FDA Bans Flavored Cigarettes

An unintentional boost for cigar sales?

When is a cigar more than just a cigar? When its appearance allows it to circumvent the intent of the Food and Drug Administration’s first ruling related to cigarettes, that’s when.

In its first official ruling since Congress passed legislation giving the agency authority to regulate tobacco (see my earlier post), the FDA banned so-called flavored cigarettes. Cigarette makers can no longer add vanilla, clove, chocolate, or any other fruit or candy flavors to their product. Menthol, for now, is exempt from the ban.

FDA commissioner Margaret Hamburg said that 90 percent of adults who smoke began doing so as children. The president of the Campaign for Tobacco-free Kids agreed, calling flavored cigarettes “starter products” for young smokers in a Dow Jones Newswires report by Jennifer Corbett Dooren.

By law, the agency cannot ban regular cigarettes outright. However, as Gardiner Harris reported in the September 23 New York Times, “the legislation left some details vague. For instance, the agency is required to ban flavored cigarettes, but the law did not clearly define what constituted a cigarette."

Huh? As it turns out, a cigarette is in the mind of the beholder. The FDA maintains that the ban applies to all cigarette-type tobacco products, including those that are “labeled as cigars or as some other product.” A spokesperson for the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids agreed: “The FDA demonstrated that they’re serious about enforcing the ban on flavored cigarettes, and serious about preventing tobacco companies from circumventing that ban,” according to the New York Times article.

Not so fast, argued Norman Sharp, president of the Cigar Association of America. Sharp told the Times that the ban clearly did not apply to cigars: “We feel this should go a long way to clearing up any confusion in the marketplace.”

Well, not exactly. An exasperated spokesperson for cigarette maker R.J. Reynolds, also quoted in the article, said: “It’s hard to understand. We need clear and timely guidance so all of us can work together so that we can understand what we need to be doing.”

What about the small brown cigarillos sold by an R.J. Reynolds subsidiary?

“They are not cigarettes,” the spokesperson said.


Photo Credit: http://politics.mync.com/tag/cigarette/

addiction drugs smoking nicotine

Kudzu for Alcoholism?

Common vine extract may inhibit drinking.

Score one for traditional Chinese folk medicine. A compound called daidzin, found in kudzu vine, acts like the anti-drinking medication Antabuse. Daidzin interferes with the metabolization of alcohol and causes the well-known flushing and sick feeling associated with Antabuse.

However, Dr. Ivan Diamond of the University of California in San Francisco and Dr. Ting-Kai Li of Duke University Medical Center maintain that a synthetic derivative of the active ingredient in kudzu vine also helps diminish the desire to drink in alcoholic rats. It does so, they believe, by preventing alcohol-induced increases in dopamine in the brain’s pleasure center. This additional finding about daidzin may help prevent relapse in recovering alcoholics by diminishing cravings—something Antabuse does not do.

The study will be published in the November issue of Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research.

Currently, the commonly prescribed medications for alcoholism include disulfiram (Antabuse), naltrexone (Revia and Vivitrol), acamprosate (Campral), topiramate (Topamax), and baclofen (Lioresal).

Harvard researchers Wing Ming Keung and Bert Vallee first discovered the effects of kudzu on drinking. A 2005 paper in Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, authored by Scott E. Lukas, et. al., reported the results of testing a kudzu extract on a clinical population of “heavy” drinkers. The result: “Kudzu treatment resulted in significant reduction in the number of beers consumed... and a decrease in the volume of each sip.” The earlier researchers, however, did not report any significant effect on the urge to drink.

In their recent research, Diamond and Li believe they have found a synthetic version of daidzin, CVT-1-216, that does effect the desire to drink. According to Diamond, the study found that the drug “prevents the usual increase in drinking (binge drinking) that occurs after five days of abstinence....”

“Extracts of various parts of the kudzu vine have been used in many Chinese herbal medicine formulas and are said to be helpful in treating a variety of maladies,” said Dr. Li, who was formerly the director of the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA). “The findings show promise that CVT-10216 might be better tolerated than Antabuse,” he added.

Dr. Diamond called alcoholism “a medical disorder, not just a problem of will power. Physicians treat medical disorders in order to prevent harm, while not necessarily curing the disease being treated—for example, drug treatment of hypertension, stains for high cholesterol, insulin for diabetes—and the same will become true for treating alcoholism.”

Diamond also agrees that synthetic kudzu extract may prove superior to Antabuse in other ways. “Most believe that disulfiram (Antabuse) would not be approved today as a new drug for alcoholism because of its many toxicities.”

Photo Credit: www.skrewtips.com

addiction drugs dopamine

Low-Nicotine Cigarettes: Deadlier Than Regular Brands?

