Vermont becomes second state to require self-extinguishing smokes

“State to sell self-extinguishing cigarettes”

Associated Press (04/28/06) Lisa Rathke

http://www.wcax.com/Global/story.asp?S=4829929&nav=menu183_2_3_2
 

Schools setting minimum nutrition standards in fight against obesity

“Overweight kids: Schools take action”

The Christian Science Monitor (05/02/06) Amanda Paulson

http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0502/p01s01-ussc.html?s=itm
 

“Company tells court antismoking ads go too far”

The New York Times (04/27/06) Rita K. Farrell

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/27/business/27adco.html?ex=1303790400&en=1ccc26eb3717b071&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

Last week, the Delaware Supreme Court heard arguments from the Lorillard Tobacco Company regarding the lawfulness of television ads created by the American Legacy Foundation, an antismoking group. At issue was a provision of the 1998 Master Settlement Agreement (MSA) that prohibits the vilification of and personal attacks against the tobacco industry. Those terms were never defined in the MSA. In an earlier hearing in August, Vice Chancellor Stephen P. Lamb of the Delaware Chancery Court ruled that the ads, which feature young people and portray the realities of cigarette smoking, were neither “cruel slander” nor “vitriolic attacks” that rose to the level of vilification. They were also not personal attacks, according to Lamb, because they did not identify “a particular person or company.” Lorillard appealed Lamb’s ruling, arguing that it introduced uncertainty into Delaware’s contract law because of its “unprecedented and unworkable method” of defining terms. But, during last week’s hearing, Justice Carolyn Berger said Lorillard itself created the problem by not defining the terms in the MSA. Attorney David Ogden defended the foundation’s ads, explaining that they were both truthful and effective. According to the foundation, during the time the ads were on television, the teen smoking rate dropped from 20 to 16 percent. Justice Henry DuPont Ridgely said, “Just because [the] methodology works, doesn’t ipso facto mean it’s O.K.” The full five judge panel has not yet issued a ruling on the case.
 

"Supreme Judicial Court says tobacco firms can't blame smokers as defense"
The Boston Globe (05/19/06) Jonathan Saltzman
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2006/05/19/sjc_says_tobacco_firms
_cant_blame_smokers_as_defense/
In a unanimous ruling last week, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) struck down a traditional tobacco industry defense in the case of a widow whose husband died of lung cancer. The man, Stephen C. Haglund, smoked nearly four packs of cigarettes a day for three decades before dying at the age of 51, in 2000. Haglund's lawyer, Stephen R. Fine, turned the industry's "personal choice" defense on its head by conceding that Haglund knew cigarettes were dangerous and that he unreasonably took up the habit. According to Fine, cigarette makers have been highly successful in arguing that smokers should know the health risks of cigarettes, and thus are responsible for harming themselves. But Fine went on to argue that Haglund's choice was irrelevant because cigarettes cannot be used safely at all. The case was first dismissed in Worcester Superior Court, but that ruling was reversed by the SJC, which ruled that, "Because no cigarette can be safely used for its ordinary purpose, smoking, there can be no non-unreasonable use of cigarettes." Attorneys for Philip Morris said the ruling does allow the "unreasonable use" defense if a smoker has a health condition like emphysema, making the decision to smoke "overwhelmingly unreasonable." Although the ruling only affects suits in Massachusetts, antismoking activists say the landmark decision could bolster litigation in other states.
 

"In: fruit crisps and milk. Out: Twix and Coke"
Christian Science Monitor (05/11/06) Amanda Paulson
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0511/p02s01-ussc.html
Growing concern over childhood obesity has resulted in legislation, litigation, and in some cases, voluntary action from the food industry. But opinions differ on how much effect such measures will have on the problem. Among the most recent actions by industry are soft drink companies' decision to pull high-calorie drinks out of schools, Disney's decision not to renew its contract to provide toys for McDonald's Happy Meals, and several companies' emphasis on "low in sugar" and "high in nutrients" advertising. "The food industry is very worried these days about being blamed for the rising obesity rates, and they should be," said Margo Wootan, director of nutrition at the Center for Science in the Public Interest. Many companies are struggling to adapt their products, and thus demonstrate that further regulation is unnecessary, while still keeping kids interested. "Kids don't care that it's only 40 calories. They want to know it tastes good, it's fun, it's cool," said Kraft's health and wellness director, Laurie Hirsch, commenting on sugar-free Kool-Aid. Last year, Kraft moved to limit its advertising of children's foods to "sensible solutions" products, which fit certain nutrition guidelines. Now, other companies are following suit. Even so, critics describe the companies' efforts as just more junk food marketing to kids, under the cloak of self-regulation. The Federal Trade Commission has urged companies to revise marketing strategies aimed at children, citing the increase in obesity among adolescents, and the Institute of Medicine has asked Congress to mandate changes if the food industry does not do enough on its own in the next two years.
 

National Obesity Forum:  The National Obesity Action Forum, sponsored by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, will be held June 5-6, 2006 in Bethesda, Maryland. For more information, visit http://www.outreach.psu.edu/C&I/Obesity/default-home.htm.
 

6th Annual Summer Evaluation Institute at CDC, June 12-14, 2006 at the Marriott Marquis in downtown Atlanta, GA.   The Institute welcomes staff at all levels--Federal, state, local, and community--who do or use program evaluation.  This year's Institute is being co-sponsored with the American Evaluation Association (AEA) and we anticipate a larger and more diverse crowd of participants and offerings than ever.   As in the past, the Institute's three days of training will include both longer skill-building sessions and small, interactive sessions with national faculty.  our Institute web site   www.evaluationinstitute.org  with information on agenda, course selection, and lodging information.
 

CDC's 2006 National Health Promotion Conference
Join local, state and national public health leaders, businesses, communities, researchers,
policymakers, communicators, and other professionals to discuss new directions in health promotion.
Together, we will lay the foundation for a national public health agenda that is focused on the
broadest concepts of health promotion and wellness delivery.  The conference tracks include Nontraditional Partnerships; Innovative Approaches to Public Health Practice; Translating Science and Evaluating Results; Health Policy and Communications; Implementing Best Practices at the Local Level; and Emerging Issues and Hot Topics in Public Health. Hilton Atlanta, Atlanta, Georgia, September 12-14, 2006
Visit www.cdc.gov/cochp for updates and more information.
 

80th Annual American School Health Association (ASHA) Conference
The 2006 conference theme is Healthy Bodies, Healthy Minds: The Mental Health Connection will be held, October 11 - 14, 2006 in St. Louis, Missouri. Many Programs will address identifying the causes of mental health problems among children and youth, emerging prevention or intervention strategies, the interactions between mental health and other educational and health outcomes, and/or practical approaches to school-based prevention or intervention. For registration or exhibit information, contact: Mary Bamer Ramsier at - mbramsier@ashaweb.org
 

Quality Health Care for Culturally Diverse Populations
October 17-20, 2006, Renaissance Hotel, 515 Madison Street, Seattle, WA.  For more information: www.diversityRx.org/ccconf ,  e-mail: ccconf@drexeledu or call 215-762-7638.  Please note that February 28, 2006 is deadline for submitting presentation proposal.