|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||
EDITORIALS |
School of Public Health, University of Sydney, NSW, Australia
Correspondence to:
Professor Simon Chapman, School of Public Health, Edward Ford Building A27, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia; sc@med.usyd.edu.au
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
It has often been noted that the tobacco industry is cosseted by regulatory exceptionalism. Unlike food, drink and pharmaceuticals that are taken into the body, and doctors, dentists, podiatrists, tattooists, body piercers and even brothels whose work involves various gradations of body penetration, tobacco remains the only commercial product or service intended to be taken into the body which is not commonly subject to safety regulation standards. Those wanting to do things to others bodies have to be qualified, trained, inspected, tested and risk losing their rights to practice if breaching legislated standards. Drugs designed to save lives and enhance health are subject to elaborate regulatory controls and those selling them required to undertake degrees in pharmacy or medicine. In most nations, tobacco, which causes stratospheric death estimated to reach a billion this century,1 can be sold by anyone. Manufacturers are free to add any licit additive for whatever purpose
Related Article
Tob. Control 2008 17: 132-141.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
J. Liberman and M. Heyward Use of the precautionary principle in the debate about emissions limits: a cautionary note Tob. Control, August 1, 2008; 17(4): 286 - 287. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
N. Gray A letter from Nigel Gray Tob. Control, August 1, 2008; 17(4): 287 - 288. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS | REGISTER |