Federal appeals court says no to FDA graphic cigarette warnings

Medline Plus has reported that smoking is simply bad for your health. Smoking causes harm to nearly every organ of the body. Approximately 87 percent of lung cancer deaths are caused by cigarette smoking. Cigarette smoking is also responsible for many other cancers and health problems, which include lung disease, heart and blood vessel disease, stroke and cataracts. And women who smoke have a greater risk of certain pregnancy problems or having a baby die from sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS).

Furthermore, secondhand smoke from cigarette smokers can also be very harmful to other people. Therefore the FDA was surprised when a federal appeals court recently threw out its attempts to place graphic warning labels on cigarette packs. David Pittman has reported for MedPage Today "Appeals Court Nixes Cigarette Warnings." In a 2-1 decision on Friday a federal appeals court threw out the FDA's attempts to have warning labels, such as a pair of lungs which are blackened by smoke, put on cigarette packs. In this decision the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia upheld a lower court ruling in March that cigarette companies' First Amendment rights would be violated by such warning labels.

In this ruling the court also ruled that the FDA failed to show these warning labels would reduce smoking. The federal appeals court wrote "FDA has not provided a shred of evidence -- much less the 'substantial evidence' required by the Administrative Procedure Act-- showing that the graphic warnings will 'directly advance' its interest in reducing the number of Americans who smoke. FDA makes much of the 'international consensus' surrounding the effectiveness of large graphic warnings, but offers no evidence showing that such warnings have directly caused a material decrease in smoking rates in any of the countries that now require them."

The American Cancer Society and other anti-smoking advocates are clearly disappointed by he ruling in this case. Chief executive John R. Seffrin, PhD of the American Cancer Society said in a statement "Overwhelming evidence demonstrates both that existing warnings have failed to inform the public adequately of the risks of tobacco use, and that the large, graphic warnings required by the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act would be effective at raising public awareness of the risks of smoking," The case is on record as R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co et al v. FDA, U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, No. 11-5332.