http://www.tobacco.org/newsfeed/category/lobbying.rss Latest top tobacco news headlines en-us http://news.wustl.edu/news/Pages/23322.aspx http://tobacco.org/news/333575.html What has been neglected is research on tobacco production in the United States, and specifically on the people who work and live in the rural, traditional tobacco-growing areas of North Carolina. Benson’s new book, Tobacco Capitalism (Princeton University Press, 2011), examines the impact of the transformation of the tobacco industry on farmers, workers and the American public. It reveals public health threats, the impact of off-shoring, and the immigration issues related to tobacco production. The book also examines the new public relations strategies of the tobacco industry and its recent corporate social responsibility “makeover”. “There are whole groups of people — farmers and farm workers — in our society who dedicate themselves to growing a crop that is vilified,” says Benson, assistant professor of anthropology in Arts & Sciences. “But this book is not just about good people doing a bad thing. What I found was, in going to North Carolina and going to these farms, that the story becomes much more complex.” Washington University in St. Louis jessica_daues@wustl.edu ( By Jessica Daues) Thu, 09 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/documentStore/t/d/f/tdf47d00/Stdf47d00.pdf http://tobacco.org/news/333569.html Collection Philip Morris Pages 13 . . . Dr. James E. Enstrom Associate Research Professor School of Public Health University of California . . . Dr. Michael R. Fox Principal Engineer American Nuclear Society . . . Dr. Gary L. Huber Director Nutrition Unit, Department of Medicine University of Texas Health Center . . . Mr. Peter Huber Senior Fellow Manhattan Institute . . . Legacy Tobacco Documents Library Thu, 09 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/tdf47d00/ http://tobacco.org/news/333568.html Document Date 19941200/E Document Type LIST . . . Organizations Mentioned TASSC, THE ADVANCEMENT OF SOUND SCIENCE COALITION Brands CORPORATE AFFAIRS/CARLSTADT; PARTIAL LISTING OF KEY SCIENTISTS AND ACADEMICIANS SUPPORTING THE ADVANCEMENT OF SOUND SCIENCE COALITION ( TASSC) Legacy Tobacco Documents Library Thu, 09 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www2.desmogblog.com/node/2750 http://tobacco.org/news/333567.html Background Michael Fox was a retired nuclear scientist and university chemistry professor with experience in the field of energy. He passed away on November 4, 2011. [1], [2] Fox's bio at the Grassroot Institute of Hawaii (GIH) states he "is a retired nuclear scientist and university chemistry professor. He is the science and energy writer/reporter for the HawaiiReport.com. A resident of Kaneohe, Hawaii, he has nearly 40 years experience in the energy field." More recently, Fox lived in Washington State. [3] . . . Affiliations * The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition (TASSC) -- Past "Key scientist and academician." [6] * Grassroot Institute of Hawaii (GIH) -- Past Senior fellow. [3] * The Heartland Institute -- Past "Expert." [3] DeSmogBlog.com Thu, 09 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/national/national/general/stub-out-tobacco-company-lobbying/2446111.aspx http://tobacco.org/news/333437.html They've been stripped of the right to advertise, will soon be forced to sell their products in plain packaging, at least two political parties refuse to accept their donations and now there is a call to ban tobacco companies from lobbying governments. Anti-tobacco group Action on Smoking and Health wants a crackdown on the tobacco industry's ability to influence public policy. In a submission to a Senate committee inquiry into the Government's Lobbying Code of Conduct and and the Register of Lobbyists, ACOSH said smoking had caused the deaths of more than one million Australians since 1950 and was now responsible for the deaths of 15,000 each year. ''Action to reduce smoking has been consistently and vigorously opposed and undermined by the global tobacco industry through sophisticated and well-funded campaigns in Australia, with the goal of undermining tobacco control and public health initiatives,'' the ACOSH submission said. ''A ban on lobbying activities by the tobacco industry is an appropriate remedy to the tactics utilised by the tobacco industry, which defy accountability or transparency. Canberra Times Australia Tue, 07 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2012/02/california-tobacco-tax-backers-take-first-swipes-of-high-cost-campaign-proposition-29.html http://tobacco.org/news/333027.html Supporters of a tobacco tax slated for the June primary ballot launched the opening salvo today of what is expected to be a multimillion dollar campaign, framing their effort as a battle to beat moneyed "big tobacco" interests. At a news conference kicking off the campaign, Proposition 29 proponents cast their measure, which would raise taxes on cigarettes by $1 a pack