Cigarette Warning Labels: Tobacco Companies Sue Federal Government Over Graphic Warnings

COLUMBIA, S.C. (Associated Press)-- Four of the five largest U.S. tobacco companies sued the federal government Tuesday over new graphic cigarette labels that include the sewn-up corpse of a smoker and a picture of diseased lungs, saying the warnings violate their free speech rights and will cost millions of dollars to print.

The companies, led by R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., Lorillard Tobacco Co., said the warnings no longer simply convey facts to allow people to make a decision whether to smoke. They instead force them to put government anti-smoking advocacy more prominently on their packs than their own brands, the companies say. They want a judge to stop the labels.

Click here to see the new warning labels.

"Never before in the United States have producers of a lawful product been required to use their own packaging and advertising to convey an emotionally-charged government message urging adult consumers to shun their products," the companies wrote in the lawsuit filed in federal court in Washington, D.C.

The FDA refused to comment, saying the agency does not discuss pending litigation. But when she announced the new labels in June, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius called them frank and honest warnings about the dangers of smoking.

The FDA approved nine new warnings to rotate on cigarette packs. They will be printed on the entire top half, front and back, of the packaging. The new warnings also must constitute 20 percent of any cigarette advertising. They also all include a number for stop-smoking hotline

One warning label is a picture of a corpse with its chest sewed up and the words: "Smoking can kill you." Another label has a picture of a healthy pair of lungs beside a yellow and black pair with a warning that smoking causes fatal lung disease.

The lawsuit said the images were manipulated to be especially emotional. The tobacco companies said the corpse photo is actually an actor with a fake scar, while the healthy lungs were sanitized to make the diseased organ look worse.

The companies also said the new labels will cost them millions of dollars for new equipment so they can frequently change from warning to warning and designers to make sure the labels meet federal requirements while maintaining some distinction among brands.

Joining R.J. Reynolds and Lorillard in the suit are Commonwealth Brands Inc., Liggett Group LLC and Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Company Inc. Altria Group Inc., parent company of the nation's largest cigarette maker, Philip Morris USA, is not a part of the lawsuit.

The free speech lawsuit is a different action than a suit by several of the same companies over the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. The law, which took affect two years ago, cleared the way for the more graphic warning labels, but also allowed the FDA to limit nicotine. The law also banned tobacco companies from sponsoring athletic or social events and prevented them from giving away free samples or branded merchandise.

A federal judge upheld many parts of the law, but the companies are appealing.

Comments

[Almondo]

09:48 AM on 08/21/2011

To all defenders of big, fatal tobacco I say, face the truth of 5.4 million deaths a year.

A person dies every 6.5 seconds from the narcotic in question here.

http://www­­.inforese­a­rchlab.c­om­/smokin­gde­aths.c­html

Greed Over People. Buying votes on the house floor.

This is who they are. This is what they are. Let them whine about being forced to TELL THE TRUTH ABOUT THEIR DEADLY PRODUCT.

[Luvon]

12:40 AM on 08/21/2011

I knew these cigarette companies wouldn't go down without a fight. LOL It's great watching them struggle to stay alive. It's like watching Mike Tyson finally realize he ain't going to beat Lennox Luis.

I was watching Jim Kramer(Mad money) and he summed up the predicament of the cigarette companies profoundly: Game over, no more lives. The trend is curving downward for smoking, and, by dribs and drabs, they are losing customer each year via the intense ad and information campaigns . How long did these folks think they could get away with lacing their product with purposefully addictive chemicals, with the nefarious effect of creating millions of chain smokers?

You lost. Take your defeat with a little dignity

[William Sherman]

01:34 AM on 08/21/2011

Actually, the rates of cigarette smoking have stabilized in recent years, which is the point in them wanting to bring in these nanny stickers.

Now, I understand that there's nothing that fascists like you love more than shoving your values down the throats of others, but have you considered that while putting the nanny stickers on the cigarettes, the main cause of illness and death in this country, poor diet, is being ignored? After all, heart disease is the number one cause of death in the US. I know that you can't stand the idea of people making personal choices regarding their own body, and their own health, the mere thought fills you with rage, but even you should be able to sniff out this hypocrisy.

If you don't support putting pictures of obese children, clogged arteries, and defibrillation machines on fast food bags, hamburger wrappers, and fry cartons, the lives clearly aren't what matters to you, you simply have your sanctimonious little vendetta against tobacco.

[Luvon]

12:00 PM on 08/21/2011

Actually not, the trend of cigarette smoking is falling like a meteor to the Earth.

Nobody is shoving "values" down anyone's throats. This is an ad campaign, and it shows exactly what this product is most likely going to do to you.

The reason why cigarettes are being targeted above all else right now, is their nasty habit for giving a slow and painful death(cancer). Obesity and heart disease are bad. but none of them are painful deaths. People would much rather die by heart attack than by cancer.

