Yes, the FDA is Overextended, but Come On…

Tobacco giant Reynolds American, in an effort to thwart federal legislation that would grant the FDA authority over tobacco companies, has begun a multi-media ad campaign painting the FDA as weak, overextended, and incapable of providing adequate oversight. But other reasons appear to be the driving force behind the ad push. From the New York Times:

Analysts contend that the bill could benefit Philip Morris over its smaller competitors. By imposing tighter restrictions on advertising, the new regulations could make it harder for Reynolds to market Camel — No. 3 in the United States market — against the industry’s top seller, Marlboro, which is made by Philip Morris.

So there’s that. But the Reynolds argument also implies that the FDA will have to pull resources from other important areas. But…

But the bill tries to address that concern by establishing a new center for tobacco regulation within the F.D.A. It would be financed by tobacco industry fees projected at more than $5 billion over the next 10 years.

So the argument’s reasoning seems thin as well. Last, but not least,

The bill would also ban candy-flavored cigarettes and give the F.D.A. authority to regulate the content of tobacco products.

Candy flavored cigarettes? Candy-flavored?

-- Dylan Blaylock