At the heart of the tobacco companies’ strategy: menthol
May 20, 2020
Par: communication@cnct.fr
Dernière mise à jour: August 6, 2024
Temps de lecture: 44 minutes
The main thing to remember:
Menthol is not just an aroma, but a powerful addictive substance, facilitating the initiation of smoking, reducing the chances of quitting, and giving the consumer the illusion of a certain harmlessness.
The tobacco industry has knowingly concealed the addictive and harmful properties of menthol, promoting menthol products as less dangerous to health and less
The tobacco industry uses menthol as a loss leader for younger generations. In the United States, 81% of young people who have used tobacco products say they started with flavored products.
Through advertising campaigns and cultural sponsorship, the tobacco industry still massively targets women, African-Americans, the LGBT community, and minorities in general. Thus, in the United States, nearly 90% of African-American smokers consume menthol tobacco products, compared to less than 30% of white smokers. This segmentation contributes to widening health inequalities between groups
Tobacco companies are making a considerable effort to delay or prevent any regulation of menthol. The lobbying campaign led by the tobacco industry during the European directive on tobacco products is one of the most massive in the history of European law. In particular, it allowed tobacco companies to delay the ban on the sale of menthol cigarettes and rolling tobacco for four years.
To prevent a transfer of consumption towards cigars, cigarillos, heating tobacco or electronic cigarettes, it is essential that this regulation which prohibits menthol in cigarettes and rolling tobacco be extended to all these products which particularly attract young people. generations.
Menthol: what is it?
Menthol (C10H20O), or cyclohexanol-5-methyl-2-methylethyl, is the main constituent of mint essential oil. It is a natural moterpene from the secondary alcohol family, naturally present in menthol plants.[1], (Mentha piperita, Mentha avensis), produced today by hundreds of tonnes throughout the world. Menthol is the most common isomer in nature which, because it is a stimulant of cold receptors, produces the characteristic sensation of coolness when applied topically to the mucous membranes or skin. Among its many uses, menthol is a mild topical analgesic, helping to relieve localized pain, often in the pharynx or mucous membranes in general. When used in high doses, menthol can on the contrary cause a feeling of irritation and heat[2]. For these mentioned properties, menthol is a product that is widely found in medicine and in pharmaceutical ingredients, such as throat lozenges or cough syrups.Menthol in tobacco
Menthol has been used by the tobacco industry since the 1920s. Although the concentration of menthol varies from one cigarette to another, 90% tobacco products on sale around the world contain it, whether they are presented to the consumer as mentholated or not. Thus, even in so-called non-mentholated tobacco products, the dose of menthol, although imperceptible to the taste, varies between 0.01 and 0.03% of the tobacco weight. On the other hand, in products sold as mentholated, menthol represents between 0.1% and 1% of the weight of the tobacco. Menthol can be added to products in different ways: either directly in the tobacco, or on the leaf inside the tobacco packet, in the filter, or in the form of a capsule inserted in the filter, which the consumer can clip, in order to diffuse the aroma[3].Multiple physiological effects
In addition to its refreshing and minty effect, in terms of aroma, menthol is used by the tobacco industry for the many physiological effects it causes when inhaled. As we have said, the consumption of menthol first leads to a refreshing and anesthetic sensation, allowing to mask and reduce the irritating effects of tobacco smoke.[4]. In other words, menthol is a way for the tobacco industry to make the initiation of smoking easier, in that it softens the sometimes harsh taste of tobacco, reducing the aversive aspect of the first smoking experiences.[5]. Menthol also causes an increase in the transoral absorption capacities of nicotine. In particular, menthol, by stimulating the production of saliva, promotes the dissolution and absorption of the drug in the mouth. Menthol has a major impact on breathing. Widely used as a nasal decongestant, menthol modifies the perception of respiratory capacities, by the impression of release that it causes. Menthol also promotes nicotine absorption by the bronchodilator effects that it induces. Inhaling menthol thus allows deeper and more prolonged aspirations of tobacco smoke, leading to an increase in the absorption of the components of the smoke at the level of the pulmonary alveoli towards the blood.Menthol, a tool for smoking addiction