It's not hypocrisy anyway because the government and the anti-obese lobby have been running campaigns about the excessive consumption of bad foods as well. Laws are being passed that require restaurants like McDonalds to show how much calories are in their foods.

The fact is, these businesses have been playing dirty from the get-go. Whether it be McDonalds with brain manipulating ads, or the cigarettes companies that target youths. Add to the fact that the cigarette companies purposefully make their products HIGHLY addictive.

If weed and dope and meth are banned, so should cigarettes. It's as simple as that.

[Katherine Hompes]

12:33 AM on 08/21/2011

One thing is true... the warnings don't make any difference. Here (in Australia) we have had the graphic warnings for years- it's become little more than a joke. Customers buying packets in a shop often joke "I'll have heart disease, thanks". Now our government wants to make it law that cigarettes have to be in plain packaging. When are they going to realise that it is whats inside the package that people want?

[Carmen Marino]

10:23 PM on 08/20/2011

If the product is so bad, BAN IT!!! The government won't however as they need the tax money FROM the products to fund healthcare. I don't smoke, it is a filthy and disgusting habit, but who am I to stop someone from using a LEGAL product? If anything we should give smokers medals; they KNOW the product is bad for them, they CONTINUE to use it, AND the tax man is happy. Another government situation where the head doesn't know what the tail is doing.

[ishigirl]

10:13 PM on 08/20/2011

no, no, NO! don't outlaw cigarettes at all! But if the cigarette companies have the balls to sue the federal government (which I thought you couldn't do...) Then the government should IMMEDIATELY pass a $5.00 PER PACK additional tax...$50.00 per carton...Don't outlaw them!! we need the money!!

[astech13]

02:26 AM on 08/21/2011

same goes for guns. 10000$ per gun tax for for the police, hospitals, and anyone else that has to deal with the loss of life. but that would be wrong now would that.

[ishigirl]

12:22 PM on 08/21/2011

Big, Big difference..The gun companies aren't suing the government..also in the constitution I have a right to bear arms for protection...I guess people have a right to smoke themselves to death if they want but then when you have trouble breathing don't call 911..call RJ Reynolds helpline and see if they have a suggestion..

[ArborialBiped]

07:23 PM on 08/20/2011

Waaah. Poor multinational cigarette conglomerates. Something might actually be slowing down very slightly, in one jurisdiction, their profiteering off of addiction, death and disease.

I don't know how I'll sleep tonight.

[GretchenMann]

05:38 PM on 08/20/2011

How can one sue about stating the incontrovertible truth?

[William Sherman]

01:38 AM on 08/21/2011

It's also the incontrovertible truth that heart disease is the number one cause of death in the USA, that doesn't mean I support putting gov't nanny stickers on foods high in refined sugars and carbohydrates.

[GretchenMann]

10:41 AM on 08/21/2011

F Brian Boudi, MD; Chief Editor Medscape Reference: Yasmine Subhi Ali, MD, MSCI, FACC, FACP, all pre-eminent academic cardiologists, and according to most other studies,

“Cessation of cigarette smoking constitutes the single most important preventive measure for CAD (coronary artery disease). As early as the 1950s, studies reported a strong association between cigarette smoke exposure and heart disease. Persons who consume more than 20 cigarettes daily have a 200- to 300 % increase in total heart disease. Continued smoking is a major risk factor for recurrent heart attacks.”

It’s not being a “nanny”. To do otherwise, the government would be shirking a very grave reponsibility to keep our public intelligently imformed and not ignorant pawns of Big Tobacco, especially in view of the fact that tobacco kills about 460,000 Americans each year, and smoking kills about 5.4 million deaths worldwide each and every year!
As for sugar being the cause of diabetes (another important, but not as important as smoking), it is a myth that this leads to diabetes type I and only it’s propensity to lead to obesity leads to diabetes type II (a known risk factor for diabetes).

You’re correct that highly refined sugar (carbohydrates) cause a surge in insulin levels, a hormone that promotes fat deposition and therefore promotes obestity and its associated diabetes type II.

Getting this junk out of our school cafeterias. (Thanks FLOTUS) Why would you protest these brutally honest cigarette labels? Have you been seduced into smoking?

[wardropper]

02:21 PM on 08/20/2011

You would think the Fed Govt. would know by now that the wild corporate beasts they have cultivated for decades actually have teeth...

[babby201]

11:37 AM on 08/20/2011

The Insurance industry , Drug industry , Medical industry , and the Government tax collector ,
all make huge profits from this.
If everyone we're in perfect health, the above mentioned would be out of business.
think about it , there is big money making policy , and forming public opinion .

