Tobacco Documents Online

TESTIMGNY OF ROBERT M. DAUGHERTY, JR.,, M.D.,, PH.D. CHAIRMAN' NATIONAL INTERAGENCY COUNCIL ON, SMOKING:A'ND HEALTH BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMr1ERCE U~.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES MARCH 5, 1982'

-3- food under the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, I find it somewhat ironic that it continues to be exported as a food under the Food for Peace program. The argument that the' provilsion of more disease specific warning •llabel's is "excessively regulatory" and "paternalisti'c"' is ludicrous. To the contrary, this legislation represents:a minimum of government regulation especially when considered agaiinst the excepti,onito the federal laws I have just noted. H.R. 4957 would give the consumer the necessary information on. the specific health hazard's ofcigarette smokiing so that the consumer would be able to make an informed' choice as to whether or not he or she smoked. No one is being deni'ed the right toi smoke under this legislation nor are any restraints on sales or distribution being imposed on the cigarette manufacturing industry. This legislatiion seeks. only to provide consumers the right to know all of the health hazards of cigarette smoking. Mr. Chairman andl Members of thi's Subcommi'ttee,, the National Interagency Council on Smoking and Health stand' ready to do their parts In working closely with the Congiresss and the Federal government in a stronger partnership to ensure thatt information on the hazards of smoking is reaching Americans everywhere. Thank you. O W' CY N

-4- REFERENCES . I. The Gal',lup Poll, The Gal'.llup Report: Gallup: Smoking Audit Report N.. 190, Princeton, N.J.,, July, 1981. 2. Office on Smoki:ng, and Health, Highlights From the 1980 Supplement to the National Heal~th Interview Survey, May, 1981. 3'. The Roper Organization, A Study of Public Attiitudes Toward Cioarette Smoking and the,Tobacco Industry in 1978, Volume 1, May 1978.. 4. Advertising Age; "'Tobacco Grou.p Drive Set", Advertis:ing, Age, page: 80, January 18, 1982. 5. Business Week, "How Cigarette Makers Aim To: Fire Up Sales", Business Week pp 65-70; December 7, 1981. 6. Myers,, M',.L.; Iscoe C., Jenni!ngis C'.;; Lenox, W.; Minsky, E.; and Sacks, A..: Staff' Report on: the Cigarette Advertising Investigation„ Federal Trade Commission, May„ 1981. 7. Whelan,, E.; Sheridan, M.;, Meister, K.;; and Mosher, B. "'Analysis of Coverage of Tobacco Hazards in: Women's Magazi'nes."' Journal of Public Health,Policy; 2'(1):28-35:. March, 1981. 8',. Smith, R_C.;. "The Magaziines' Smoking, Habit" Columbia Journalism Review, 16(5):29-31„ January-February, 1978'. 91. The Tobacco Institute. Comments. of the Tobacco. Institute an the FTC Staff Report on Cigarette Advertising Investigation. Was:hington„ D.C. 1981. 10. Tyler, William D'.;! "Tyler's Ten, For the Year"' Advertising Age p.. 52-54', January 1:8, 1982. cap-420 3/1/82

