Tag: nanny state

American Lung Association Demands the FDA Mislead the Public About Vaping

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) should abandon any efforts to inform the public that vaping is safer than smoking, says the American Lung Association (ALA).  

Numerous public surveys show a consistent, widespread misperception that vaping nicotine is just as or more dangerous than smoking cigarettes. The problem is so extensive that correcting these false beliefs forms part of the FDA’s Center for Tobacco Products (CTP) 5-year strategic plan. 

Writing in the journal Addiction, Brian King, the head of CTP, stated: “Opportunities exist to educate adults who smoke cigarettes about the relative risks of tobacco products.” To that end, among the five goals listed as part of CTP’s plan is a commitment to inform the public that not all tobacco products are created equally, with cigarettes being the most dangerous and others, such as e-cigarettes, being far less harmful. 

The pledge to provide accurate information about the risks of different nicotine products is long overdue and in line with the public health communications of peer countries such as Canada, New Zealand, and the U.K. (The U.K. even has vape shops in hospitals, and some smokers are offered free vapes to help them quit.)

But in their comments on CTP’s strategic plan, the ALA, which proclaims its commitment to a world free of lung disease, demands the FDA “remove language from the description for this goal that references informing adults about the relative risk of tobacco products” and that “CTP should have no part in the industry’s efforts to sustain addiction through the failed and flawed notion that adult smokers should switch to e-cigarettes.”

Despite ALA’s protestations, the idea that e-cigarettes are effective for smoking cessation is not a tobacco industry notion. According to the prestigious Cochrane Review, e-cigarettes are more effective than nicotine patches or gums in helping smokers quit. In essence, the ALA is asking the FDA to withhold accurate information from the public that could save lives. The recommendations sparked strong reactions from those who believe safer alternatives to cigarettes are a no-brainer from a public health perspective.

“This is highly ironic, given the extent to which the Lung Association and other tobacco control organizations went to punish the tobacco industry for lying to the public and hiding critical health information,” writes Michael Siegel, a visiting professor at the Tufts University School of Medicine. “It is also unethical because it violates the public health code of ethics, which calls for honesty and transparency in public health communications. We do not hide critical health information from the public.”

Keep reading

Biden Alcohol Czar Says US May Change Recommendations For How Much Beer Americans Should Drink

A U.S. federal official suggested in a recent interview that Americans may be told by officials that they are recommended to have no more than two alcoholic drinks, or beers, per week.

Director of the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) George Koob told the Daily Mail on Thursday that the United States could follow how Canada handles its alcohol guidelines.

The NIAAA’s guidelines currently recommend males up to age 65 limit themselves to two drinks per day, while women up to age 65 should limit themselves to one. Recommendations published under the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Dietary Guidelines for Americans (pdf), which are not mandates or requirements, are slated to be reviewed in 2025.

For the NIAAA’s “heavy” drinking limits, it says that men should drink no more than four per day, and no more than 14 beverages per week. For women, according to the guidelines, they should drink no more than three drinks per day and seven per week.

Meanwhile, Canada’s current guidelines recommend people have only two drinks per week. A drink is defined as containing 0.6 fluid ounces of alcohol, or equivalent to one beer, one glass of wine with 12 percent alcohol, or one shot of hard alcohol.

“If there’s health benefits, I think people will start to re-evaluate where we’re at [in the U.S.],” Mr. Koob told the Daily Mail.

When asked about whether the guidelines would change in 2025, he said that it’s likely officials will not recommend that people drink more per day or week, as compared with the current guidelines.

“I mean, they’re not going to go up, I’m pretty sure,” Mr. Koob said. “So, if [alcohol consumption guidelines] go in any direction, it would be toward Canada.”

Keep reading

Playground Sign Outlaws ‘Loitering at Slide Entry or Exit’

“Welcome! Play Safe,” reads the sign at a Fairfax County Public School playground in Virginia, just outside of Washington, D.C. The sign also lists a few simple rules—21 of them, by my count.

First off, the playground should never be used when it is frozen. Or wet.

There can be no climbing on things like the safety rails (which are basically just fences). Kids must not wear any clothing with drawstrings, hoods, or toggles while they are playing, because these items could get caught on something. (Ponytails seem grandmothered in.)

On the slide, children must “take turns,” “sit in an upright position,” and “not climb.” There also must be “no loitering at slide entry or exit.”

Loiter not, little ones!

Keep reading

A Ham-Handed Bill Attacks the First Amendment in the Name of Protecting Minors From Online Harm

Late last month, a Senate committee considered a 50-page bill with a name that includes the word kids and approved it unanimously. Those two facts alone are enough to raise the suspicion that legislators are heading down a winding road toward a destination they only dimly perceive.

That suspicion is amply supported by the text of the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), which ham-handedly aims to shield children and teenagers from vaguely defined dangers lurking on the internet. The unintended but foreseeable results are apt to include invasions of privacy that compromise First Amendment rights and a chilling impact on constitutionally protected speech, both of which will harm adults as well as the “kids” whom the bill is supposed to protect.

KOSA imposes an amorphous “duty of care” on platforms, online games, messaging applications, and streaming services, demanding “reasonable measures” to “protect” against and “mitigate” various “harms” to users younger than 17. The targeted dangers include anxiety, depression, suicide, eating disorders, substance abuse, “addiction-like behaviors,” physical violence, online bullying, harassment, sexual exploitation and abuse, “financial harms,” and promotion of “narcotic drugs,” tobacco products, alcohol, or gambling.

