Congress gave the FDA regulatory oversight of the tobacco
industry in 2009. In 2013, Mitch Zeller,
director of the FDA Center for Tobacco Products (CTP), observed, “There are some
very powerful tools that Congress has given FDA to use wisely and supported by
evidence. That’s where I think, the greatest opportunity lies: to use the tools
relying on regulatory science to try to protect consumers and reduce the death
and disease toll from tobacco.”
Despite this avowed focus on scientific evidence, the CTP is
engaged in an unfounded crusade against the products it is tasked to
regulate. Typical of the agency’s action
is a March
18 Tweet that grossly distorts the facts;
it reads: “Smokeless tobacco causes cancers of the mouth, esophagus, and
pancreas.”
It appears that this claim is
based on the 3-page summary of a 400-page smokeless tobacco monograph from the
International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)(here), making the
FDA Tweet a case study in the cherry-picking of evidence. Worse, as shown below, some of this paltry
data doesn’t even apply to Swedish and American products.
In defining mouth cancer risks, the IARC monograph relies
heavily on a 1981 New England Journal of Medicine article that exaggerated the
health effects of powdered dry snuff use and falsely implicated moist snuff and
chewing tobacco, as I have detailed earlier (here
and here). Other studies cited by IARC mainly come from
India, Pakistan, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, central Asia and Africa, where smokeless
products are far more toxic than those in the US. and Sweden.
As for cancer of the esophagus, the IARC monograph cites one
study from India, along with cherry-picked and minimally elevated risks from one
Swedish and one Norwegian study. For
cancer of the pancreas, selective data points are offered from one Norwegian and
three U.S. studies.
The problem is that the IARC never conducted a systematic
and comprehensive analysis of all available studies. As I have discussed (here),
when all the evidence is weighed, snus users in Scandinavia and dip/chew users
in the U.S. have no elevated risks for any of these cancers. I have also documented how cherry-picked data
has been used to falsely blame pancreatic cancer on the use of smokeless
products (here).
Although it lacks the FDA’s tobacco enforcement powers, the
Centers for Disease Control (CDC) makes the same unscientific claims about
smokeless tobacco. The CDC supports the
disinformation campaign by failing to report deaths due to smokeless tobacco
use when it releases annual smoking death estimates. The failure is likely driven by the fact that
the number for smokeless is close to zero, which undercuts the government’s
anti-smokeless campaign.
The FDA, with its ongoing anti-science attack on nearly
risk-free smokeless tobacco, continues to demonstrate that it cannot be trusted
to base tobacco regulation on scientific evidence.
2 comments:
Excellent piece of detective work .
If it wasn't for Dr. Rodu, along with Carl Phillips, I would have kept smoking instead of switching to smokeless tobacco. If they were to take away smokeless tobacco I would have to start smoking again. These are frightening times my friends. I would also ask of the good Dr. if, in some future posts, he would return again to the crusade to ban smokeless tobacco use in professional baseball. I caught the story on SportsCenter on ESPN recently and it made me sick with worry. What's next?
Post a Comment