Mr. Chatrman,, Members of the Subcommittee on Health and Environment, I am Robert Daugherty,,Jir., M.D., P'h.D.,, Dean of the ScMooli of Medicine„ University of Nevada and the present Chairman of National Interagency Council on Smoking and Health (NICSH). I!t is. in this latter capacity that I appear before you today. The National Interagency Council on Smoking and H'ealth, i,s a voluntary. associationi of health, education and' youth leadership organizations having responsibility or concern: with the problem of' ciigarette smoking on human health. It.seekst to,provide a cooperative and independent force to inform the public of' the harmful effects of cigarette smoking. Thirty national organizati'ons currently comprise the membership of the Counci]. A list of .those organizations is attached'to my statement. The NICSH, through its member organizations and 80 local interagency councils, has and will continue its efforts to. educate peapPe ab'out the dangers of ciigarette smoking and assist these smokers who want to quit. The technical i'nformation and other service we receive from the federal sector facilitate the more efficient utilization of our limited resources.Oh the other hand, the Office on. Smoking and Health, with Its limited budget, must rely heavily on the prviate, sector to carry the message. to the publilc. This federal- private inRerface ts~ largely responsible for the conti'nui.ng downward trend in smoking among Americans.. While the preval,ence of-smokfng is decliningl-Z we do not underestimate the difficulty of' the task that lies ahead. The tobacco industry, with i'ts vast resources is very good' at waging, campaigns designed to create diversion, and doubt in the minds of the public. Since the 1978 public opinion survey conducted for the Tobacco Institute by the Roper Organization' recommended these and other tactics, such campaig,ns have proliferated in the media. Last month,, the Tobacco Institute l':aunched' what. P'eter Sparker, Vice-President Public Information„' called "the biggest campaiign we've ever done". The campaign will i'.nclude nine insertions iln national editi'ons of Newsweek, People, Sportls I,llustrated', Time, TV Guide, and UI.S. News and: W'orl'd' Reoort during 1982. The cost of a campaign of this magnitude is,estimated at,welll in excess of $1,000,000. Considering the concl~usive evidence linking cigarette smoking to di'sease, a campai'gn with the theme "Weiigh Both Sides~ Before, You Take Sides"'can only be designed to create confusion. To. counter the,immense determination of the tobacco industry to keep Americans smoking, our limited resources must be effectively coordinated and' the interface with the federal sector maintained., The N'ICSH i's determined to play its role as coordinator in the private sector. However, the commitment of the federal government to perform its role has become a source of great concern. As you know, the Office of Management and Budget has twice tried to "line out" the Office on Smoking: and Health (OSH). Fortunately, OHHS Secretary Schweiker has been able to get the funding restored. The 52-3' mi'llion, budget of' OSH iis mini',scule when compared to over $1 billion° used to promote the sale of cigarettes.Yet, it provides an essential function to the private organization that must get the job done.

-2- H'..R. 4957 would assure that OSH' continue to provide this vital function.. A secure extstence for 0SH with delineated functiionsandl objectives, would also be a,significant stimulant to the private sector. The establishment of an Interagency Committee within OSH to coordinate all federal', activities that relate to smoking is a very important provision of H.R.4957'. By requiring federal agencies to coordinate, as the private agencies now db„ will further enhance the quality and efficiency of federal performance. Considering the dim prospect for increasing federal outlays in this.area, efficiency iis cri~ticall. The provision: of H.R. 4957 requiring the rotation of six new warni'ng, statements on cigarette packages and advertisements is immensely important. The FTC° has shown'convincingliy that the current warning is "'worn out". Dmmediate acti'oni is needed to. make this an effective medium to reach the public with information on the hazard of smoki'ngi. This requirement is something which the federal' government can do~, at no cost„ to, supplement private efforts. Its importance cannot be.overemphasiized since the broadcast° and pri'nt'-` are largely' inaccessible for communicating i'nformation on the efifects of'smoking. The Tobacco Ihstiltute' has referred to the rotational warning as a,"cumbersome system"„ implying a burden to the, industry. However, an observance of the copy of cigarette adverti'sements point out how ridiculous this clai'm is. Brown and Willi'amson's Barclay ad campaign used at least seven completelyd:iifferent or variations in the. copy., This was rated one of the "top ten" campaigns for 198L.'° In. accordance with this provision In H.R:. 4957, the same warniing statement would have been used on all these variatio:ns. The point is that, cigarette ad copy i~s changed and changed frequently to avoid "wear out"'. Requiring a label change once a year i's indeed a simp1'e matter., The Tobacco Institute has also argued that this representss increased' regulation on ani over-regulated industry. This argument also Tacks merit. It overlooks the fact that tobacco and tobacco products are either exempt by' agency determination or specifi.caTlly by statute from those llaws which were enactedl by the Congress and', in particular thiis Subcommittee to protect the health and well' being of the American consumer. The Food'and Drug Administration has by agency determination ru~led that tobacco and tobacco products are neither 'foods' nor 'd'rugs' to be regulated under the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. The, Consumer Product Safety Act specifically. exempts by statute tobacco and tobacco products from, being defined, as a"'product" to be regulated under that Act. The Federal Hazardous Substances. Act specifically exempts tobacco and tobacco products from being considered a "hazarous prod'uct!" under that Act., Tobacco and tobacco productss are also not regulated under the Toxic Substances Act. So. Mr. Chairman„ and Members of the Subcommittee, although the Congress of the United States has declared cigarettes to be dangerous to ones health, tobacco and tobacco products have escaped being regulated under those Acts which, were enacted by the Congress to specifically protect consumers from, health and safety risks. While tobacco and tobacco products cannot be considered to be,a