More tars, more cancer.

Now that the U.S. Congress has passed legislation enabling the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to monitor the tobacco industry for the first time in history (see my earlier post), one of the primary issues the agency must deal with are health claims on behalf of allegedly less-toxic brands of “low-nicotine” cigarettes.

It has long been understood, and demonstrated clinically, that people addicted to nicotine will smoke “light” cigarettes harder, and in greater numbers, in order to compensate and obtain the same amount of nicotine they are used to--thereby staving off withdrawal. [See graphic at right for the secret of why light cigarette smokers must puff harder.]

As prominent tobacco researcher N.L. Benowitz wrote in a National Cancer Institute (NCI) monograph:

“In brief review—when faced with lower yield cigarettes, smokers can smoke more cigarettes per day, can take more and deeper puffs, can puff with a faster draw rate, and/or can block ventilation holes. Using these last four techniques, a smoker can increase his or her smoke intake from a particular cigarette several fold above the machine-predicted yields.”

In the description of a patent for a low-tar and low-nicotine technique in 1995, Duke University Researchers wrote:

“Unfortunately, it has been discovered that only a small proportion of the total smoking population (e.g., less than 25%) has substituted low tar cigarettes (e.g., cigarettes that deliver less than 10 milligrams of tar) for conventional and more hazardous cigarettes. Also of note, only about 2.0-3.0% of total cigarette sales are accounted for by very low tar cigarettes (e.g., cigarettes that deliver less than 3 milligrams of tar). Moreover, even among the cigarette smokers who have substituted low tar cigarettes for conventional cigarettes, it has been discovered that these individuals will tend to smoke low tar cigarettes more intensively in order to extract more tar and nicotine than the nominal values listed on the pack. This, of course, defeats part of the objective of the low tar cigarettes.”|

Moreover, there has never been any significant body of evidence to suggest that switching to lights or ultra-lights in a way actually contributes to the success of smoking cessation efforts. According to the National Cancer Institute, there are no health benefits for smokers of light cigarettes, period.

In a letter published in the August 21 issue of Science, Marshall E. Deutsch argues that cigarettes with reduced nicotine may in fact “increase tobacco related death and disease” and are therefore potentially more dangerous than regular smokes.

Deutsch’s argument is that by smoking more cigarettes with lower concentration of nicotine, smokers “will be subjected to more of the ‘tars’ (the cancer-causing ingredients of the smoke) in their attempts to get their usual dosage of nicotine, (the ingredient responsible for heart disease and stroke). In the end, smokers of low-nicotine cigarettes will remain at the same risk for heart disease and stroke but increase their chances of developing cancer.”

It’s never too late to quit, and the earlier the better: The National Cancer Institute tells us that smokers who quite before age 50 cut their risk of dying by 50 % over the next 15 years, compared to those who keep smoking.

Graphics Credit: www.tobaccoinaustralia.org.au

addiction drugs smoking nicotine

The Portuguese Experiment

How has decriminalization fared in Portugal?

In 2001, amid lurid worldwide media coverage, Portugal made the decision to eliminate penalties for the personal use and possession of heroin, cocaine, and marijuana. Dire predictions were heard on all sides. According to the London Economist, this “ultraliberal legislation had set alarm bells ringing across Europe. The Portuguese were said to be fearful that holiday resorts would become dumping-grounds for drug tourists. Some conservative politicians denounced the decriminalization as 'pure lunacy'”.

Strictly speaking, Portugal did not legalize drugs. They decriminalized them—drug use and possession have been deemed administrative, not criminal, matters. Drug trafficking remains a criminal offense. Portugal is the only nation in the European Union (EU) to have made this blanket move, and Portuguese health officials have been at pains to point out that decriminalization in Portugal does not mean that drug use is in any way condoned or encouraged there.

Eight years down the road, how is this "lunatic" project faring? According to the Cato Institute, in a report issued earlier this year, pretty darn well. In “Drug Decriminalisation in Portugal: Lessons for Creating Fair and Successful Drug Policies,” Glenn Greenwald concludes that the project is in fact “a resounding success.” According to the Cato report, “decriminalization has had no adverse effect on drug usage rates in Portugal, and that “sexually transmitted diseases and deaths due to drug usage” have decreased dramatically.

Two years earlier, a study by the British Beckley Foundation, a member of the International Drug Policy Consortium (IDPC), reported that the main changes in Portugal since decriminalization in 2001 were:

--Increased use of cannabis.

--Decreased use of heroin.

--Increased use of treatment options.

--Reduction in drug-related deaths.

The Economist, in its article entitled “Treating, Not Punishing,” concludes: “The evidence from Portugal since 2001 is that decriminalisation of drug use and possession has benefits and no harmful side-effects.”

