In the online version, this was published on February 4, 2013: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...437200-60fa-11e2-a389-ee565c81c565_story.html
In the print edition, published today (2/5/13) the title was "Holding our Breath". It is available online, but you must be a subscriber to view it.
Near as I can tell, the only difference between the two versions is the headline.
But as far as raising taxes reducing tobacco use, the latest research shows that may not be as effective as it once was.
Study Shows that Genetics Play an Important Role in Anti-Tobacco Policies | SciTech Daily
In the print edition, published today (2/5/13) the title was "Holding our Breath". It is available online, but you must be a subscriber to view it.
[h=3]The Posts View[/h]
[h=1]FDA should do more with its authority over tobacco products[/h]
IN 2009, PRESIDENT Obama signed the tobacco Control Act, which gave the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authority over tobacco products. It was a signal moment in the fight against smoking. Tobacco use is the leading cause of preventable death in the country, racking up 400,000 premature deaths in America every year and holding 40 million Americans in the grip of addiction. After decades of education campaigns, cessation programs and increasing taxes, the U.S. smoking rate is stuck at about a fifth of the adult population. And after a string of headline-worthy achievements, the FDAs tobacco program has been a little quiet lately.
<snip>
So far, the agency has asserted authority over only cigarettes and smokeless tobacco, not products such as cigars, pipe tobacco or e-cigarettes. Until it claims broader jurisdiction, it cant compel the examination of ingredients and assess their relative lethality, let alone regulate more aggressively. Flavored cigarettes have been banned, but tobacco companies still flavor cigars to taste like grape or cola, and the vaporous chemical mixture inhaled from e-cigarettes now comes in flavors such as cherry limeade and Atomic Fireball. The lung association sees upticks in the use of non-cigarette tobacco products and worries that the industry will hook children with new, less-regulated products. Menthol cigarettes, meanwhile, are still on sale.
<snip>
Lawrence Deyton, the FDAs chief tobacco regulator, says the agency has been busy enforcing all the rules it enacted in its first years, building a regulatory body from scratch and informing tobacco companies what it will expect of them. In order to take steps such as dialing back the amount of nicotine in tobacco products, the agency must undertake exhaustive scientific research demonstrating that its decisions are not arbitrary and capricious. Mr. Deyton says the public can expect more progress in 2013.
Meanwhile, the FDA isnt the only body that needs to act. Congress should raise national tobacco taxes, especially for products that currently enjoy preferential tax treatment relative to cigarettes, such as large cigars and pipe tobacco. States, too, can raise excises and devote more of the money to anti-tobacco programs. These sorts of policies have saved many lives over decades of effort, and theres reason to think that old tools can still help.
Near as I can tell, the only difference between the two versions is the headline.
But as far as raising taxes reducing tobacco use, the latest research shows that may not be as effective as it once was.
Study Shows that Genetics Play an Important Role in Anti-Tobacco Policies | SciTech Daily