As antismoking

As antismoking overnight delivery advocate Godshall (1999) has asserted, ��[W]ith unprecedented future legal protection granted by the state [attorneys general] in exchange for money, it appears that the tobacco industry has emerged from the state lawsuits even more powerful.�� The Food and Drug Administration With regulation of the industry (the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act), a new experiment in tobacco control may begin (Kennedy, Cornyn, Waxman, & Davis, 2007). Theoretically, such regulation would eliminate nicotine and toxic agents from cigarettes. However, it is unlikely that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will be allowed to eliminate the industry. Thus, the outcome of regulation, based on the BEM, will involve new contingencies that may limit the industry’s life or prolong it.

Complex contingencies produce dependence Since the World Health Organization tobacco treaty (Framework Convention Alliance, 2008), the processes now unfolding are a function of changes in the antitobacco subculture in the United States, western Europe, and other nations. This suggests future curtailments as nations develop antitobacco cultures, but the timing and degree remain uncertain. One reason for this is that the industry actively pursues systems that guarantee long-term existence. Its ability to lobby legislators is partially based on incredible wealth acquired by selling an addictive product. The industry has also systematically supported all levels of society, from funding local fire departments to funding science in our most prestigious universities (Chapman & Shatenstein, 2001).

Its business success attracts investors, including pension funds. Thus, efforts to curtail the industry may hurt the retirement and health services of thousands of workers in the United States alone. Theoretically, such contingencies cause legislators to pause in their efforts to curtail a deadly industry. Research to confirm this is warranted. The tobacco industry funds academic research in the context of academic freedom norms, offering the public possible ��cures�� for cancer, heart disease, and so forth. By targeting treatment first and smoking cessation second, the industry ensures minimal effect on its business. These industry contingencies support research and clinical care by the very professionals who should be leading efforts against a harmful industry.

Potentially biased behavior of academics is supported by cultural contingencies of academic freedom. Recognizing these interacting contingencies is a step toward altering them. More research should focus on the direct and indirect effects of industry support for civil governments as well as academic investigators. The right to smoke guarantees new addicts Concepts Entinostat of self-control and personal decision making prevail in most cultures.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>