to fund cancer research and anti-smoking programs, as an approach to improve health and save lives. "It's this simple: A no vote on Proposition 29 supports tobacco companies' strategy of singling out poor people and people of color for addiction and death. A yes vote on Proposition 29 is a vote for better health and live saving research," Joe Debbs of the American Heart Association said, adding: "From our perspective there is no middle ground. You're either with us, or you buy big tobacco's lies." Supporters marked the official launch of the campaign for the initiative, which qualified for the ballot in 2010, by holding rallies in 21 other locations across the state that featured a bed with the message, "Let's see who's in bed with Big Tobacco." Sacramento Bee feedback@sacbee.com Wed, 01 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/int/news/-/news/world-europe-16797862 http://tobacco.org/news/332994.html In the Netherlands, politicians are being accused of allowing the powerful tobacco lobby to exercise undue influence over smoking policy. In recent years while most countries have been tightening anti-smoking legislation, the Netherlands has partially reversed some of its laws - allowing people to smoke in some bars again and cutting funding for anti-smoking organisations. Now there are allegations that this could be due to improper links between the politicians and the tobacco industry, and experts are warning it could have a potentially deadly impact on the nation's health. 'Saved business' Three years ago, like many others across Europe, the Dutch government outlawed smoking in bars. But over the past six months, under pressure from licence holders, ministers in the Netherlands have been rolling back the restrictions. . . . Researchers predict that without tougher anti-smoking policies and more help for those who want to give up over the next 30 years, almost a million people in the Netherlands will die prematurely due to tobacco-related diseases. But the economic crisis is forcing the government to implement cross departmental budget cuts. The Stiviro smoking cessation clinic in The Hague has had its government funding cut completely. BBC Online Netherlands Tue, 31 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.thenational.ae/news/uae-news/health/business-drags-out-smoke-ban-introduction http://tobacco.org/news/332983.html DUBAI // Business is delaying the introduction of the law to stop smoking in public places and regulate tobacco sale and production, a senior health official says. At a meeting of the GCC Tobacco Control Committee, with representatives from all six Gulf states, Dr Mahmoud Fikri, the undersecretary for health policy at the Ministry of Health, said the law was in the final stage of approval and awaiting cabinet approval. But it has been at that stage since June, when the ministry submitted the regulation. Dr Fikri said implementing such a law was difficult. "It is hard for things to run smoothly in this," he said. "There are a lot of interests, and there are big companies today and a lot of other things that come into effect. The National Newspaper osalem@thenational.ae ( Ola Salem) Uae Mid-east Mon, 30 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://voices.idahostatesman.com/2012/01/30/idahopolitics/dont_raise_cigarette_tax_national_group_tells_idaho_legislators http://tobacco.org/news/332972.html The D.C. conservative outfit Citizens Against Government Waste is wading into Idaho’s cigarette tax debate, telling the Legislature it should reject a proposal to raise the tax by $1.25. Citizens Against Government Waste is best known for crusading against Congressional political pork, but its lobbying arm has taken on tobacco issues nationwide while at the same time collecting at least $245,000 from tobacco companies, according to a St. Petersburg Times report. The lobbying arm, called the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste, announced today that it’s sent a letter to the Idaho Legislature on the issue. “Raising cigarette taxes, especially during a weak economy, will slow business and negatively impact state retailers … The Congressional Budget Office has reported that cigarette excise taxes are the most regressive type of excise tax and disproportionately impact the poor and those living on fixed incomes,” the letter says. The Idaho Statesman onlinenews@idahostatesman.com Mon, 30 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/sideviews/article/fighting-big-tobacco-in-malaysia-fifa-rahman/ http://tobacco.org/news/332940.html In a country where 46 per cent of males smoke, and where the government spends RM20 billion a year treating tobacco-related illnesses, it is imperative that we as a society demand greater health protection, and stronger tobacco laws. However, in the enactment of tobacco laws to protect public health, and also in the execution of anti-tobacco/pro-health advocacy, there has been a long history of tobacco industry interference which undermines and very