Rapid Responses to:

EDITORIALS: Debra J Lipson The World Trade Organization's health agenda BMJ 2001; 323: 1139-1140 [Full text]

Rapid Responses: Submit a response to this article

Rapid Responses published:

Trade vs. Health on Tobacco-Control

Atul Kapur   (19 November 2001)

Trade vs. Health on Tobacco-Control 19 November 2001
Atul Kapur, Emergency Physician, The Ottawa Hospital Ottawa Hospital, Dept. of Emergency Medicine, 1053 Carling Ave., Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1Y 4E9 Send response to journal: Re: Trade vs. Health on Tobacco-Control	Debra Lipson's editorial on the World Trade Organization's effect on health[1], especially on governments' public health measures, does not go far enough in exploring the perhaps unintentional effects on trade liberalisation on other health measures, specifically tobacco control. This week, the World Health Organization (WHO) is convening the third formal negotiating session working towards a Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC). A major area of contention will be whether this convention has primacy over commercial considerations. There have already been many measures which the multi-national tobacco companies have used trade rules to thwart tobacco-control measures: threatening trademark infringement suits to scare Canada away from requiring generic (plain) packaging for cigarettes, forcing southeast Asian countries (most notably Thailand) to open its market to foreign tobacco companies, and challenging European bans on the misleading terms "light" and "mild." [2][3] Unfortunately, the current base text for the upcoming FCTC negotiating session contains wording that would make the convention subordinate to current trade agreements. These agreements, even though they may contain wording exempting health-protection measures, have been interpreted in a manner most restrictive to health-protection. That is why the Framework Convention Alliance, an alliance of non- governmental organisations working to support the development of a strong FCTC, has supported alternative wording which would specify that "in the event of a conflict between the Convention or any of its Protocols and the application of another international agreement to tobacco, the FCTC shall take precedence," as well as precautionary language so that a lack of absolute scientific certainty would not be used to postpone or challenge specific tobacco-control measures.[2] Most of the developing countries in the world are supporting such wording. However, many of the developed nations are taking the lead from their ministries of trade rather than from health. In tobacco control, health must take precedence. (signed) Atul Kapur, MD, DABEM, FRCPC President, Physicians for a Smoke-Free Canada 1. Lipson DL. The world trade organization's health agenda. BMJ 2001;323:1139-40. 2. Framework Convention Alliance. INB3 Briefing - Trade. Accessed on November 19, 2001. Available at http://www.fctc.org/INB3_Briefing_Trade.shtml 3. Physicians for a Smoke-Free Canada. An introduction to international trade agreements and their impact on public measures to reduce tobacco use. 2001. Accessed on November 19, 2001. Available at http://www.smoke-free.ca/pdf_1/Trade&Tobacco-April%202000.pdf