OK: We all know that cigarette smoking is bad for our health now for the latest

legislation
By now, everyone on the planet is aware of the dangers of cigarette smoking. Nev
ertheless, more than 3000 kids start the habit every day! Fighting the battle ag
ainst cigarettes has long been a case of the tobacco industry versus common sens
e. However, at the same time, since common sense does not prevail, our Congress
continues to attempt to legislate behavior (rather ineffectually) while the toba
cco industry spends hundreds of millions of dollars fighting the legislation.
Early in 2009, legislation was passed which almost doubled the price of tobacco.
This legislation went into effect April 1, 2009. Perhaps the rationale was that
, if tobacco products became so costly, particularly in a bad economy, people wo
uld simply not be able to afford to poison themselves or, at least, not as liber
ally. The trouble with this enforced type of behavior modification is that cigar
ette smoking is addictive. Attempts at quitting result in short tempers. Do they
really suppose the person who has just been laid off is going to quit smoking w
hile trying to land a new job? Not likely. Chances are they'll reduce their food
budget before quitting cigarettes.
The positive result of such legislation? Government coffers grow. While these ta
xes are supposedly funding new programs to help reduce cigarette smoking and fun
d even more legislation to ban smoking in public places, we've all seen the effi
cacy of other such government efforts.
The government's latest move to put a damper on cigarette smoking has empowered
the FDA with the authority to approve what ingredients may be allowed in tobacco
products, mandate changes, eliminate toxins and disallow new tobacco products.
Now, on the face of it, this may sound like a good thing. Nicotine is a toxin an
d the primary addictive substance in tobacco.
However, what's less known is that there are between 500 and 1000 'additives' to
cigarette tobacco which are also addictive and also toxins. Shouldn't the legis
lation have put some real teeth into this FDA authority, requiring all of the ad
ditives be removed, thus approving a much less addictive product that people mig
ht actually be able to beat?
When I was much younger and commensurately naive, I thought that the FDA was sup
posed to regulate food and drugs in a manner that provided the consumer with saf
e products. Now I know that pharmaceutical companies put out drugs that, while p
assing FDA approval, are later found to have side effects with devastating conse
quences which go unnoticed for years. The FDA allows additives, growth hormones
and antibiotics to enter our bodies through various approved foods. So why shoul
d we believe the FDA will do any better with cigarette 'safety'?
Taxation and attempts to legislate behavior seem more an issue of revenue and po
litics than real solutions to the cigarette smoking problem. Perhaps if the fund
ing were used for classroom coursework for kids, with documentaries of patients
on oxygen tanks and a few images of what cigarette smoking does to your lungs, t
he money might be well spent.
After all, if President Obama, an educated and intelligent man, still smokes, it
seems that it's the future generation we should be targeting. In his remarks on
the bill, President Obama said ... For over a decade, leaders of both parties ha
ve fought to prevent tobacco companies from marketing their products to children
and provide the public with the information they need to understand what a dang
erous habit this is.
When this latest piece of legislation passed, the primary author of the bill, Re
presentative Henry Waxman (D-California) made this statement: "I think we are to
day at the last gasp of the tobacco industry's efforts to protect their profits
at the expense of the health and lives of the American people and to get childre
n to take up this habit." The last gasp.