Stonewall and the FDA (This is Snusgetter's Job! Not mine!)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Randall
    Member
    • May 2010
    • 753

    Stonewall and the FDA (This is Snusgetter's Job! Not mine!)

    http://www.wavy.com/dpp/news/virgini...r-risk-tobacco

    Firm to be case for lower-risk tobacco
    Will FDA allow products to be marketed as safer
    Updated: Tuesday, 28 Sep 2010, 1:32 PM EDT
    Published : Tuesday, 28 Sep 2010, 1:32 PM EDT

    RICHMOND, Va. (AP) - Tobacco maker Star Scientific Inc. hopes there's fire where there's no smoke.

    The small Virginia company has made itself the test case for a big issue: whether the Food and Drug Administration will allow certain tobacco products -- particularly the company's tobacco lozenges that dissolve in the user's mouth -- to be marketed as less harmful than cigarettes.

    The application to market the product as safer also highlights a philosophical debate over how best to control tobacco. One camp says there's no safe way to use tobacco and pushes for people to quit above all else. Others embrace the idea that lower-risk alternatives like smokeless tobacco or electronic cigarettes can improve public health, if they mean fewer people smoke.

    How the FDA handles the products is being closely watched by both the public health community and bigger tobacco companies, which are looking for new products to sell as they face declining cigarette demand due to tax increases, health concerns, smoking bans and social stigma.

    A law enacted last year gives the FDA authority to evaluate tobacco products for their health risks and lets the agency approve ones that could be marketed as safer than what's currently for sale.

    So far only Star Scientific has applied for approval to market what the agency calls "modified-risk" products. The company says the small, flavored tablets that dissolve in the user's mouth contain "below detectable levels" of certain cancer-causing chemicals found in tobacco and its smoke. It wants to sell them to smokers as "a useful alternative -- with greatly reduced toxin levels."

    "Why shouldn't tobacco users ... have an opportunity to know this and make an informed decision? That's why we took the risk, that's why we spent the money," Paul Perito, president of Star Scientific, said in an interview with The Associated Press.

    The company, formerly known as Star Tobacco and Pharmaceuticals, has sold varieties of the dissolvable tobacco under the Ariva and Stonewall brands since 2001. Its sales have grown about 47 percent since 2007, but it still remains a tiny player in the industry.

    The tablets contain tobacco's most addictive component, nicotine. Star Scientific says its method of tobacco cultivation and preparation creates tobacco leaves with low levels of some carcinogens.

    While the FDA's Center for Tobacco Products has not yet ironed out its guidelines for approval of such products, draft guidelines suggest it could take nearly a year to review an application.

    Tobacco companies want to market more smokeless tobacco and other cigarette alternatives to make up for falling cigarette sales. Some have introduced snus -- small pouches like tea bags that users stick between the cheek and gum -- and dissolving tobacco -- finely milled tobacco shaped into orbs, sticks and strips. But they can't explicitly market them as less risky than cigarettes.

    But a report from the Royal College of Physicians, a U.K. medical group, titled "Harm Reduction in Nicotine Addiction," -- along with other scientific studies -- suggests that when compared with cigarettes, some smokeless tobacco products are about 90 percent less harmful.

    Meanwhile, GlaxoSmithKline, which makes nicotine replacement therapy products like Nicorette gum and NicoDerm patch, has urged the FDA to take dissolvable tobacco off the market until companies can demonstrate that selling them is appropriate for the protection of public health.

    The question remains whether smokers, which total about 46 million in the U.S., are really willing to switch, even if it means saving their lives.

    Max Levin, a 29-year-old longtime cigarette smoker from St. Louis, is skeptical.

    "For me, the lighting of the cigarette is too convenient, and I wouldn't care to trade it just because I could do (smokeless tobacco) anywhere," said Levin, who has tried snus a few times. "When I do decide to quit, it's not like I'm going to quit cigarettes and switch over to another tobacco product."

    The powerful combination of addiction and the rituals of smoking are difficult to overcome, said Richard Brown, a Brown University professor whose research focuses on smoking behavior and nicotine addiction at Brown University.

    "It's a poor substitute. They know it won't do the same thing," he said.

    But tobacco company research shows that many smokers transition to smokeless products in about a year and a half once they begin to notice the benefits of going smoke-free, said David Sweanor, a Canadian law professor and tobacco expert who consults with companies and others on industry issues.

    "People can change what they do when they have sufficient motivation," Sweanor said.

    Several studies say that pushing alternatives such as smokeless products with lower levels of carcinogens could reduce the number of smokers by between 1 and 3 percent over five years.

    Matthew Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, said the FDA can now keep tobacco companies accountable for health claims and
  • raptor
    Member
    • Oct 2008
    • 753

    #2
    marketing, but also use scientific standards to assess health impacts.

    "If there are tobacco products out there that can be marketed in such a way that can significantly reduce the risk of disease, I don't know of anybody who opposes that," Myers said.

    Jesus f'n Christ, if everyone thought this way there wouldn't be this anti-everything-tobacco crusade.

    Comment

    • snusgetter
      Member
      • May 2010
      • 10903

      #3
      Snusgetter here...

      ~
      I know it seems I've been asleep on the job but today was a busy day for me.

      I had to go to the UPS Store to pick up my latest order of snus.

      Then I had to go to the post office to get my initial order of Toque Snuff.
      This being my old stomping grounds I had to spend time shooting the
      breeze with my former boss, Sally the Postmaster. And of course there
      were some of my old customers who wanted to know if I was now
      officially retarded (aren't they a hoot!).

