Tobacco Control

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
[Advanced]

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this link to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Add article to my folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Siegel, M
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Siegel, M
Tobacco Control 2004;13:439-441
© 2004 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd


Debate

FDA REGULATION

FDA REGULATION

Food and Drug Administration regulation of tobacco: snatching defeat from the jaws of victory

M Siegel

Correspondence to:
Dr Michael Siegel
Social and Behavioral Sciences Department, Boston University School of Public Health, 715 Albany Street, TW2, Boston, MA 02118, USA; mbsiegel@bu.edu

Keywords: Food and Drug Administration; FDA

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

There are two essential elements of a policy analysis: (1) it should provide an accounting of all harms and benefits of a proposed policy and then weigh these harms and benefits1–3; and (2) it should be evidence based—it should assess the likelihood of policy effects not from the perspective of what could happen based on hypothetical considerations or pure speculation, but on documented effects or theoretical or conceptual research.1–3

Any analysis that fails to identify both harms and benefits of a policy, fails to weigh these in drawing its overall conclusion, or is not evidence based, is likely to be flawed and highly subject to bias. Thus, my approach here is to provide an accounting of the harms and benefits of the US Senate Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Bill, using an evidence based approach to assess the likely policy effects.


PROVISIONS OF BILL FOR WHICH THERE IS EVIDENCE OF A POSITIVE EFFECT ON PUBLIC HEALTH
Strengthening of warning labels
For only one provision of the . . . [Full text of this article]




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
CarcinogenesisHome page
S.L. Prior, A.P. Griffiths, J.M. Baxter, P.W. Baxter, S.C. Hodder, K.C. Silvester, and P.D. Lewis
Mitochondrial DNA mutations in oral squamous cell carcinoma
Carcinogenesis, May 1, 2006; 27(5): 945 - 950.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Health Politics, Policy and LawHome page
D. T. Studlar
Unfiltered: Conflicts over Tobacco Policy and Public Health; Smoke in Their Eyes: Lessons in Movement Leadership from the Tobacco Wars; The Fight Against Big Tobacco: The Movement, the State, and the Public's Health
Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law, April 1, 2006; 31(2): 395 - 407.
[PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
Terms and conditions relating to subscriptions purchased online  ¦  Website terms and conditions  ¦  Privacy policy
Copyright © 2004 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.