Thesis- The Food and Drug Administration should regulate the use and control of tobacco based products. If this was allowed then the FDA could control the harmful chemicals put into cigarettes and the amount they contain, the advertising that it is directed to minors and the prevention of them starting, as well as adequate funding for less harmful cigarettes and smoking cessation research.
Points-Nicotine is an addictive substance that if regulated could prevent people from being addicted to cigarettes- the FDA regulates all other legal addictive drugs, why not nicotine. Tobacco targets minors and youth, over 4000 minors will start smoking today, studies show that most regular smokers start before the age of 19, and most people who will never smoke didn't try smoking until after they were 19, studies show that kids and teens are 3 times as sensitive to tobacco advertisements than adults are. If the FDA regulates tobacco, then they can force big tobacco to find a safer cigarette, as well as cigarettes with a much less carcinogen level and such an addictive nature.
Conclusion- if the FDA regulates big- tobacco we will see a decline in minors smoking as well as a decline in government spending, i say this because every year the government millions of dollars on Medicare for tobacco related illness that money could be put elsewhere. if the levels of nicotine were lowered than the rate of addiction would decline rapidly. We would see less advertising thus creating less of an appeal to minors, and lastly there would be more funding into smoking cessation research that would ultimately help people quit.
Counter points- If the nicotine levels were lowered than people would take deeper drags or smoke more to achieve their nicotine buzz, Cigarette smoking is a "state" problem, so tobacco does not fit under the guidelines of what is needed for FDA regulation, thus the FDA would be over-stepping its boundaries. Technically tobacco is not a drug, therefore it cannot be regulated by the FDA
The ATF currently does that job. have you considered their current programs? I don't know what they are, but it might be interesting reading. Also, if tobacco were classified as a drug by the FDA, wouldn't it have to pass tests?
ReplyDeleteI'm not to familiar with those programs, but the FDA pulls drugs when they harm people. It sounds like you're just soft-pedaling a ban- which I think is a decent idea, but not workable. One more thing, do you plan on talking about electric cigarettes? they seem to fit the bill for a less harmful smoke...
hope this helps
ciao
Im not going to talk about the electronic cigarette because it is basically a nicotine supplement with the exhalation of a water vapor. And the FDA would have to run tests on the tobacco which in turn would be helpful seeing as there are hundreds of carcinogens in an everyday cigarette, im not pedaling a ban, im merely just showing how tobacco needs to have less of the harmful ingredients. Good critique though. Thanks!
ReplyDelete