Smoking bans: good public policy? Or simply a great pharmaceutical marketing plan?
For whatever reason our local lawmakers seem to ignore the conflict of interest, if they know about it at all. I am curious if some of these local lawmakers receive campaign support from any or all of these special interests........Are local media outlets, or attorneys general interested in investigating? We'll see.
Here are some links to financial grants from the Nicoderm people at Robert Wood Johnson Foundation to:
Recipient: American Medical Assoc. $88,000,000.00 http://replay.web.archive.org/20070927173004/http://www.rwjf.org/reports/npreports/smokeless.htm
was http://www.rwjf.org/reports/npreports/smokeless.htm before RWJF removed from their current website
Recipient: American Lung Association, American Cancer Society, American Heart Association $99,000,000.00
More grants to American Lung Association:
The Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids received $84,000,000.00 from Nicoderm interests at RWJF:
(the number of grants from Nicoderm / RWJF to CTFK are too numerous to list here)
Recipient: numerous research universities around the country
RWJF ties to the Johnson & Johnson Company:
ALZA is owned by Johnson & Johnson company
http://www.data-yard.net/infocoalition/alza1.htm (ALZA removed their link, backup is from previous ALZA website)
Why would a pharmaceutical company fund smoking bans? http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2005/07/why-is-pharmaceutical-company-funding.html
...the pharmaceutical industry has mounted a sophisticated grassroots campaign to build support for its position on key issues that affect its bottom line. The industry has funded various groups to champion its positions, sponsored studies tilted to the industry and hired public relations firms to spearhead campaigns to soften up public opinion and government policies....
Update: Here are a number of grants by Nicoderm financed Robert Wood Johnson Foundation used to influence government policymakers and lawmakers.......and as you guessed it, that lobbying is designed to eliminate tobacco nicotine use.......while increasing pharmaceutical nicotine use......a public policy also known as smoking bans.
Update: This posting can also be found at the Heartland Institute.Meanwhile science and air quality testing prove that the secondhand smoke hype has been greatly exaggerated:
Very important foot note, smoking bans have closed thousands of bars and restaurants eliminating hundreds of thousands of jobs, more information at this hyperlink:
Update: J & J spent $1.5 million lobbying Obama White House for healthcare laws that will increase their profits.......just as smoking bans have.
Comedian's take on the issue:
http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.1001020 (Peer reviewed and published excerpts):
report on the scope of relationships between these tax-exempt foundations and for-profit corporations including major food and pharmaceutical companies.
As another instance, which may reflect aligning interests (conflicts of interest), the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) has played a leading role in promoting anti-tobacco products and maintains Smoking Cessation Leadership Centers and programs, although its endowment is mainly invested in Johnson & Johnson, a leading manufacturer of cessation products, and some board members have been represented on both the Foundation and the company's boards.
Evidence suggests 3M has been looking into nicotine delivery methods as a possible new market: