ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

American Opinion: The FDA is right to ban menthol cigarettes

Summary: The tobacco industry has argued that a ban on menthol products would only cause menthol smokers to turn to regular cigarettes. But a 2020 meta-study that included examinations of places where such bans were already in place found that while some smokers switched products, fewer people started smoking altogether. And surveys of menthol smokers cited in the meta-study found that a significant number said they’d quit smoking rather than try another tobacco product if there were a ban. ... To paraphrase an old cigarette advertising slogan, they’d rather quit than switch.

Packs of menthol-flavored and non-menthol cigarettes are displayed for sale in a smoke shop on April 28, 2022 in Los Angeles.
Packs of menthol-flavored and non-menthol cigarettes are displayed for sale in a smoke shop on April 28, 2022 in Los Angeles.
(Mario Tama/Getty Images/TNS)
We are part of The Trust Project.

Take a deep breath, America. We’ve made serious progress against cigarette smoking. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 23% of adults were smokers in 2000. By 2020, the rate had fallen to 12.5%. Teen use of traditional cigarettes has plummeted from 22.5% in 2002 to 6% in 2019, according to the American Lung Association.

Recent American Opinion editorials.
From American Opinion editorial: Enter the Anti-Robocall Litigation Task Force, a nationwide effort that’s being made to investigate and take legal action against companies who bring foreign robocalls into the United States. The coalition includes attorneys general from all 50 states.
From the American Opinioin editorial: Late in 2021, U.S. Secretary of the Interior Deb Haaland formally created a process to replace derogatory names of geographic features across the nation. She declared the word “squaw” to be derogatory and ordered a federal panel — called the Board on Geographic Names — to move forward with procedures to remove that word from federal usage.
The truth about the lie fits perfectly with last week’s Jan. 6 hearing, which exposed that Trump’s plan all along was to urge the ginned-up, lied-to mob to train their ire, and their fire, on the U.S. Capitol.

And yet we have a long way to go, in part because the popularity of vaping has led to an overall increase in use of tobacco products. A 2021 survey found that 11.3% of high school students said they currently used e-cigarettes; of those, more than a quarter vaped daily. And yes, e-cigarettes don’t have the smoke associated with lung cancer, but they contain a batch of harmful chemicals that can cause breathing problems and other health issues. Not to mention that they hook young people on nicotine, which then opens the door to cigarettes.

It’s probably not a coincidence that in 2009, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration banned most kinds of flavored cigarettes, those that taste of candy or fruit and lured teens into smoking. It would take 12 more years for the FDA to announce a similar but partial ban on flavored e-cigarettes while it continues to consider whether vaping products should be banned altogether.

But there’s one flavor that has remained untouched, at least until now. After more than a decade of consideration, the FDA is proposing to ban menthol cigarettes and cigars (and is taking public comments on this plan until July 5). Menthol has long been the most common and popular flavoring for tobacco products.

Menthol has a minty taste that softens the harshness of cigarette smoke, making it easier to start — and, some studies indicate, harder to quit. It also is especially marketed to communities of color, so it should be no surprise that 48% of adult Latino smokers and 85% of Black smokers use menthol tobacco products, compared with 30% for white smokers, according to the CDC.

ADVERTISEMENT

Of course, adults are entitled to make their own decisions — even very bad decisions — about whether to smoke. Banning menthol, considering its effect on the Black community, is a double-edged sword. Tobacco companies have targeted vulnerable populations with marketing, causing disproportionate harm. Black people smoke at somewhat higher rates than white people. But banning menthol could be seen as biased and patronizing, with the government telling Black adults that they no longer have access to the kind of smokes they like, while most white people get to continue with their chosen form of cigarettes. Nor is menthol’s effect on smoking rates entirely clear. Despite the higher levels of menthol use among Latinos, they are significantly less likely to smoke than white people.

But the debate ends with the irrefutable fact that menthol is a gateway to smoking and it worsens the rate of smoking overall. According to the anti-tobacco group Truth Initiative, the percentage of smokers who choose menthol rose steadily from 2008 to 2018. And young smokers — teens and young adults — are significantly more likely to choose menthol than regular cigarettes.

Our society does have the right and duty to take steps to protect kids and young adults from tremendous harm, as the federal government did in 2019 when it raised the smoking age from 18 to 21. Considering how difficult it is to stop smoking — fewer than one in 10 who try to quit are successful — prevention is the best way to bring down this deadly addiction.

