rss
Tob Control 16:275-279 doi:10.1136/tc.2006.019349
  • Special Communication
  • Special communication

Implications of the federal court order banning the terms “light” and “mild”: what difference could it make?

  1. Stacey J Anderson1,
  2. Pamela M Ling2,
  3. Stanton A Glantz3
  1. 1Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA
  2. 2Department of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine, Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA
  3. 3Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA
  1. Correspondence to:
 Professor S A Glantz
 CTCRE, University of California, Box 1390, 530 Parnassus Avenue, Suite 366, San Francisco, CA 94143–1390, USA; glantz{at}medicine.ucsf.edu
  • Received 14 November 2006
  • Accepted 4 February 2007

Abstract

Federal District Judge Gladys Kessler found that the major American tobacco companies violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, defrauding the public by deceptively marketing “light” cigarettes. Judge Kessler’s ruling prohibits the defendant tobacco companies from implying health benefits through using misleading terms such as “light”, “mild” or “low-tar”, or through other indirect means. This ruling could be interpreted narrowly as simply prohibiting certain words, or could be interpreted broadly as prohibiting implying health benefits by any other means, including colour, numbers or images. It is important to include indirect communications, as tobacco companies easily circumvent narrow advertising bans. A narrow interpretation would be inconsistent with the court’s comprehensive factual findings of fraudulent intent by the industry. A broad interpretation of the Order, including existing brands, line extensions and new tobacco products such as potential reduced exposure products that are marketed as “cigarettes”, Judge Kessler’s order could make a substantial contribution to protecting health.

Footnotes

  • Competing interests: None declared.

Free sample

This recent issue is free to all users to allow everyone the opportunity to see the full scope and typical content of Tobacco Control.
View free sample issue >>

Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.


This insightful video is produced by Cancer Research UK

Navigate This Article