Stanton Glantz is one of the most diabolical anti-vaping activists of all time, and his latest blog entry on the Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education website proves this point in spades. The latest accusation from the University of California cardiology professor is that Big Tobacco companies are so desperate to hook youngsters on cigarette smoking that they are secretly trying to convince the FDA to authorize a Hello Kitty brand of cancer sticks. But don’t worry. It’s all a big, fat lie.
The title of the blog post is what really draws the attention of the fear mongers, Court opens door to FDA authorizing ‘Hello Kitty’ cigarettes. And since the majority of anti-vaping advocates rarely read past the headline, Glantz has created a blog that will gain a great deal of media attention and spread across social media like wildfire. But once you read the article in its entirety, you quickly discover that it’s the old bait-and-switch routine.
Is ‘Hello Kitty Cigarettes’ a real thing?
Once we read past the headline, Glantz seems to have a big problem with the cigarette marketing requirements as set forth by the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of 2009. He seems to have an even bigger issue with a recent federal court ruling stating that slight changes to the packaging of tobacco products does not automatically mean that it is a brand new product. And thanks to the new FDA deeming regulations, a new product would also mean a new, million-dollar Pre-MarketTobacco Application.
When the court decided that this was simply a ridiculous notion, Glantz took to his trusty blog and wrote the “HelloKitty” headline. Of course, no Big Tobacco company has any intention of ever utilizing such an absurd marketing ploy. But according to Gantz, the recent court ruling makes it entirely possible and totally legal.
“So, according to this ruling, the FDA could authorize Marlboro cigarettes in Hello Kitty packages for sale (as substantially equivalent) as long as the cigarettes themselves were unchanged.
The fact that kids and their parents might perceive Hello Kitty cigarettes as tasting milder and being less harmful than Marlboro full flavor in Philip Morris’ iconic red chevron pack is, according to the court, not relevant.”
So, yes. After reading the whole article, the cleverly and intentionally misleading headline seems to make a bit more sense. In a parallel universe, perhaps PhillipMorris might consider replacing the Marlboro Man with a cartoon kitten, but that would only occur if 8-year olds were running the world. This isn’t the Curious Case of Benjamin Button where we all age backwards and turn into an infant just before we die. This is real life. And Stanton Glantz is nothing more than an offensive blowhard trying to scare the hell out of the American people info no good reason.