Filtering tobacco's harmful pitch

Philip Morris' support for federal oversight is causing suspicion within the public health community. It should.

Editorial. Aug. 25, 2003.

"I'm here to emphasize our strong support for passage by the 108th Congress of meaningful and effective regulation of tobacco products by the Food and Drug Administration." -- Mike Szymanczyk, chair and CEO of Philip Morris USA, June 3, before the House Committee on Government Reform

At first glance, these words are a shock to almost anyone who has paid attention to the ongoing tobacco wars -- the public health community's effort to minimize Big Tobacco's death grip on the American public.

Skirmishes have resulted when health advocates have sought Food and Drug Administration authority to regulate the manufacture, sale, distribution and marketing of tobacco products. This position includes stiff marketing restrictions regarding how, when and where advertising messages can be communicated and the display of clear label warnings about the harm that tobacco use inevitably causes.

Tobacco companies traditionally have responded by tirelessly campaigning in opposition.

So why the turn around?

Simple. Philip Morris now wants a certain brand of FDA regulation that will buttress its interest in pursuing the "reduced-harm" market -- designing and selling what they say are less risky cigarettes.

These products include cigarettes engineered to have lower amounts of cancer-causing compounds and electronic gadgets that heat instead of burn tobacco. But unclear regulatory circumstances likely would minimize the industry's ability to promote them as a less harmful option for smokers.