Menthol’s popularity has already been waning among some young people. A 2020 study found that from 2011 to 2018, use of menthol among young cigarette smokers dropped from 57.3% to 45.7%. But the numbers didn’t change at all for young Black and Latino smokers, the ones most likely to choose menthol in the first place. And even at the lower rate, it’s still higher than for adults.

The menthol ban is the right way to go — except that it doesn’t go nearly far enough. Menthol e-cigarettes are not included, even though the FDA banned cartridge-based vaping with candy and fruit flavors in 2020.

This month, the Los Angeles City Council tackled this in a stronger way: It banned flavored and menthol e-cigarettes as well as cigars and cigarettes. This isn’t the first city to do this, but it’s the largest. Of course, without a statewide ban — a similar California law is on hold pending a referendum on the November ballot — many smokers are likely to buy their flavored tobacco products outside the city. But bold moves by a few cities create a trend. That’s what happened with California’s single-use plastic bag ban.

The tobacco industry has argued that a ban on menthol products would only cause menthol smokers to turn to regular cigarettes. But a 2020 meta-study that included examinations of places where such bans were already in place found that while some smokers switched products, fewer people started smoking altogether. And surveys of menthol smokers cited in the meta-study found that a significant number said they’d quit smoking rather than try another tobacco product if there were a ban.

To paraphrase an old cigarette advertising slogan, they’d rather quit than switch.

ADVERTISEMENT

This American Opinion editorial is the opinion of the editorial board of the Los Angeles Times.

©2022 Los Angeles Times. Visit at latimes.com . Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

______________________________________________________

This story was written by one of our partner news agencies. Forum Communications Company uses content from agencies such as Reuters, Kaiser Health News, Tribune News Service and others to provide a wider range of news to our readers. Learn more about the news services FCC uses here.

More opinion content
More opinion content published on Wctrib.com.
From the editorial: Those unfortunate bits of political sausage-making notwithstanding, the measure will mean cleaner air, a more stable climate, lower drug prices for seniors and a more fair tax system for everyone. And Democrats had to shoehorn it through with no help from GOP obstructionists, whose singular priority is to deny any accomplishments to the other side. Even accomplishments that would help Republicans’ own constituents.
An editorial cartoon by Dave Granlund.
From the commentary: Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis is already taking that risk, but the bigger one may be a miscalculation of the Republican primary electorate and what it may look like in two years. The bad news for DeSantis: It might well look like Kansas. The bad weather could spread for Republicans as their fondest wish — the overruling of Roe v. Wade — turns into an electoral disaster.
From the commentary: And so, in local and national elections in the coming months, to say nothing of the presidential election in 2024, that small slice of the electorate that actually considers both sides before casting their votes will be charged with determining whether a group of men and women who would undermine the foundation on which American democracy is built will be allowed to once again attempt to do so. We can only hope they make the right choice.
From the editorial: But the formation of Forward is a signal that some Americans yearn to restore balance to our badly broken political system. And that is welcome.
An editorial cartoon by Gary Markstein.
From the commentary:
From the commentary: If that’s the case, then we can think of the complex system of multiple points where policy ideas can be initiated or vetoed as a mechanism to force those who choose to advocate for something such as a veterans health bill into having to learn the system, bargain with others with equally legitimate private interests and work out compromises. That is, it’s a system that tries to teach the advantages of a life of public participation.
An editorial cartoon by Bruce Plante
From the commentary: What is significant about the Kansas vote is that a very red state turned out to reject the kind of ban that Idaho and half the other states are likely to adopt. Or, perhaps, not so likely, knowing that voters may reject such bans and the Justice Department is ready to challenge them. If people start thinking about abortion in more realistic terms, as a necessary medical procedure and, in many cases, a life-saving one, the results change, as they did on Tuesday. And perhaps on more Tuesdays to come.

Related Topics: AMERICAN OPINION
What to read next
From the editorial: The problems at the southern border are complex but not unsolvable. They should never have reached this point of near-crisis. What’s most needed now is leadership.
From the editorial: The approaching midterm elections provide a perfect opportunity for the president to stress his need for visionaries in Congress who can help him.
From the editorial: While Republican opposition has blocked the bills enshrining federal rights to abortion and contraception from advancing in the Senate, the GOP appears open to codifying same-sex marriage. It was encouraging to see that the Respect for Marriage Act passed the House with solid bipartisan support. Some 47 Republicans joined all 220 Democrats in voting for it.
From the editorial: People and organizations can respect Audubon's work with birds, but his name shouldn't be the brand for birding in Seattle or in America.