by Carl V Phillips
As most readers probably know, the FDA tobacco regulation include the “modified risk tobacco product” (MRTP) process, through which a manufacturer can apply to be able to make risk claims about their products (which basically boils down to: can communicate that they are lower risk than standard cigarettes). It has always been clear this process is (a) misnamed (nothing has to be modified to make this true) and (b) silly (when it is obviously true, why is this even necessary?). What has not been clear is whether FDA intends for it to work at all, or whether it just lets them pretend to offer an option and a formal process while just imposing whatever rules they want, as seems to be the case with the “substantial equivalence” process. Swedish Match has decided to invest an enormous effort in finding out, filing the only MRTP application that FDA has considered. (There have been a few other applications in the past but FDA refused to consider them, including at least one case where they basically changed their own rules to avoid doing so and then changed them back again later.)
Swedish Match filed over 100K pages (!) to basically request permission to stop printing false and misleading warning labels on their snus in the USA. They wish to remove the two currently mandated warning labels that are clearly unsubstantiated (that the products cause oral cancer and dental diseases) and change the grossly misleading “not a safe alternative to cigarettes” warning to say, “No tobacco product is safe, but this product presents substantially lower risks to health than cigarettes.” FDA asked for comments on the application, and CASAA submitted our assessment of the implications of the label change, which you can read at our main blog at this link.
Reblogged this on jredheadgirl.
Pingback: Misleading the public for their own good? Changing the warnings on snus « The counterfactual
Carl on the wholel I really do not buy conspiracy stories but, I am starting to wonder about this one.
Pingback: More on the FDA and MRTP | Anti-THR Lies and related topics
Pingback: New York Times Editorial Board lies about smokeless tobacco labeling | Anti-THR Lies and related topics
Pingback: CASAA: 2015 Legislative Preview
Pingback: TPSAC meeting on Swedish Match MRTP application: is there a scientist in the house? | Anti-THR Lies and related topics
They should keep the warning as-is if the FDA forces them to do so, but add that this danger only occurs on U.S. soil and scientists haven’t pinpointed the reason yet.
A major snus exporter has the hilarious statement on their website accompanying the mandated warnings for sales in the USA, saying that if you are not in the USA, then these risks do not apply to you. (I would mention who and say that they are worth giving your custom to for that alone, but this is an official CASAA publication, so we cannot endorse any vendor.)
Pingback: Remember, what the US government wants to do to ecigs, they have already done to smokeless tobacco | Anti-THR Lies and related topics
Pingback: FDA’s snus PMTA approval — what it seems to mean | Anti-THR Lies and related topics