|
Townhall...
FDA Headbangs With
Condoms, Not Cigs
By Katie Kieffer
If young people have casual sex, they’re rock stars, as long as they
use condoms. If they casually smoke cigarettes, they’re borderline
criminals. According to the FDA, that is.
The FDA takes a hypocritical and overly invasive stance on two adult
products: Condoms and cigarettes. The FDA’s inconsistent and excessive
regulation of these adult products hurts free enterprise and represents
an inappropriate extension of government in our daily lives.
This month, The Associated Press reported that condom maker Graphic
Armor Inc. is releasing the first line of FDA-compliant condoms with
full-color advertising graphics directly on the latex. The graphics
will include images of Kiss rock stars Gene Simmons and Paul Stanley.
Even pop star Ke$ha, who just closed a deal with LifeStyles Condoms to
get her face on the packaging of 10,000 latexes to throw out to her
fans at concerts, knows that condoms aren’t foolproof. Her condom
disclaimer is: “If it breaks, you have to name your daughter or son
after me.”
Besides the fact that condoms can break, reliance on condoms could
encourage a sense of rock star invincibility and potentially lead to
unhealthy behavior in young people. Naïve adolescents could get the
wrong message from Graphic Armor’s marketing. But, an uptick in teen
pregnancy doesn’t seem to worry the FDA.
FDA butts out reason
In the Indian village of Jaav, Hindu villagers color themselves in dye
and smoke cigarettes to celebrate the end of winter. In America, the
FDA appears convinced that smokers are just one step away from being
criminals.
Accordingly, the FDA has released 36 new warning labels (it will narrow
them down to nine by June 22, 2011) for cigarette packaging that will
be mandatory in October 2012. On June 22, 2009, President Obama signed
a landmark legislation called the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco
Control Act (Tobacco Control Act) that gives the FDA unprecedented
authority to bypass Congress and regulate the tobacco industry’s
marketing, advertising and even product content.
The warning labels are designed such that they will cover about 50
percent of each cigarette pack’s surface area. So, retailers will
struggle to sell the products because the individual cigarette brands
will be covered by the FDA’s scare ads, infers The New York Times.
One proposed FDA label depicts a “typical” female smoker with an image
of a mother blowing smoke on her baby, along with the words: “WARNING:
TOBACCO SMOKE CAN HARM YOUR CHILDREN.” Another ad shows a graveyard
full of tombstones with the words: “WARNING: TOBACCO SMOKE CAUSES FATAL
LUNG DISEASE IN NONSMOKERS.”
The FDA’s packaging mandate sounded a tad extreme to me until I
remembered that every smoker I’ve ever known has literally sent every
nonsmoker within ten feet of them to the graveyard and every female
smoker I’ve ever known was an irresponsible baby-hater. I’m just
relieved we have the FDA to keep adults and babies completely safe.
I also realized that Americans don’t need to vote for members of the
FDA like they do for members of Congress because we have the FDA’s word
that it’s uninfluenced by politics and is looking out for us. It’s kind
of nice that we can trust the FDA enough to do business on a handshake,
just like the good ol’ days. Ahhh.
A better way
OK, so I was being sarcastic. I actually think American companies
should be able to advertise their products without an
extra-constitutional agency like the FDA stepping in and big-brothering
them. Especially a big brother who’s a big hypocrite: The FDA seems
unconcerned about middle school kids having access to kinky, rock star
fun in the tunnel slides, as long as they don’t smoke on the swings.
My view is: Let consumers make their own choices and let companies make
their own marketing decisions. Need and demand for products and
services should dictate consumption, not an unelected and unaccountable
government bureaucracy.
The FDA has been quick to use its new authority to try to ban
menthol-flavored cigarettes. But, a new study published in the Journal
of the National Cancer Institute shows that menthol poses no greater
health risk, and may actually mitigate the risk of lung cancer by up to
30 percent, Reuters reported last week. So much for the government
being an expert on the health hazards of smoking.
We need the government to effectively police the Texas-Mexico border,
not excessively regulate advertising on adult products like cigarettes
and condoms.
Americans should begin having public discussions about acceptable
health practices in their local communities and families rather than
relying on the government to make these decisions for them.
What do you think? Should an unelected federal agency like the FDA have
jurisdiction over advertising on cigarettes and condoms? Or, should we
leave such decisions up to individual citizens, small business owners
and elected state legislatures?
Read it at Townhall
|
|
|
|