[pansycritter]

10:01 AM on 08/20/2011

Here is a case where liberals want their cake (taxes) and they want to eat it too. As a runner I don't smoke, I don't find it a good thing to do. I quit in 1973, long before it was the "in" thing to do. I was one of Carter's unemployed and couldn't afford it when they went from 50 cents to 55 cents thanks to new taxes. So be something a liberal never has been. Be brave, cut those taxes you pile on the working poor with your cigarette taxes, and make cigarettes illegal. I'm all for that. Stop being sneaky and bite the big bullet.

[orcinous]

03:29 AM on 08/20/2011

Cigarettes are addictive and poisonous. Time to outlaw cigarettes, that way the asinine cigarette companies can disappear. If what you are selling is a danger to someone, without any added benefits, the product should be outlawed. It is shameful that anyone works for the cigarette companies.You are dealers of death.

[astech13]

02:28 AM on 08/21/2011

same for war?

[orcinous]

03:11 AM on 08/23/2011

Yes, we should become a nation like Costa Rica, no standing army. If we get invaded we can stand up and fight, the common people have enough arms.

[knightie2008]

09:14 PM on 08/19/2011

I say fine if you want to put the graphic labels on cigarettes, why not put them on alcohol too. Show people who have had car accidents due to drunk driving, show families that have lost loved ones. Don't be shy show all the gorey details. And while we are at it, show what happens when you eat too many snacks...put graphic labels on them too. Give the federal government an inch and they want to take a mile. I'm tired of it....

[Boopsie2008]

01:05 AM on 08/20/2011

All of those dangers get plenty of publicity. And food label warnings allow you to see just how much good or bad you'll be doing to your body. In that sense, they're already graphic. Plus you can find plenty of public material on how stuff plugs up your arteries, causes diabetes, eats an acidic hole in your stomach, etc.

The difference is that the tobacco industry rigorously tries to contain the amount of negative press on cigarettes and all the harm they do to the human body. The key to their billions of dollars in sales is in lulling people into an "oh, it won't happen to me from just this amount of exposure" mindset. So we need the warnings.

You know to look for the amount of salt in foods if you have high blood pressure because doctors and health websites will stop at nothing to tell you. You know that certain types of fats will plug up your arteries because you read about it in health columns in magazines. But try and find an article on the dangers of cigarette smoking in any of these healthy living magazines. You see plenty of commercials telling you not to drive after drinking, but none on how smoking can toast your lungs for good. The REAL dangers - chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, lung cancer or the charcoal briquettes that don't pull in oxygen any more and suffocate you to death -- get almost zero media play.

[Dezembrr]

08:56 PM on 08/19/2011

Cigarette products are the only legally sold item that, if used exactly as intended, are designed to kill the user. Tobacco companies include 599 additives in their cigarette tobacco mixes, many of which are known carcinogens. Cigarette smoke includes toxins such as nicotine, tar, and carbon monoxide, as well as formaldehyde, ammonia, hydrogen cyanide, arsenic, and DDT. And how much do people pay for the privilege of killing themselves these days, $5 or more a pack? Crazy!

[William Sherman]

12:37 PM on 08/20/2011

I smoke organic, additive-free cigarettes. But of course, you fascist liberals want to put the labels on those too. No surprise. Forcing your values upon others is inherent in your nature.

[epfm60]

08:38 PM on 08/20/2011

Forcing your values on others is exactly what the right wingers due whenever they get the chance; abortion,gay issues, guns, medical research,trying to limit voting. The only thing they do't want to regulate is business.

[Gus Anderson]

06:36 PM on 08/19/2011

Let's make a trade-off. The gov'ment does away with all requirements for *warning labels* beyond the basic *this product has been found by the Federal Gov'ment to cause health problems and premature death*.
In trade, the government ends the *corporate welfare* of multiple hundreds of thousands of dollars given to the tobacco industry.....free money....your tax dollars at waste.....every year.

[maigesheng]

07:36 PM on 08/19/2011

Brilliant point.

[mellow yellow]

05:39 PM on 08/19/2011

this is just a waste of money, by now everyone knows that smoking is bad for you. I think it's great to educated people about the effects of smoking, but i also support people's right to give themselves lung cancer. The reason people don't stop smoking is because they're addicted, not because they don't think it will hurt them.

[50AndreaTexas]

05:44 PM on 08/20/2011

They know but it is a highly addictive product and once you start its hard to stop. I am the only person left in my family including aunts, uncles, cousins, and my sister. They were all smokers and they all died of lung cancer, stroke, bladder cancer and a heart attack all which were directly related in their cases to smoking. I have no tolerence for tobacco products around me. Sorry, watched my 50 yr old sister smoke herself to death. The Tobacco companies know that cigs kill but the money is too good to stop. Deaths like these costs taxpayers billions each yr in health care costs because of the uninsured. They are nasty and they turn young people into old, stinky, stained, toothless, coughing addicts.