often, blocks efforts from materialising altogether. As someone who has had exposure to tobacco policies and regulation, I am fearful that tobacco industry interference is the most significant obstacle that policymakers and anti-tobacco advocates face today. . . . In addition to the use of biased studies, over the years, the tobacco industry has also been very smart in recruiting influential persons or persons with previous government links to fill positions in their companies. A quick Google search of the Board of Directors of any large tobacco company will reveal names of highly influential persons, recognizable names that make tobacco lobbying just that much stronger. The WHO provides measures to effectively deal with the tobacco epidemic; these are called the MPOWER measures -- all of which have in the past and currently face tobacco industry interference. These effective measures are: Monitoring of tobacco use; Protection from tobacco smoke; Offer help to cease smoking (cessation techniques); Warning of harms of tobacco use; Enforce advertising bans; and Raise taxes. . . . In the campaign for smoke-free areas, the tobacco industry employs front-groups such as restaurant owners associations and tourism groups, stating that restaurant business would reduce and tourism would reduce. I could be wrong, but logically persons frequent restaurants for food and touristic areas for scenery and recreational activities -- not to smoke. Furthermore, evidence has proven that in New York, which banned smoking in restaurants, business was not adversely affected. In fact, the New York Restaurant Association and the Restaurant Union President supported smoking bans in restaurants for public health reasons. The above anecdotes and worldwide experiences show that tobacco industry influence is rife and extremely powerful. As someone who has had tobacco control experience, I can verify as to interference that is alive and well, and that if we don't stand up, we won't just have 45 per cent of male smokers. That figure will increase unless something is done. Political will and the voice of the people will be imperative in defeating tobacco industry lobbying, and ensuring that Malaysians' health is better protected. The Malaysian Insider Malaysia Tue, 31 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2012/01/31/plain-cigarette-packaging-campaigners-jostle-for-position http://tobacco.org/news/332919.html Initial skirmishes are taking place over plans to impose plain cigarette packaging, ahead of a public consultation this spring. Smokers' group Forest has set up an online petition for customers to lobby government ahead of the consultation, which is being backed by an alliance of tobacco control groups including Action on Smoking and Health (Ash). "Public consultations on tobacco control are effectively public sector consultations," said director Simon Clark. "Thousands of public workers are deployed to persuade MPs that there is overwhelming support for the latest tobacco control initiative. "All over the country groups funded by the taxpayer will be gathering signatures or signing their own petitions. We want to give opponents of pointless regulation the voice they are often denied." Politics.co.uk UK Tue, 31 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.prwatch.org/spin/2012/01/11242/industry-documents-expose-nordic-tobacco-companies-conspiratorial-behavior http://tobacco.org/news/332864.html In the 1970s, Nordic countries were among the first to adopt policies against tobacco, like bans on cigarette advertising, health warning labels and smoke-free laws, but U.S.-owned tobacco companies, and particularly Philip Morris, makers of Marlboro, became concerned such polices could spread to America and other developed countries where they sold cigarettes. Also, Europe's first product liability case against the tobacco industry occurred in Finland in 1988, when a smoker sued several companies claiming their products caused his illness, causing even more concern for global tobacco companies. To help escape product liability claims, Nordic tobacco companies -- like Amer Tobacco and Rettig, which distributed Philip Morris and R.J. Reynolds brands, respectively -- long claimed to be ignorant of, and denied participation in the multinational tobacco companies' global strategies to undermine anti-tobacco policies, but industry documents reveal the truth -- that smaller Nordic tobacco companies did, in fact, participate in the multinational companies’ long-time conspiracy to deny the health dangers of smoking and undermine anti-tobacco policies, helping delay key effective tobacco control measures, and particularly smoke-free laws, for years. PR Watch Finland Sweden Norway Sun, 15 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.prwatch.org/news/2011/07/10787/alec-and-tobacco-industry http://tobacco.org/news/332821.html The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) is an influential, under-the-radar organization that facilitates