THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT has thrown down the gauntlet to tobacco companies over a recently issued order requiring the incorporation of graphic health warnings on cigarette packs.
![Health Secretary Esperanza I. Cabral displays samples of graphic health warnings tobacco products are now required to carry on their packaging. -- <i>Photo by Jonathan L. Cellona</i>” hspace=”3″ vspace=”3″ /><br />Health Secretary Esperanza I. Cabral displays samples of graphic health warnings tobacco products are now required to carry on their packaging. — <em>Photo by Jonathan L. Cellona</em></div>
<p>In a press conference in Taguig City, Health Secretary Esperanza I. Cabral yesterday said the labeling directive, contained in Administrative Order (AO) 2010-0013 issued last May 12, is scheduled to take effect June 9 after publication in newspapers today.</p>
<p>“Tobacco product packages that do not comply with this order shall be prohibited after 90 days from the effectivity of this order,” AO 2010-0013 read. “Non-compliant products must be withdrawn no later than such date.”</p>
<p>“Absolutely no extensions of time to comply with the provisions of this order shall be granted to tobacco manufacturers or any other affected party,” the order read further.</p>
<p>The Philippine Tobacco Institute, in apparent anticipation of the announcement yesterday, said in a statement over the weekend that such an order violates Republic Act (RA) 9211, or the Tobacco Regulation Act of 2003, which set specifications for, among others, printed warnings on cigarette packs. The group cited Section 13 of that law, which said “No other printed warning, except the health warning and the message required in this section…shall be placed on cigarette packages.”</p>
<p>But Ms. Cabral said in a phone interview that AO 13 is pursuant to the Philippines’ ratification in 2005 of the World Health Organization-initiated Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC). Thus, she said, FCTC “superceded” RA 9211.</p>
<p>“Our legal department and lawyer groups advised us that we have the mandate to issue this administrative order without violating any law. We expected these objections, but we stand by our mandate,” Ms. Cabral said.</p>
<p>She added that she had consulted with the other members of the Inter-Agency Committee-Tobacco (IAC-Tobacco), which RA 9211 formed to implement the law and of which the Health department is vice-chairman. “I had a meeting with DA (Department of Agriculture) Secretary [Bernie G. Fondevilla] and DTI (Department of Trade and Industry) Secretary [Jesli A.] Lapus and they were very supportive of the administrative order; in particular, because it is based on an international treaty, thus, a law of the land. So we have to comply.” Ms. Cabral said.</p>
<p>Neither Mr. Lapus nor Mr. Fondevilla were immediately available for comment.</p>
<p>The other members of the IAC-Tobacco are the departments of Justice, of Education, of Science and Technology, and of Environment and Natural Resources, the National Tobacco Administration, as well as a representative each of the tobacco industry and of a nongovernment organization involved in public health promotion nominated by the Health department.</p>
<p>In the briefing, Ms. Cabral said the department has drawn up eight picture warning variations for use by tobacco firms.</p>
<p>The pictures, to be alternately used within a 24-month period, will be displayed prominently on each packet or package, occupying at least 30% of the front panel and 60% of the back panel “in a manner that ensures maximum visibility.”</p>
<p>Ms. Cabral showed to media sample images that include a child suffering from asthma, patients suffering from several forms of cancer, an infected foot and a person suffering from heart attack.</p>
<p>Aside from the graphic label, the order also prohibits the use of “misleading descriptors” such as “low tar,” “ultra-light,” “mild,” “extra,” “ultra.”</p>
<p>Also banned are product claims such as “reduced levels” of content, substance and emission, as well a figures for emission yields for tar, nicotine and carbon monoxide.</p>
<p>The order also requires tobacco manufacturers, importers and/or exporters to bear the labeling cost.</p>
<p>As a way to kick the habit, Mr. Cabral said: “We’d love for these companies to pass on the costs of labeling to consumers. It would serve as an additional deterrent to stop them from buying these goods.”</p>
<p>She noted that taxes collected by the government from tobacco products reach P30 billion a year, but this pales in comparison to annual health expenses for smoking-related diseases and ailments worth at least P200 billion.</p>
<p>Executives of tobacco firms could not be reached for comment yesterday. — <strong>MGMG</strong> </p>
<hr />
</div><!-- .entry-content .clear -->
</div>
</article><!-- #post-## -->
<nav class=](http://www.bworldonline.com/webpics/articles/image/201005249c591.jpg)
Health dep’t issues ultimatum to tobacco firm, 24/05/10