health

Listen to this week's edition of the "Weekly Radio Spin," the Center for Media and Democracy's audio report on the stories behind the news. This week, we look at why we should pity the oil industry, how invasion of privacy is sold as a good thing, and kids fighting back. In "Six Degrees of Spin and Fakin'," we look at Philip Morris's ability to see into the future. The Weekly Radio Spin is freely available for personal and broadcast use. Podcasters can subscribe to the XML feed on www.prwatch.org/audio or via iTunes. If you air the Weekly Radio Spin on your radio station, please email us at editor@prwatch.org to let us know. Thanks!

As CMD has reported previously, the infant formula industry in the U.S. is committed to making sure that women aren't, as they put it, made to feel guilty about not breast feeding. But it seems that formula producers are also looking to make inroads in Europe, where rates of breast feeding are far higher than in the U.S. The Independent "has uncovered strong ties between Nestle, the world's largest baby milk manufacturer, and the Department of Health. Rosie Cooper, a parliamentary private secretary to the Health minister Ben Bradshaw, is undergoing a year-long Industry and Parliament Trust fellowship with Nestle, and in February went for a week to South Africa as a guest of the group to oversee its corporate social responsibility activities." Three other Labor Party members of Parliament accompanied her at Nestle's expense. Critics are alarmed that the corporation has made such inroads into the government. A spokesperson for Baby Milk Action, which together with UNICEF, Save the Children and the National Childhood Trust, has organized a boycott of Nestle, said "Time and again we see Nestle trying to ingratiate itself with health workers and policymakers through gifts, free trips, sponsorship and so-called partnerships. Surely the Government should not look to companies to fund and organise trips such as this."

On June 6, limos will be lined up, the red carpet will be rolled out, and decked out attendees will have their photos snapped by swarming paparazzi. But this isn't your usual Hollywood awards ceremony. Instead, it is the 4th annual Fame & Shame Awards, sponsored by the New Mexico Media Literacy Project and New Mexico Voices for Children in collaboration with the Smoke Free Movies Campaign. The "fame" part of the ceremony will recognize New Mexico teens that are working to encourage their peers to not start smoking, or to quit if they have. They are vying for the Youth Kicking Tobacco's Butt Advocate of the Year Award. The "shame" segment targets the entertainment industry. "The ceremony also hands out 'Shamie Awards' to actors, actresses, directors and producers who glamorize smoking in Hollywood movies. This year's nominees include Nicolas Cage, John Cusack and Jamie Foxx as Actor Who Glamorizes Smoking the Most, Beyonce and Emma Thompson as Actress Who Glamorizes Smoking the Most, and Hairspray, Ocean's Thirteen and Wild Hogs (shot in New Mexico) as Most Popular Teen Movie That Glamorizes Smoking."

Some U.S. Congresspeople want to limit direct to consumer marketing of drugs. Rep. Bart Stupak is head of the U.S. House of Representatives Energy and Commerce investigative panel. At a hearing to discuss specific ads by Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, Merck and Schering-Plough, Stupak said that "It appears that we need to enforce significant restrictions on DTC (direct–to–consumer) ads to protect American consumers from manipulative commercials designed to mislead and deceive for the profit of pharmaceutical companies." Referring to the fact that other than New Zealand, the U.S. is the only country to allow direct to consumer advertising of drugs he added, "Pharmaceutical companies should consider it a privilege to be allowed to air DTC ads in this country. We should make sure that pharmaceuticals companies conduct themselves responsibly." The ranking Republican on the committee, John Shimkus of Illinois, said that since the Food and Drug Administration was just recently given oversight of drug ads, it is too soon for congressional intervention. But as CMD has reported previously, there is significant concern as to whether the FDA and other government agencies are able and willing to stand up to industry and government pressure.

The proposed Food and Drug Administration tobacco bill currently under consideration would ban artificial flavors like cinnamon and cherry from cigarettes, but strangely gives special protection to menthol. Public health advocates wonder why menthol has been exempted from the bill, especially when it masks the harsh taste of cigarettes for beginners. A 2006 study also showed that menthol makes it harder for addicted smokers to quit. Menthol brands are also disproportionately popular among African Americans; seventy percent of blacks smoke menthols, compared to only 30 percent of whites. While African Americans smoke less than whites overall, they suffer higher rates of cancer and other tobacco-induced diseases. Despite all this, legislators believe that menthol cannot be eliminated as a cigarette flavoring under the bill because menthol is crucial to the $70 billion cigarette market. It is of particular importance to Philip Morris, which has been planning for, and driving FDA regulation of cigarettes since 1999. The watered-down terms resulted from legislators' belief that the bill won't pass without PM's buy-in.

