FDA estimates menthol ban would prevent up to 654,000 smoking-related deaths over 40 years, including 238,000 among African Americans
Menthol products make up over one-third of US tobacco sales
The Biden administration's decision to delay the review of a proposed menthol cigarette ban has left the fate of this life-saving measure uncertain. The ban, which is expected to prevent hundreds of thousands of deaths over several decades, has been in discussion for years and was originally anticipated last summer. However, political considerations have prompted the delay.
Menthol products make up over one-third of U.S. tobacco sales and have historically been heavily marketed to the Black community and young people. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has estimated that a menthol ban would prevent up to 654,000 smoking-related deaths over the next 40 years, including as many as 238,000 deaths among African Americans.
The delay in implementing the ban has been met with frustration from public health experts and anti-tobacco groups. Nancy Brown, CEO of the American Heart Association, stated that
“Devastating” - David Margolius, director of public health for Cleveland
“35 percent of adults in metro Cleveland smoke cigarettes, more than three times the national average”
Accuracy
Biden administration is delaying a ban on menthol cigarettes
Menthol cigarettes are particularly addictive
Studies estimate a menthol ban would prevent up to 654,000 smoking-related deaths over the next 40 years
FDA has said the ban would be enforced against businesses and not individual consumers
Deception
(30%)
The article contains selective reporting and emotional manipulation. The author quotes Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra stating that there are still more conversations to be had regarding the menthol cigarette ban, implying political pressure as the reason for the delay. However, no evidence is provided to support this claim. The author also quotes public health experts expressing frustration with the delay and their belief that lives are being lost due to it. This emotional manipulation is used to sway readers' opinions against the Biden administration's decision. Additionally, selective reporting occurs when the article only reports details that support the author's position, such as quoting public health experts who are frustrated with the delay but not providing any counterarguments or quotes from those in favor of it.
Public health experts and civil rights groups have repeatedly urged President Biden to finalize the ban, which was originally anticipated last summer but has been opposed by the tobacco industry. Political advisers have warned that Biden could lose support by banning products popular in the Black community, jeopardizing votes in what is expected to be a close election in November.
It's clear that there are still more conversations to have, and that will take significantly more time.
The Biden administration is again delaying a ban on menthol cigarettes amid political pressure and complaints from some advocates who say it unfairly targets Black smokers who favor the products.
Fallacies
(85%)
The author makes an appeal to political concerns and potential backlash from the Black community as reasons for the delay in implementing a menthol cigarette ban. This is an example of an appeal to emotion fallacy, as it attempts to elicit an emotional response rather than presenting logical arguments.
The Biden administration is again delaying a ban on menthol cigarettes amid political pressure and complaints from some advocates who say it unfairly targets Black smokers who favor the products.
Political advisers have warned that Biden could lose support by banning products popular in the Black community, jeopardizing votes in what is expected to be a close election in November.
Bias
(80%)
The author mentions political pressure and complaints from some advocates who say the ban unfairly targets Black smokers, implying that there may be a political bias in delaying the ban. The article also states that Biden could lose support by banning popular products in the Black community, suggesting a monetary bias.
Political advisers have warned that Biden could lose support by banning products popular in the Black community, jeopardizing votes in what is expected to be a close election in November.
The Biden administration is again delaying a ban on menthol cigarettes amid political pressure and complaints from some advocates who say it unfairly targets Black smokers who favor the products.
The Biden administration's delay in finalizing a ban on menthol cigarettes is the result of decades of resistance, delays, and industry lobbying.
In 2019, 18.5 million people smoked menthol cigarettes in the United States, and in 2020, 81% of Black smokers used menthols compared to 34% of white smokers.
Only around half of the Congressional Black Caucus signed on to a 2022 letter supporting the ban organized by Rep. Robin Kelly.
Accuracy
About 80 percent of Black smokers chose menthol brands in 2020.
Menthol cigarettes are particularly addictive.
Deception
(30%)
The article contains selective reporting and emotional manipulation. The author quotes former officials and public health advocates expressing concerns about the delay in finalizing a ban on menthol cigarettes, but does not provide any counterarguments or perspectives from those who support the delay. This creates an emotionally charged narrative that implies a moral obligation to ban menthol cigarettes as soon as possible. Additionally, the author uses statistics about Black smokers and their preference for menthol cigarettes to manipulate emotions and create a sense of urgency around the issue.
But that risks exposing the rule to a repeal from congressional Republicans should they win control of Washington.
The delay has frustrated advocates who fear the political ramifications could worsen as time goes on.
Polling from CTFK shows Biden maintaining a 2-point lead with voters regardless of whether he finalizes the menthol ban. But polling commissioned by Altria shows a majority of Biden’s core demographic opposed to the menthol and flavored cigar bans.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several examples of appeals to authority and mentions potential political fallout, which can be considered as informal fallacies. The author also presents opposing viewpoints without clearly stating her own opinion, which could be seen as a form of the dichotomous depiction fallacy. However, the article does not contain any clear examples of formal logical fallacies.
The potential political fallout is fueling speculation that the proposal will be delayed again, at least until after the presidential election in November.
Bias
(80%)
The article demonstrates a clear bias towards the political ramifications of banning menthol cigarettes and the potential impact on President Joe Biden's reelection campaign. The author quotes several sources expressing their concerns about the political fallout and speculation that the proposal will be delayed until after the presidential election. This bias is evident in statements such as 'The delay has frustrated advocates who fear the political ramifications could worsen as time goes on.' and 'But that risks exposing the rule to a repeal from congressional Republicans should they win control of Washington.' The author also quotes David Sweanor, an adjunct professor at the University of Ottawa and a longtime anti-smoking advocate, who questions the political significance of banning menthol cigarettes for Biden's voter base. This bias is further demonstrated in statements such as 'How many swing voters or potential nonvoters are going to be influenced by anything that we do?' and 'And do we risk losing Georgia?'
And do we risk losing Georgia?
But that risks exposing the rule to a repeal from congressional Republicans should they win control of Washington.
How many swing voters or potential nonvoters are going to be influenced by anything that we do?
The delay has frustrated advocates who fear the political ramifications could worsen as time goes on.
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (0%)
Jessica Wehrman, the author of this article, has numerous conflicts of interest related to the topics provided. She quotes several individuals and organizations with known ties to the tobacco industry and its lobbying efforts. These include David Sweanor from the University of Ottawa who is a vocal advocate for tobacco control but also receives funding from Philip Morris International; Rev. Al Sharpton's National Action Network and the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives, which have received funding from Altria; and Scott Gottlieb, a former FDA commissioner who now serves on the board of directors for Pfizer. Wehrman also quotes Margaret Hamburg, who served as FDA commissioner under the Obama administration and is currently a senior advisor to the Biden administration. The article discusses delays in implementing menthol cigarette bans during both the Obama and Biden administrations, raising questions about potential influence from industry lobbying.
'Decades of dallying led to current delay on menthol ban', 'There’s been nobody in the White House — under Biden or under Obama, and certainly not Trump — who was interested in helping FDA get that clearance through', 'So it’s so interesting, many years later, to come to Congress and find out that the Black community was targeted'
'How many swing voters or potential nonvoters are going to be influenced by anything that we do?'
'Reynolds has been clear on our position regarding banning menthol cigarettes — we strongly believe there are more effective ways to transition adult smokers away from cigarettes permanently'
