Unit 3
The European Parliament recently voted for some higher regulations in regards the marketing and sale of tobacco. In past years, they have been fairly lenient when comes to cigarettes, so any improvement could be considered significant. The vote among the European Parliament was successful. Lawmakers will now work with national governments to get them on board. The concern that a country wouldn't be on board with increasing regulations towards cigarettes is not a valid concern. The European Parliament frequently passes laws as a whole that help to make Europe a better place socially, economically, and politically.
There are a few things European lawmakers have decided to do about the smoking issue. First off, the Europeans decided to lawfully push tobacco companies to change their marketing in the 'warning' category. They voted to increase the warning labels to 65 percent of the front and back of cigarette packages, 40 percent above the current requirement. To put that into perspective, warning labels in the U.S. on on the sides of the packages.
The second change European lawmakers have made would tend to be unheard of in the States. They voted on banning flavored cigarettes after three years of law enactment and eight years for menthol cigarettes. The F.D.A. got a passed for the ban of flavored cigarettes in 2009, but not for menthol cigarettes. If they tried to ban all cigarettes, they probably wouldn't have been successful, but that might be a different story now.
The most interesting change The European Parliament voted on was about e-cigarettes. The pattern of being strict with regulations starts to undermine here. The e-cigarette companies pressured the European Union so that they wouldn't label their product as a drug-delivery device. It would've been interesting if the Europeans went through with that. They did vote on the same regulations as regular cigarettes regarding the marketing, but sales were centered only towards adults. Compared to the lack of the F.D.A. to regulate this product like tobacco, this is some improvement
Something the writer of this article said sparked my interest. She said, "Lawmakers have made some important steps; United States regulators should do the same."
I think that the U.S. should take more notice to the issue of cigarettes than they currently have. I understand there are priority issues, but tobacco is still an issue. Let's face it, people still die from cigarettes. Sure, I agree that we as a country need to get some other things figured out first, but we need to make some changes to the regulation of cigarettes. I know having stricter regulations for cigarettes is the same as having stricter regulations toward business, but this is different. There are things called ethics. I absolutely do not believe in a product that is harmful to its consumers. For me, products and innovation are there to improve life, not degrade it. Therefore, cigarettes should be regulated to the point that they aren't killing anyone.
I agree that we need to look at how Europe has just taken a stricter stance on tobacco and apply it to our country. I do think that cigarette use is not as much now as it has been in the past. What do you think about alcohol then? Cigarettes harm you and so does alcohol. But if you tried to put more regulations on alcohol everyone would be having a fit. Maybe that point was irrelevant, but I do really like your statement about how products should be there to improve life and not selling anything harmful to consumers.
ReplyDelete