      The postmaster, being a chatterbox, told a few customers that I was now
      into snussing 'n snuffin' .... which led to the pros of both. I did manage to
      interest one gal to research snuson online and if her boyfriend then was
      interested I would set him up with a small care package.

      All of this took up most of the afternoon!!



      As for Stonewall, it's good to know a 'modified-risk' advocate is willing to
      take the FDA to task. Let's just hope the winds of sanity blow strong.

      Comment

      • CoderGuy
        Member
        • Jul 2009
        • 2679

        #4
        Originally posted by snusgetter View Post
        ~
        I know it seems I've been asleep on the job but today was a busy day for me.

        I had to go to the UPS Store to pick up my latest order of snus.

        Then I had to go to the post office to get my initial order of Toque Snuff.
        This being my old stomping grounds I had to spend time shooting the
        breeze with my former boss, Sally the Postmaster. And of course there
        were some of my old customers who wanted to know if I was now
        officially retarded (aren't they a hoot!).

        The postmaster, being a chatterbox, told a few customers that I was now
        into snussing 'n snuffin' .... which led to the pros of both. I did manage to
        interest one gal to research snuson online and if her boyfriend then was
        interested I would set him up with a small care package.

        All of this took up most of the afternoon!!



        As for Stonewall, it's good to know a 'modified-risk' advocate is willing to
        take the FDA to task. Let's just hope the winds of sanity blow strong.
        You're a regular ambassador! Nice! Good the word is spreading.

        Comment

        • CoderGuy
          Member
          • Jul 2009
          • 2679

          #5
          I stopped in a smokeshop today to see if they carried snuff (I am getting curiouser and curiouser) but he had no idea what I was talking about. Told me Camel snus was the only product out there. Anyway they had Stonewalls and wanted 6 bucks (before tax) for 1 (one) pack of 20!

          Lil Brown Smoke Shop has them for 14 for 5 packs of 20 (http://www.lilbrown.com/product/tabi...t/default.aspx)

          Amazing how different prices are even locally.

          Comment

          • c.nash
            Banned Users
            • May 2010
            • 3511

            #6
            Wow. This would be awesome. One step forward!

            Comment

            • snusgetter
              Member
              • May 2010
              • 10903

              #7
              Originally posted by CoderGuy View Post
              I stopped in a smokeshop today to see if they carried snuff (I am getting curiouser and curiouser) but he had no idea what I was talking about. Told me Camel snus was the only product out there. Anyway they had Stonewalls and wanted 6 bucks (before tax) for 1 (one) pack of 20!

              Lil Brown Smoke Shop has them for 14 for 5 packs of 20 (
              http://www.lilbrown.com/product/tabi...t/default.aspx)

              Amazing how different prices are even locally.

              Just about the same price I paid the injuns pre-PACTCRAP.

              Comment

              • snusgetter
                Member
                • May 2010
                • 10903

                #8
                Originally posted by CoderGuy View Post
                You're a regular ambassador! Nice! Good the word is spreading.
                The question is: am I an ambassador-at-large or just a large ambassador ........
                or maybe a large ambassador-at-large?

                Hmmmm.......


                Comment

                • CoderGuy
                  Member
                  • Jul 2009
                  • 2679

                  #9
                  Originally posted by snusgetter View Post
                  The question is: am I an ambassador-at-large or just a large ambassador ........
                  or maybe a large ambassador-at-large?

                  Hmmmm.......


                  Or could be super-sized diplomatic snus spreader extraordinaire (that's the title I am striving for)

                  Comment

                  • Langdell
                    Member
                    • Jun 2010
                    • 255

                    #10
                    Will the FDA man up and show some honesty by allowing reduced harm products to be marketed as such? I'm not holding my breath, but it would certainly be a major breakthrough if they did.

                    Big, big props to Star Scientific for waging this fight. Somebody needs to.

                    Comment

                    • MGX
                      Member
                      • Jun 2010
                      • 127

                      #11
                      This is so reminiscent of "abstinence only sex education" ie never do it and we'll shove it down your throat that its bad and yet people do it anyways.

                      Comment

                      • raptor
                        Member
                        • Oct 2008
                        • 753

                        #12
                        Originally posted by MGX View Post
                        This is so reminiscent of "abstinence only sex education" ie never do it and we'll shove it down your throat that its bad and yet people do it anyways.
                        Anti-tobacco preys on ignorance.

                        Comment

                        • snusgetter
                          Member
                          • May 2010
                          • 10903

                          #13
                          Originally posted by raptor View Post
                          Anti-tobacco preys on ignorance.

                          That's because ignorance begets ignorance.

                          Comment

                          • myuserid
                            Member
                            • Jun 2010
                            • 1645

                            #14
                            Good for them. I hope they get the approval to market as less-harmful.

                            My wife has been a full month without smokes thanks to Stonewall. We stopped by the tobacco shop last week to pick her up some more an the package has changed. It now has the huge warning label on the front and back.

                            Comment

                            • Tristik
                              Member
                              • Jan 2009
                              • 654

                              #15
                              ~~
                              Now that someone has applied for it, they're gonna have to figure out their own guildlines. Last I remember, they didn't even have the guidelines set up to APPLY for the reduced harm tag, let alone knew how to go about testing and evaluating it. (Obviously, they figured out their application :P )
                              ~~

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X