That’s a tall order, and it is not at all clear what meeting this obligation would entail. Nor is it clear when the duty of care applies.

As amended by the Senate Commerce Committee, KOSA applies to any “covered platform” that “knows” its users include minors. But no one knows what “knows” means.

In addition to “actual knowledge,” that condition can be satisfied by “knowledge fairly implied on the basis of objective circumstances.” KOSA directs the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), within 18 months of the bill’s passage, to issue “guidance” about how to understand the latter phrase.

That guidance, however, would not bind the FTC, which is charged with investigating and penalizing platforms that it thinks have violated KOSA. Nor would it constrain state attorneys general, who would be authorized to independently enforce KOSA through “civil actions.”

An earlier version of KOSA provoked criticism from civil libertarians who warned that it would effectively require platforms to verify users’ ages, which would entail collecting personal information. That was a clear threat to internet users of all ages who want to engage in speech without revealing their identities, a well-established First Amendment right.

In response to that concern, the latest version of KOSA revises the duty-of-care test and explicitly says it does not require “age gating or age verification.” But given the burdens the bill imposes and the uncertainty about what counts as “knowledge fairly implied,” platforms still would have a strong incentive to exclude minors or minimize the number of users who are younger than 17.

Keep reading

Cigarettes in Canada to be individually labeled with health warnings

Cigarettes will be individually labeled in Canada. The messages, in English and French, include warnings such as “poison in every puff” and “cigarettes cause cancer.”

By July 2024 manufacturers will have to ensure the warnings are on all king-size cigarettes sold, and by April 2025 all regular-size cigarettes and little cigars with tipping paper and tubes must include the warnings. …In May, Health Canada said the new regulations “will make it virtually impossible to avoid health warnings” on tobacco products. …The move is part of Canada’s effort to reduce tobacco use to less than 5% by 2035 and follows a 75-day public consultation period that was launched last year.

Though the prevalence of smoking is vastly reduced since the middle of the 20th Century, about 10% of teens regularly smoke cigarettes, according to the American Lung Association. Canadian cigarette packets already have spectacularly unpleasant warnings featuring photos of diseases caused by smoking.

Keep reading

Sen. Chris Murphy Wants the Government To Help You Make Friends

Is there any social issue that elected officials don’t think they can solve? Loneliness is a highly complex phenomenon, produced by an interplay of cultural components and personal psychological attributes. One senator thinks he can fix it with bureaucracy and “public awareness.”

On Tuesday, Connecticut Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy announced the introduction of his “National Strategy for Social Connection,” a bill that would create “a federal office to combat the growing epidemic of American loneliness, develops anti-loneliness strategies, and fosters best practices to promote social connection,” as Murphy put it.

The idea that the federal government can solve loneliness is naive and laughable. If there is an “epidemic of loneliness” in America—a big if—its causes are surely so diverse that no group of bureaucrats is going to dislodge it. And certainly not with the silly solutions Murphy proposes.

Murphy’s bill would create an “Office of Social Connection Policy to advise the president on loneliness and isolation,” order federal agencies to implement a “national strategy on social connection,” and start a public awareness campaign to educate people about fostering connections.

“Similar to existing national guidelines on nutrition, sleep, and physical activity, the Office would issue research-based best practices on how to better engage and connect with our local communicates,” Murphy’s summary of the bill states.

U.S. nutrition guidelines, of course, have a long history of being ridiculously unscientific and plagued by cronyism. And whatever one thinks about nutrition and physical activity guidelines today, there’s no denying that Americans are massively overweight and way too sedentary. So, I’d hardly call these things models of efficacy.

In fact, national guidelines on how to be less lonely are bound to work about as well as nutrition and physical fitness guidelines have: not at all.

Keep reading

Meal deals: Unhealthy options will be restricted in Wales

Meal deals with a high fat, sugar or salt content will be restricted in Wales under plans to tackle obesity and diabetes.

Temporary price drops and multi-buy offers on the unhealthiest foods will also be banned in the proposals put forward by the Welsh government.

But retailers have raised concerns about the timing of the announcement as food prices remain high.

The legislation will be introduced next year and rolled out by 2025.

A number of retailers offer lunch deals which combine a sandwich, drink and a snack for a set price.

Restrictions will be placed on certain combinations that have a high fat, sugar or salt content above the recommended daily amount.

Keep reading

Oregon Partially Repeals Ban on Adults Fueling Their Own Cars

After years of marginal reforms, a dire labor shortage, and dislocations from natural disasters and the pandemic, Oregon politicians have finally agreed to open up the entire state to self-service gas pumps.

This past week, the Oregon Senate passed H.B. 2426, which allows all gas stations to designate at least half their gas pumps as self-service, meaning motorists can opt into fueling their vehicles if they feel up to the challenge. It also ends the requirement that a gas station attendant physically hand motorcyclists the nozzle before they pump their gas.

The bill, approved by the Oregon House in March, now goes to Gov. Tina Kotek, a Democrat, for approval.

For years, Oregon was one of two states in the union (New Jersey being the other) that mandated full-service gas stations—meaning an attendant was required to fuel most drivers’ vehicles.

Supporters of the full-service mandate claim it’s a productive job creation measure, a form of consumer protection, a necessary health and safety measure, and a valuable cultural quirk all rolled into one.

Reformers have therefore had to tread carefully when arguing that drivers and gas station owners deserve more freedom in their fueling relationship.

Keep reading