The world's first international tobacco control treaty
BMJ 2002; 325 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.325.7369.846 (Published 19 October 2002) Cite this as: BMJ 2002;325:846All rapid responses
Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed. Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles. The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not including references and author details. We will no longer post responses that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
Although in popular parlance, the two words ' tobacco ' and '
nicotine ' are interchanged without confusion, when applied in legal,
technical or scientific context, clarity is of utmost importance. The
World Health Organization seems to have over looked this basic concept in
the process of creating its Intergovernmental Negotiating Body on the WHO
Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. The " Tobacco
Treaty " presented to the member countries of the WHO comprises of 38
articles. It has extensive, expensive proposals.
It is unfortunate to note that the authors of the treaty hopelessly missed
nicotine the culprit of the tobacco menace.
Only with drastic changes may the Tobacco Treaty be saved from going up in
smoke.
Competing interests: No competing interests
The June 25, 2002 "Chair’s Text" appears to have the strong stamp of
the neo-nicotine salesman (Nicotine Replacement Therapy - NRT - and
friends) all over it. In the entire 24 page document the concept of
chemical dependency upon nicotine is mentioned only twice, while the word
"tobacco" appears 196 times. The Chair's definition of "tobacco control"
does not include any means of nicotine delivery except tobacco.
As we've already seen, tobacco can be entirely reconstituted without
nicotine but in such form it does not sell, beyond that first experimental
pack, to those whose brain reward pathways are dependent upon a steady
supply. Nicotine smokers are no more addicted to a "cigarette" than a
heroin addict is to a needle. Their dopamine and adrenaline levels are
dependent upon the powerful chemical inside - nicotine.
Is the "Chair's Text" a joke or was it written by the pharmaceutical
industry? Twenty-seven flavors of nicotine suckers, nicotine chocolates,
nicotine sodas, nicotine water, flavored lozenges, nicotine straws, and
every flavor of nicotine gum imaginable, are now either already available
or in different stages of development. New forms of delivery are already
being marketed to youth for weight loss, alertness and flavor. It's being
marketed to those already dependent as an alternative nicotine delivery
system (ANDS) to temporarily satisfy an endless need to feed in
situations where toxic public fires are no longer acceptable.
Performance promises, peer pressure, rebellion, and a lack of any
warnings, threaten a new generation of youth with permanent nicotine
dependency. Once hooked, most will be forced to quickly turn to the
cheapest source available - the dirtiest, most destructive, and deadly
dependency delivery device ever devised by man - the cigarette.
Over the past two years we've new read studies associating clean
nicotine delivery with lung cancer, tumor vascularization (with
accelerated growth rates), atherosclerosis, chronic depression, and only
recently to impairment of learning and memory. During the same time, all
new OTC NRT study evidence indicated that gradual stepped-down withdrawal
via clean nicotine is probably no more effective that an ignorant and
unsupported abrupt cessation quitter’s own natural abilities at mid-year
(10 to 11%).
Pharmaceutical companies have gone to great lengths in order to
generate the lowest placebo group performance rates possible, as
production of inferior results is the only means they have of claiming
success. The problem is that the OTC studies, for the first time, allowed
us see that the emperor had no clothes. Now there is a mad dash to
quickly clothe and hide an ineffective tool in highly effective behavioral
programs.
With placebo rates almost three times lower than historical on-your-
own abrupt cessation rate (in the 4% range), and admissions in at least
three studies that placebo delivery devices were being doctored with
varying amounts of nicotine, the validity of all early NRT studies is
being called into question.
True abrupt cessation withdrawal peaks in intensity within 72 hours.
While the NRT group may have received sufficient nicotine to permit
successful device transfer, how would just 1 or 2 mg. of nicotine a day
effect historical on-your-own performance rates? We’re just now beginning
to discover the truth.
The California study published in September's JAMA concluded that
"NRT appears no longer effective in increasing long-term successful
cessation in California smokers." The new HONC study published in
September's edition of Tobacco Control suggests that it takes far less
nicotine to produce dependency than previously thought.
The "Chair's Text" intentionally ignores reality. Isn't it time to
deprive those seeking to profit from nicotine sales from having control
over writing and establishing national or worldwide nicotine control
policy?
John R. Polito
Nicotine Cessation Educator
Founder, www.WhyQuit.com
709 Black Oak Blvd.
Summerville, SC 29485 USA
john@whyquit.com
Competing interests: No competing interests
Wanted an international coalition against "tobaccoism". Isn't tobacco more dangerous than Bin Laden?
The third world is approaching a “Tobacco Holocaust”. The Tobacco
industries, with declining tobacco consumption in parts of the west, are
now targeting Asian and eastern European markets intensively. We need an
international coalition that could address tobacco issues that cross
borders. World Health Organization's (WHO) tobacco control treaty(1) is
only the first step forward. The real test would be in implementing the
measures effectively. The following staggering statistics call for an
urgent action on the part of international community and urge
international agencies to review their existing policies and programs, to
ensure that tobacco control is given prominence.
* Tobacco kills more people than AIDS, alcohol, cocaine,
homicide, suicide, motor vehicle crashes and fires combined. It has
already killed 70 million people since 1950. Annual global tobacco related
deaths are about 3 million (one third in developing nations) and is
expected to rise to more than ten million by the 2020s(2). By 2030, 70% of
all deaths due to tobacco will occur in developing nations (presently it
is 50%). Tobacco-related diseases are responsible for 1 in 10 adult deaths
worldwide(3).
* With current patterns, about 500 million people alive in
the world today will eventually be killed by tobacco use (nearly a half
will be today's children and teenagers)(4). If tobacco control is
extremely successful and adult tobacco consumption is cut to half by 2020,
there will still be over 250 million people dying of tobacco consumption.
* Seventy percent of Chinese men smoke and, if they do not
change their habits, a third of them, now under 30 years (more than 50
million), will eventually die of smoking. Tobacco is predicted to account
for 13 percent of all deaths in India by 2025. In Thailand, 250 million
children alive today will eventually die from tobacco if they take up
smoking at the present rate(5).
In a developing country with a per capita GDP of $2000,
effective tobacco prevention costs approximately $20 to $40 per year of
life gained. Lung cancer treatment costs $18,000 per year of life
gained(6). For the USA, direct health care costs related to tobacco were
estimated in 1980 to be US $16 billion (7% of national health care costs)
and indirect mortality & morbidity costs were US $26 billion.
Approximately five trillion cigarettes (1,000 / human
on earth) are produced annually. In 1999 tobacco industry spent $8.24
billion a year as marketing expenditures. This amounts to $22.5 million a
day – nearly $1 million an hour!
Philip Morris, Japan Tobacco and British American
Tobacco, the world’s 3 largest cigarette companies, now own or lease
plants in at least 40 countries each. In 1998, they had combined tobacco
revenues of more than $88 billion, a sum greater than the total gross
national product of Albania, Armenia, Bahrain, Bolivia, Botswana,
Bulgaria, Cambodia, Cameroon, Estonia, Guyana, Honduras, Jamaica, Jordan,
Laos, Latvia, Madagascar, Moldova, Mongolia, Nepal, Nicaragua and Togo
combined(7).
We need to create an international coordinating agency to reduce and
monitor tobacco consumption. Key areas for action include facilitating
international agreements on smuggling control, discussions on tax
harmonization to reduce the incentives for smuggling, and ban on
advertising and promotion involving the global communications media.
References:
1. Gilmore AB, Collin J. The world's first international tobacco
control treaty. BMJ. 2001;325:846-847.
2. World Health Organization, World Health Report 1999 (Geneva: WHO,
1999) http://www.who.int/whr/1999/en/report.htm and World Bank, World
Development
Indicators 1998, http://www.worldbank.org/data/wdi/pdfs/tab2_1.pdf
3. World Bank, Curbing the Epidemic: Governments and the Economics of
Tobacco Control, 1999; http://www1.worldbank.org/tobacco/reports.htm
4. World Health Organization, World Health Report 1999 (Geneva: WHO,
1999); http://www.who.int/whr/1999/en/report.htm
5. World Health Organization, “Tobacco Epidemic: Much More than a
Health Issue,” Fact Sheet No. 155, 1998; http://www.who.int/inf-
fs/en/fact155.html
6. World Bank, Curbing the Epidemic: Governments and the Economics of
Tobacco Control (Washington: World Bank, 1999);
http://www1.worldbank.org/tobacco/reports.htm
7. As of January 2000, Philip Morris and Japan Tobacco had
subsidiaries, affiliates and licensing agreements in 63 and 44 countries
respectively, while BAT had subsidiaries and affiliates in 74 countries.
Source: “International Cigarette Manufacturers,” Tobacco Reporter, March
2000.
Competing interests: No competing interests