No harmful side effects? How do we square that with the worldwide unending Drug War? I am tempted to suggest that either everybody is lying about the situation in Portugal, or else it is time to put the Drug War to bed. Drug Czar Gil Kerlikowske has made clear his distaste for the term “drug war,” but has yet to solidly indicate the course that will take the country away from spending money on interdiction and prosecution and toward spending money on treatment, medical research, and harm reduction policies.

Graphics Credit: Cato Institute

addiction drugs

National Alcohol and Drug Addiction Recovery Month

Obama's September proclamation.

Recovery Month, an annual September observance highlighting the benefits of substance abuse treatment, kicked off on August 31 when President Obama issued a proclamation, excerpted below:

"Every year, Americans across the country overcome their struggles with addiction. With personal determination and the support of family and friends, community members, and health professionals, they have turned the page on an illness and sought the promise of recovery.

"As a Nation, we must work together to provide access to effective services that reduce substance abuse and promote healthy living. Without effective treatment, abuse of alcohol, illicit drugs, or prescription medications can devastate the mind and body. With treatment, substance use disorders can be managed, giving individuals the effective tools necessary to address their addiction.

"During National Alcohol and Drug Addiction Recovery Month, we also pay special tribute to the dedicated professionals and everyday citizens who, with skill and empathy, guide people through the treatment and recovery process. Across America, they are offering a message of hope and understanding. These compassionate individuals remind us that the strength of our character derives not from the mistakes we make, but from our ability to recognize and address them."

More information on Recovery Month is available HERE.

This year's theme--"Join the Voices for Recovery: Together We Learn, Together We Heal"-- is intended to "emphasize the need to use all available resources, in our communities and on the Internet, to educate people about the disease and to help those with substance use disorders, and those close to them, get support," according to the Recovery Month website.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) and its Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (CSAT) created the materials being distributed for Recovery Month. President Obama's proclamation is available HERE.

addiction drugs

My Interview with Santa Fe Public Radio

Addiction science gets a little air time.

Been doing some publicity for my book, The Chemical Carousel. This radio interview with Diego Mulligan on KSFR in Santa Fe is from August 26th, and it turned out to be reasonably listenable.

The interview runs 18 minutes.

CLICK HERE FOR THE INTERVIEW.

addiction drugs

My Name is Roger

A famed movie critic tells his story.

Excerpted from :
“My Name is Roger, and I'm an alcoholic.”
By Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun Times
Posted on “Roger Ebert’s Journal,”
August 25, 2009.
© Sun-Times News Group

In August 1979, I took my last drink. It was about four o'clock on a Saturday afternoon, the hot sun streaming through the windows of my little carriage house on Dickens. I put a glass of scotch and soda down on the living room table, went to bed, and pulled the blankets over my head. I couldn't take it any more.
----------
At about this time I was reading The Art of Eating, by M. F. K. Fisher, who wrote: "One martini is just right. Two martinis are too many. Three martinis are never enough."
----------
In my case, I haven't taken a drink for 30 years, and this is God's truth: Since the first A.A. meeting I attended, I have never wanted to. Since surgery in July of 2006 I have literally not been able to drink at all. Unless I go insane and start pouring booze into my g-tube, I believe I'm reasonably safe. So consider this blog entry what A.A. calls a "12th step," which means sharing the program with others. There's a chance somebody will read this and take the steps toward sobriety.
----------
I know from the comments on an earlier blog that there are some who have problems with Alcoholics Anonymous. They don't like the spiritual side, or they think it's a "cult," or they'll do fine on their own, thank you very much. The last thing I want to do is start an argument about A.A.. Don't go if you don't want to. It's there if you need it. In most cities, there's a meeting starting in an hour fairly close to you. It works for me. That's all I know. I don't want to argue with you about it.
----------
I've been to meetings in Cape Town, Venice, Paris, Cannes, Edinburgh, Honolulu and London, where an Oscar-winning actor told his story. In Ireland, where a woman remembered, "Often came the nights I would measure my length in the road." I heard many, many stories from "functioning alcoholics." I guess I was one myself. I worked every day while I was drinking, and my reviews weren't half bad. I've improved since then.
----------
The God word. The critics never quote the words "as we understood God." Nobody in A.A. cares how you understand him, and would never tell you how you should understand him. I went to a few meetings of "4A" ("Alcoholics and Agnostics in A.A."), but they spent too much time talking about God. The important thing is not how you define a Higher Power. The important thing is that you don't consider yourself to be your own Higher Power, because your own best thinking found your bottom for you.

Photo Credit: chicagoist.com


addiction drugs alcoholics anonymous