Burns D, Benowitz N, N'Connolly G N, Cummings K M, Davis R M, Henningfield J E, Shopland D R, Warner K E
Tob Control. 1997 Spring;6(1):1-4.
Litigation and regulatory assaults on the tobacco companies may create a willingness among tobacco manufacturers to bargain resources and acceptance of public policy changes for limitations of liability, as has been seen by the recent settlement with the Liggett Group. Two elements absolutely critical to any plan are the elimination of tobacco advertising and promotion and the removal of addiction as a reason for tobacco use. Minimal components of any settlement should include: (a) acceptance by the tobacco manufacturers of the causal relationship between tobacco use and disease, and the addictive nature of nicotine; (b) a total ban on tobacco advertising and promotion; (c) FDA jurisdiction over tobacco products and their nicotine content, with the intent of removing nicotine as soon as acceptable nicotine substitution products are available; (d) reimbursement to the states for Medicaid and other state expenditures attributable to smoking, to the maximum extent feasible; (e) funding for local, state, and federal programmes and research in tobacco control; (f) acceptance of legislation and regulations protecting the right of non-smokers to breathe air free of tobacco smoke; (g) funding for a large, national, media-led, anti-tobacco campaign; and (h) cessation assistance for addicted smokers. If negotiations toward a settlement proceed, it is essential that the public health community participate in defining the elements of any agreement to ensure that whatever agreement develops is focused on reducing tobacco-related disease rather than continuing the profitability of American tobacco companies. That participation requires articulation of the core elements essential to an acceptable agreement. If resolution of the public health issues surrounding continued sale of tobacco products can be reached in the United States, it may provide a model for similar resolution in other countries.
针对烟草公司的诉讼和监管冲击可能会使烟草制造商愿意协商资源，并接受为限制责任而进行的公共政策变革，就像最近与利格特集团达成的和解协议那样。任何计划绝对关键的两个要素是消除烟草广告和促销，以及消除将成瘾作为吸烟理由的观念。任何和解协议的最低限度内容应包括：(a) 烟草制造商承认吸烟与疾病之间的因果关系以及尼古丁的成瘾性；(b) 全面禁止烟草广告和促销；(c) 美国食品药品监督管理局（FDA）对烟草产品及其尼古丁含量拥有管辖权，目的是在有可接受的尼古丁替代产品时尽快去除尼古丁；(d) 在最大可行范围内向各州偿还与吸烟相关的医疗补助及其他州支出；(e) 为地方、州和联邦的烟草控制项目及研究提供资金；(f) 接受保护不吸烟者呼吸无烟空气权利的法律法规；(g) 为大规模的、由媒体主导的全国性反烟草运动提供资金；(h) 为成瘾吸烟者提供戒烟援助。如果朝着和解协议进行谈判，公共卫生界必须参与确定任何协议的内容，以确保达成的任何协议都专注于减少与烟草相关的疾病，而不是维持美国烟草公司的盈利能力。这种参与需要明确可接受协议的核心要素。如果在美国能够就围绕烟草产品持续销售的公共卫生问题达成解决方案，它可能会为其他国家类似问题的解决提供一个范例。