The Ohio state legislature has seized $230 million from to the state's Tobacco Prevention Foundation and diverted it other uses. In the late 1990s, Ohio and other states sued the major tobacco companies to recover billions of dollars spent treating sick smokers. Tobacco companies settled the suit by signing the historical 1998 Master Settlement Agreement (MSA), and agreeing to pay billions out to the states. The tobacco companies and the National Association of Attorneys General originally claimed that the purpose of the MSA and its payments was to reduce smoking, but on May 7, Ohio Governor Ted Strickland signed a bill to abolish the state's Tobacco Prevention Foundation and confiscate most of its money. Legislators claimed the money was going to an economic stimulus package, but shutting down the Foundation caused the layoff of 27 advertising employees who handled the Foundation's anti-smoking ad campaigns.

"Prozac Nation: Revisited," a show that aired on U.S. National Public Radio member stations, "featured four prestigious medical experts discussing the controversial link between antidepressants and suicide. ... All four said that worries ... have been overblown." But the show did not disclose that all four "have financial ties to the makers of antidepressants," or that the series that produced the show, "The Infinite Mind," has received "unrestricted grants" from drug companies including Eli Lilly, the maker of Prozac. One guest, Peter Pitts, heads the industry-funded Center for Medicine in the Public Interest and is "senior vice president for global health affairs at the PR firm Manning Selvage & Lee," which counts among its clients Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer and "more than a dozen other pharmaceutical companies." In other drug news, Congressman Bart Stupak held a hearing titled "Direct to Consumer Advertising: Marketing, Education or Deception?" Stupak said "he wants to lay the groundwork for future legislation to tighten controls on drug marketing," reports the Wall Street Journal. The hearing addressed such "recent controversies" as ads for Pfizer's Lipitor, where artificial heart inventor Robert Jarvik "appears to be giving medical advice," and ads for Johnson & Johnson's anemia treatment Procrit that promote off-label uses for the drug.

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission is suing NextClick Media, Inc., an Internet advertising company, over Web sites they operate that offered "free 10-day trials" of an herbal stop-smoking patch called "Nicocure," "Stop Smoking 180" and "Zero Nicotine." The sites claimed the product worked better than nicotine patches and had a "97% success rate." People who signed up for the "free trial" got a 30-day supply instead of a 10-day supply, then were told they had to pay for all 30 days if they chose to keep it. If they returned the product, they were assessed a $7.95 restocking fee. People who agreed to the "free trial" also found themselves enrolled in a "continuity program" that automatically billed their credit or debit card a monthly charge of up to $99.95 until they canceled. Customers found contacting the company to get out of the arrangement nearly impossible. None of the costly terms of the "free trial" were disclosed on the company's Web sites. After the FTC sued the company, NextClick agreed to halt its deceptive practices.

The global increase in grain prices may make the meat supply less safe. The European Union is considering a relaxation of feed bans that prohibit animal by-products being used as feed for other animals in the human food chain. The proposal would "allow pig remains to be used to feed poultry" and would be the EU's first exception made to strict regulations enacted to respond to the BSE, or mad cow disease, crisis of a decade ago. Feeding pigs to pigs, cows and chickens is widespread and legal in the United States, which has had mad cow disease since the 1990s and is covering up its extent. But the European plan is facing opposition from a wide range of parties, including consumer groups, animal rights activists, and Muslim organizations. With nutritionists predicting that "there will be such a backlash from consumers that the idea would have to be dropped," some grocery outlets are already going on record as not being willing to carry the pork-fed poultry. The EU's Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said that it could "only support it if we were fully satisfied that appropriate and effective testing had taken place to control the use of such proteins in poultry feed." Meanwhile, the Korean government's decision to sell US beef in that country has led to massive street protests in the capital. CMD staffers John Stauber and Sheldon Rampton wrote about the issue of feeding animals to other animals in their 1997 book "Mad Cow USA."

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has been criticized for not totally banning "downer" cows -- animals "too sick or hurt to stand for slaughter" -- from the food supply. So "when a coalition of major industry groups reversed their position and joined animal advocates and several lawmakers in calling for an absolute ban," why wouldn't the USDA agree? Agriculture Secretary Ed Schafer hasn't responded to the new stance of the American Meat Institute and other industry groups. So, industry leaders are encouraging meat producers to institute their own voluntary ban. But the Humane Society of the United States says a total ban is needed and "the USDA should take immediate action." The limited regulation of downer cows was instituted after mad cow disease was found in the U.S. and Canada. CMD staffers John Stauber and Sheldon Rampton wrote about the issue in their 1997 book "Mad Cow USA."