president in 2001 and 2007, who accuses tobacco companies of using "retailers to legitimise their campaign". He said tobacco money flowed into the federation "discreetly" via sponsorship of trade events, annual conferences, seminars, meetings and dinners.

  "The whole situation with the federation and the tobacco industry is out of kilter," said Finch, who opposes the display ban, arguing it is unfair and will not work. "The federation's code of ethics has been poisoned by the tobacco industry."

  Allegations that a trade body that has lobbied MPs has been influenced by tobacco firms will be seized on by health campaigners. The UK is a party to the World Heath Organisation convention on tobacco control, which compels governments to ensure the drafting of policies is free "from vested interests of the tobacco industry".

  "The government is required to protect its public health policies with respect to tobacco from the commercial and vested interests of the industry," said Deborah Arnott, director of the anti-smoking campaign group, ASH. "If the government repeals or significantly delays the display ban it will have utterly failed to live up to its international treaty obligations."
   

  Source: The Observer, 27 Feb. 2011
  Link: http://bit.ly/foo0NT

• Tobacco displays in Britain's shops should be consigned to history

  The following editorial in The Observer accompanied the article above on tobacco display bans. 

  The government will soon decide whether cigarette displays in shops should be banned. Health campaigners insist they should, believing this will reduce the number of young people smoking, while those who run convenience shops oppose the move, saying it will cost up to £1,000 to remove the displays and to fit under-the-counter trays to hold tobacco products. This, they warn, will increase queues in shops, levels of theft and smuggling.

  Whether a ban deters young people from smoking is fiercely contested. Several Canadian provinces that introduced a ban have witnessed a significant fall in youth smoking. But provinces that did not introduce a ban have also seen falls.

  What is clear is that in the Canadian example the smoking lobby vigorously resisted the move, advancing the same arguments against the ban now being made here, ostensibly by shopkeepers but with the tacit support, both financial and administrative, of the big tobacco companies.

  The assertion that compliance with the ban will result in thousands of shopkeepers going out of business must be treated with suspicion. Even those who oppose the ban estimate the true cost of compliance will be only in the hundreds of pounds, a fraction of an average shop's annual turnover.

  Perhaps the most useful exercise for the UK government is to look to Ireland, which introduced a similar ban in 2009. Independent research confirmed that the ban did not result in a loss of income for Irish retailers, while there was a dramatic decline in children's awareness that tobacco was sold in shops. Support for the ban also rose among the general population after it was introduced.

  The researchers concluded the ban helped to "de-normalise" tobacco in the minds of children. The truth, long recognised by the tobacco industry, is that these displays are just another form of advertising and so, in the case of cigarettes, should be consigned to history.
   

  Source: The Observer, 27 Feb. 2011
  Link: http://bit.ly/grsqPf

• USA: Tobacco industry sues FDA on proposed menthol cigarette ban

  Lorillard Inc and R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co have filed a lawsuit against the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) saying there were conflicts of interest and bias among members of an advisory panel which may recommend banning menthol cigarettes.

  The FDA advisory panel's recommendations are not binding although the agency usually goes along with its advice. Panel members are expected to put forward their recommendations regarding menthol-flavored cigarettes on 23rd March this year.

  Nearly 1 in every 3 cigarettes sold in the USA is mentholated. R. J. Reynolds sells a menthol Camel version as well as the Kool brand, while Lorillard's Newport brand is the number one menthol cigarette seller in the country.

  Legislation was passed in 2009 giving the FDA the power to decide over tobacco products, such as cigarettes, pipes and cigars. The agency banned fruit, chocolate and other flavored cigarettes, which were thought to be aimed at getting children to smoke.

  The new law asked the FDA to get a panel of outside experts to look into the health and social aspects of menthol cigarettes before deciding on whether to ban them.

  Three panel members are accused of having severe financial and appearance conflicts of interest and associated biases, according to the lawsuit.

  Pharmaceutical companies have financially rewarded three advisers for consultation work and research - these companies make products that to help people give up smoking, the lawsuit claims.

  Two more members of a panel subcommittee have appeared as expert witnesses in suits against cigarette makers, the suit also claims.

  Those wanting to prevent children from ever starting to smoke say the lawsuits are frivolous attempts to derail much needed legislation.

  In an online communiqué, Matthew Myers president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids says this latest suit is an act of panic. He accuses the tobacco companies of fearing that the committee will recommend effective actions that either undermine or completely destroy a very lucrative market for menthol cigarettes, "Once again, they are putting profits ahead of lives and health."

  Myers says the lawsuit is groundless. The advisory committee was legally set up in accordance with the 2009 legislation. The evidence is compelling that the presence and availability of menthol cigarettes is linked to a higher incidence of smoking among children - the tobacco industry want to keep the evidence secret, Myers said.

  Source: Medical News Today, 27 Feb. 2011
  Link: http://bit.ly/idIsHJ

• USA: Lance Armstrong campaigns for tobacco tax initiative to fund cancer research

  Lance Armstrong, the seven-time Tour de France winner who announced his retirement earlier this month, will kick off a state ballot initiative campaign in Los Angeles on Monday for a measure that would direct hundreds of millions of dollars toward cancer research by levying an additional $1 tax on cigarettes and other tobacco products.

  Organizers of the initiative known as the California Cancer Research Act, gathered more than 433,000 signatures last year to qualify for the next statewide ballot, which is scheduled for February 2012.

  But their timeline may be accelerated by Gov. Jerry Brown's push for a special election in June that would ask voters to help close the state's $26-billion budget gap by extending vehicle, income and sales taxes for five years. Brown must first win approval for the special election from two-thirds of each house of the California Legislature. If he succeeds, the cigarette tax initiative would automatically be placed on that ballot.

  Source: Los Angeles Times, 27 Feb. 2011
  Link: http://lat.ms/f7hARf

• China: Shanghai’s first capsule hotel deemed a potential fire trap

  Fire inspectors testing Shanghai’s first capsule hotel a month after it opened for business were unable to give the 68-berth construction their official stamp of approval after it emerged that each sleeping pod could burst into flames by an unattended cigarette.

  Given the profile of the average capsule hotel guest — a dead-tired, heavy-smoking, blind drunk executive who has missed the last train — the risks involved were apparently judged too high to give the hotel a licence to function.

  Source: The Times, 25 Feb. 2011 (subscription required)
  Link: http://thetim.es/h61CQL