collaboration between many of the most powerful corporations in America and state-level legislative representatives. Elected officials then introduce legislation approved by corporations in state houses across the U.S., without disclosing that the bills were pre-approved by corporations on ALEC task forces. ALEC has had a long relationship with the tobacco industry. . . . ALEC's relationship with the tobacco industry started after 1979, when ALEC Executive Director, Kathleen Teague, first wrote the Tobacco Institute seeking financial support. Shortly after, Institute members started participating in ALEC events. The industry's relationship with ALEC showed its worth quickly after ALEC provided Tobacco Institute members with face-to-face access to highest-level federal elected officials. In 1981, Tobacco Institute President Samuel Chilcote accepted an invitation to attend an ALEC "Exclusive White House and Cabinet Briefing" meeting with none other than the president of the United States, Ronald Reagan and his cabinet. . . . ALEC has taken the cigarette makers' side in virtually every debate between the industry and public health. A 1987-89 R.J. Reynolds strategic plan describes ALEC as an ally who could help "create an atmosphere of tolerance and fairness in the public's attitude toward smoking and smokers." RJR considered ALEC a friendly group of elected officials who would be willing "to tell our story in such a manner that it becomes their [other legislators'] position." PR Watch Fri, 15 Jul 2011 04:00:00 GMT http://www.handsoffourpacks.com/ http://tobacco.org/news/332719.html FOREST contact@handsoffourpacks.com UK Fri, 27 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/lary.22358/full http://tobacco.org/news/332434.html INTRODUCTION In the mid-20th century the tobacco industry faced a dilemma. The emergence of ever more convincing data showing a link between smoking and cancer was threatening to undermine their market. These worrisome scientific findings were reported to the public via a steadily increasing stream of newspaper and magazine articles. The industry realized that mere advertising would not be effective against the weight of scientific authority. To plan their opposition, the industry engaged the era's most sophisticated public relations experts. Their strategy was to enlist prominent scientists and redirect their research to manufacture doubt about the emerging scientific facts and thereby to fabricate a climate of scientific controversy. Supported by generous payments, some of the U.S.'s foremost physicians, scientists, statisticians, and journal editors were recruited to participate in a decades-long effort to obfuscate the emerging truth that tobacco causes cancer. Our purpose was to describe how the tobacco industry used the prestige and authority of leading head and neck surgeons to undermine scientific evidence about the role of smoking in cancer of the upper aerodigestive tract. Through consulting arrangements and research grants, a virtual Who's Who of leading head and neck surgeons from among the nation's foremost universities and cancer hospitals became involved, often unwittingly, in the industry's scheme. . . . It is difficult to evaluate the impact that the collaboration of otolaryngologists and their organizations had on the growth in the consumption of tobacco products throughout this era. What is abundantly clear, however, as evidenced by the enormous rise in smoking over the years, is that the tobacco industry's campaign to obscure the health consequences of smoking was hugely successful. It could be speculated that forceful opposition of tobacco use by otolaryngologists may have improved public awareness of the dangers of smoking and perhaps even swayed government policy. The fact that organized medicine, lulled into complacency by lucrative industry support, largely stood by the wayside meant that many consumers were deprived of the opportunity to make better informed personal choices. Fortunately, once the preponderance of evidence became overwhelming, the pendulum swung, and by the late 1960s the otolaryngology community became forceful advocates for smoking cessation. . . . CONCLUSIONS The unfortunate history of physician collaboration with the marketing arms of tobacco companies has relevance to medicine in the 21st century. Future advances in medicine are strongly dependent on robust and mutually beneficial interactions between doctors and industry. Ethically, a physician must always act on behalf of the well-being of the patient. Responsible industries seek collaborations that balance the need to maximize profits with a commitment to optimize the health of their consumers. The lesson of the highly successful campaign by the tobacco industry to manipulate medical opinion is that physicians need to adhere to the highest standards of scientific validity and remain vigilant in their advocacy for their patient's interests. The Laryngoscope Mon, 23 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT