- Jonathan Samet, professor1,
- Heather Wipfli, research associate (hwipfli@jhsph.edu)1,
- Rogelio Perez-Padilla, investigator2,
- Derek Yach, director, global health3
- Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615 N Wolfe Street, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA
- Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Respiratorias, CP 14080, Mexico
- Rockefeller Foundation, New York, NY 10018, USA
- Correspondence to: H Wipfli
- Accepted 6 January 2006
In May 2004 the Mexican government announced an agreement with the tobacco industry that related to tobacco control measures and industry contributions to the Seguro Popular de Salud, a programme for people without health insurance.1 Although the agreement has received little international discussion, it has implications not only in Mexico but in other countries that may be tempted to follow Mexico's example. The timing of the agreement raises concern that it may be an industry model for counteracting the effect of the World Health Organization's Framework Convention on Tobacco Control.
What is the agreement?
The agreement was signed by two agencies within Mexico's ministry of health and by British American Tobacco, Phillip Morris of Mexico, and Cigatam (Cigarros La Tabacalera Mexicana). Notable elements include:
Minor limitation on the size of billboards
Restriction on the surface area of the pack for health warnings
Specific exclusion of graphic health warnings
Disclosure of ingredients “respecting industrial secrets and confidential information.”
These elements conflict with key articles in the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, which Mexico ratified only days before the agreement was announced (see bmj.com).2 Article 11 of the convention calls for health warnings covering a minimum of 30% of the principal display areas of packaging, …
Sign in
Personal subscribers, sign in here:
Article access
Article access for 1 day
Purchase this article for £20 $30 €32*
The PDF version can be downloaded as your personal record
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Reddit
Technorati
Twitter
Stumbleupon
Rapid responses
Latest Responses
Ethical considerations
Published 14 February 2012
Re: Diagnosis and management of Raynaud’s phenomenon
Published 14 February 2012
Re: Raised inflammatory markers
Published 14 February 2012
Re: Physical activity for cancer survivors: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
Published 14 February 2012
Smokefree cars in Wales: Laws are better
Published 14 February 2012
Most responses
Does anyone understand the government’s plan for the NHS? (17 responses)
Published 17 Jan 2012
Bad medicine: medical nutrition (15 responses)
Published 18 Jan 2012
Shared decision making: really putting patients at the centre of healthcare (8 responses)
Published 27 Jan 2012
Why legislation is necessary for my health reforms (8 responses)
Published 1 Feb 2012
How much of a social media profile can doctors have? (7 responses)
Published 23 Jan 2012