We live in a hyper-partisan world, and this should not be a surprise to anyone. It’s the new nature of our society – everything is spun from a partisan lens and elected officials seem to largely make decisions based on what is politically convenient and not what is best for the American public.
When it comes to healthcare and the decisions that are made about choices Americans need to make to protect themselves and live healthier lives, government and elected officials need to follow the science and data to make informed policy.
Regrettably, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is on a recent losing streak which has threatened that credibility. From a walk back of decongestants to over-politicizing Covid vaccinations and mandates, the FDA is following a similar pattern of making politically convenient choices and not what is best for an informed American public.
Americans need to understand that it’s important to have conversations about what can lead healthier lives but not when it is done through a partisan or politically convenient lens. The next salvo in the FDA’s politically convenient decisions: E-cigarette and vaping policy.
Recent flashy headlines against vaping and the FDA’s crackdown on some certain vaping products reflects a desire by the agency, and specifically the Center for Tobacco Products in the agency, to do the bidding of outside groups rather than follow the science when it comes to the substantial benefits and relative risks of e-cigarette use.
It baffles me that the FDA chose this fight with American consumers and retailers – potentially enacting policy which would significantly limit a tool that has tremendous benefits towards smoking cessation and harm-reduction, especially for marginalized, minority communities who use these products at disproportionately higher levels.
Shouldn’t we be following science and understanding what makes people healthier? Isn’t that what FDA claimed they were doing with Covid-19 vaccinations?
It is absolutely true that vaping products should not be marketed or sold to younger users, but it concerns me that the FDA is using a concerted disinformation campaign to mislead American consumers about a safe and proven alternative to smoking. The reality is that disposable e-cigarette vaping products are a critical harm-reduction and smoking-cessation tool for adult tobacco users, who are disproportionately Black and low-income communities.
Continued access to e-cigarettes and vapes, especially for impacted communities, is imperative towards curtailing traditional cigarette use in the U.S. – and the government should be supporting broader access to this important tool. This can have an immediate impact in communities across the country and especially in places like my home state of Pennsylvania.
FDA has abandoned its mission to follow the science, and regardless of the medical consensus on a wide range of health issues, the agency chooses to pursue politically favorable policy goals which they hope gains them favor in the upcoming election. The Biden Administration’s FDA needs to recognize that they have to be serious about advancing positive public health outcomes, especially for vulnerable communities.
That’s what they claimed during Covid-19. Doing something like removing a smoking cessation and harm-reduction tool from American store shelves is not a way to create a healthier public. In fact, it’ll just lead to more tobacco-related death and disease.
I know people who smoke. I know people who have tried to quit smoking – some who have been successful, others who have not. Smoking is the leading cause of preventable death and disease in the U.S., and if we really want to follow the science and help Americans lead healthier, safer lives, the FDA must reverse recent course on its ongoing campaign to significantly curtail e-cigarette use.
The FDA can right the ship, but it needs to follow the science. Let’s hope it does for the sake of the millions of American smokers looking for an alternative.
Ryan Costello is a former Congressman representing Pennsylvania’s Sixth Congressional District.
