|
|
|
|
Trade Policy: Farmers call on UK to commit in law to ban chlorinated chicken
The National Farmers’ Union (NFU) has called on the UK government to make a legal commitment to ban chlorinated chicken and hormone-fed beef from supermarket shelves.
In an exchange with the international trade secretary, Liz Truss, at the Conservative party conference, Batters called on the government to support the Curry amendment to the agriculture bill, which returns to the House of Commons on 12 October. Lord Curry’s amendment is designed to give the recently assembled trade and agriculture commission (TAC) a stronger role in scrutinising trade deals.
Truss came under repeated fire over the lack of perceived scrutiny in parliament for trade deals from the government’s food tsar, Henry Dimbleby, who called for full parliamentary scrutiny, including evidence and witness accounts to select committees of all post-Brexit trade deals.
He has also called on Truss to put a health expert on the TAC before the nation’s bus stops and billboards are “covered in ads for Hershey bars”. “Our diets are already one of the worst in the world, and we do not want to make it any worse,” he said.
Truss rejected the accusation of secrecy and said all signed trade deals would go before an independent trade commission chaired by the SNP’s Angus Brendan MacNeil, who was not a “government patsy”.
They would also be subject to an impact assessment process to analyse economic and social consequences, and their report would go before parliament and be debated. Under the so-called Crag process, it could be blocked indefinitely if there were an objection.
She also said industry players would be consulted in confidence on key elements of trade deals. The tariff offer from the US was about to be shared with “trusted” advisory groups from 11 sectors under non-disclosure agreements.
Source: The Guardian, 4 October 2020
|
|
Tobacco Transformation Index under fire
An Index that ranks tobacco companies on their harm reduction activities has been criticised by public health organisations and researchers. The Tobacco Transformation Index, launched by Philip Morris International (PMI) funded Foundation for a Smoke-Free World (FSFW) on 21st September 2020, ranked Swedish Match AB in first place, followed by Philip Morris International.
The 15 companies assessed by the Index account for around 90% of global sales of tobacco products by volume. The Index authors noted that sales of combustible cigarettes barely shifted between 2017 (4·9 trillion sticks) and 2019 (4·8 trillion sticks). They wrote that “A small group of companies have made public commitments to harm reduction, but none have shifted their focus enough to ensure the accelerated decline of cigarettes and other high-risk products”. Publicly traded multinational companies tended to score higher than state- or privately-owned companies, a finding the Index authors partly put down to pressure from investors.
However, the Index has been criticised by tobacco control experts. Professor Anna Gilmore at the University of Bath said: “The Tobacco Transformation Index is yet another cynical attempt by Philip Morris International to legitimise the tobacco industry and to undermine control measures that have been proven to reduce tobacco use. None of the Index metrics attempt to capture the real barriers to progress in tobacco control: the ways in which the tobacco industry interferes with policy making and opposes tobacco control measures that work.” Gilmore believes the FSFW is simply an industry front group. “The whole premise of the Index, whereby increased sales of alternative products, notably heated tobacco products that have not been shown to be less harmful than combustible cigarettes, will decrease population harm, is fundamentally flawed”, she added. Gilmore questioned the Index's methods and its lack of external oversight, and noted that it takes no account of dual use of combustible cigarettes and the alternatives supported by the FSFW.
Deborah Arnott, Chief Executive of ASH, stressed that the solution to the tobacco epidemic lies in enforcing the World Health Organization tobacco treaty, the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC). “Harm reduction is a small part of the FCTC; the measures proven to be most effective are taxation, banning tobacco advertising and promotion, and legislating for smoke-free environments”, said Arnott. “The FSFW has very little to say on these measures, because it has been set up to promote Philip Morris International's agenda, which is to switch smokers to heated tobacco products, so the company can continue to generate huge revenues.” She added that Philip Morris International still sells vast quantities of combustible cigarettes.
Given the widespread opposition to the FSFW, it seems probable that its activities will be ignored by most significant public health organisations and researchers. The FSFW plans to update the Tobacco Transformation Index every two years. Whatever else happens, it is unlikely to run out of money. Philip Morris International has pledged to invest almost US$1 billion in the foundation by 2030.
Source: The Lancet, 1 October 2020
|
|
Greece: Third Scientific Summit on Tobacco Harm Reduction concludes
The third Scientific Summit on Tobacco Harm Reduction: Novel products, Research & Policy, organised by a number of Greek universities in collaboration with the National School of Public Health in Greece, has concluded in Athens. The summit addressed varying issues concerning tobacco harm reduction with the participation of scientists and experts from around the world.
Dr Michael Toumbis, a pulmonologist, said that tobacco control strategies should adopt the concept of harm reduction in developing coordinated regulations, policies, and interventions to encourage smokers to switch to less harmful alternatives, and regulations should be relative to harm.
“Harm reduction is an evidence-based approach to tobacco control, which, along with other proven tobacco control interventions, can simultaneously prevent youth from starting to smoke and help current smokers stop, saving many lives more quickly than would otherwise be possible.”
Clive Bates, campaigner for harm reduction policies in public health, said that “Public health risk communication is key for tobacco control policies and programs, since perceptions of the targeted population can largely affect their results and efficacy.”
“A recent UK survey”, he explained, “showed that only 12.5% of participants believed that some smokeless tobacco products, such as chewing tobacco and snuff, are less harmful than tobacco smoking and only 3.6% believed that electronic cigarettes are much less harmful compared to smoking cigarettes.”
He added that 56.5% of the participants believed that it is the nicotine in cigarettes that causes most of the cancer caused by smoking. To this effect he continued, public health risk communication should be based on the consumer’s perspective and not the corporate one, and warnings should be based on the magnitude of risk to facilitate clarity.
“New harm reduction products should de-normalise smoking and not normalise it. “Unfortunately, in the name of uncertainty, we are over-regulating these products,” he argued.
Source: Vaping Post, 2 October 2020
|
|
Have you been forwarded this email? Subscribe to ASH Daily News here.
For more information call 020 7404 0242, email [email protected] or visit www.ash.org.uk
ASH Daily News is a digest of published news on smoking-related topics. ASH is not responsible for the content of external websites. ASH does not necessarily endorse the material contained in this bulletin.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