In a long report comparing the health consequences of menthol and non-menthol cigarettes, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) concludes that menthol consumption is correlated with increased smoking prevalence among younger generations and young adults, and is associated with greater dependence, reducing the chances of quitting smoking[6]. Indeed, at different stages of its consumption, menthol modifies the smoker's behavior. First, by sweetening tobacco smoke, menthol facilitates initiation. Menthol is then a " sensory component of reinforcement of smoking behavior ", making it easier to continue smoking. By slowing down the metabolism of nicotine and acting on nicotine receptors, menthol helps to reinforce the smoker's addiction. Slowing down the metabolism of nicotine means that nicotine levels in the body remain high for longer, giving nicotine more time to interact with nicotine receptors throughout the body.[7]. In other words, menthol cigarettes make it easier to start smoking and make it harder to quit.[8]. In this respect, the time between a smoker's waking up and their first cigarette is a good indicator for estimating their degree of addiction to smoking. Thus, in 2004, a study conducted on nearly 1,700 people showed that 24.3% of menthol cigarette smokers smoked their first cigarette in the first five minutes of their day, compared to 19.9% of non-menthol cigarette smokers.[9]. Similarly, a study reported in 2008 that, on a panel of 1688 smokers, 55.3% of menthol smokers indicated that they got up at night to smoke, compared to 44.9% of non-menthol cigarette smokers.[10].In-depth knowledge of the sensory effects of menthol by the tobacco industry
The properties of menthol have long been known to the tobacco industry. As a study points out, the internal documents of tobacco companies demonstrate that the scientific research undertaken by them has enabled them to develop extremely precise knowledge of the effects of menthol on the smoker's behavior and degree of addiction.[11]. While the tobacco industry publicly claimed that menthol was only used as a flavor additive, and that it had no impact on the consumer, an internal RJ Reynolds document dating from 1976 indicates that the society has known, for more than thirty years, that menthol, even when inhaled at levels imperceptible to the smoker, helps reduce the acridness and irritation caused by tobacco smoke. Another internal document from RJ Reynolds summarizes this idea:“ The first reaction of smokers is generally negative. Early negative effects can be mitigated with a low level of menthol ".Furthermore, internal studies carried out by the tobacco industry show that the latter is very interested in the sensory and physiological effects of menthol, making the smoking experience more pleasant for certain smokers. The tobacco industry quickly discovered that menthol interacted synergistically with nicotine, and notably made it possible to compensate tobacco products with “low nicotine and tar contents”, increasingly offered by the tobacco industry. as solutions to address consumer concerns about the harmfulness of smoking to health[12].
Menthol and health: a century-old imagination
The invention of the menthol cigarette is classically attributed to Lloyd “Spud” Hughes, in the 1920s, who secretly mixed menthol crystals with his tobacco to relieve his asthma. The first menthol cigarettes were promoted in the 1930s as remedies or safer and less irritating alternatives to traditional cigarettes. Since menthol also refers to the pharmaceutical and medication imagination, the tobacco industry's initial strategy was to associate menthol products with the idea of healthier and less dangerous smoking. At this time, brands like Kool presented the menthol cigarette as an occasional consumer product, intended to relieve sore throats caused by the smoke of classic cigarettes.[13]. While it has long been established that menthol tobacco products not only have no health benefits, but are in many ways more dangerous than traditional cigarettes, menthol still benefits today from an altered perception of the real risks incurred by the consumer.[14]In its 2013 report on menthol cigarettes, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) made the same point: “ The cooling and numbing properties of menthol […] and evidence that menthol cigarettes are marketed as a milder alternative to non-menthol cigarettes makes menthol cigarettes likely a greater public health risk than non-menthol cigarettes ". The appearance of new brands on the American market such as Salem (1956) or Newport (1957) marks a new breath of fresh air in the marketing strategies developed by the tobacco industry with regard to menthol products. While keeping the health messages mentioned above in the background, cigarette manufacturers now place more emphasis on the refreshing flavors of menthol, which ceases to be an occasional product to become an object of daily consumption.Women, the primary marketing target for menthol tobacco products
Women were the first marketing target considered by the tobacco industry for the consumption of menthol products. Thus, from the 1950s, menthol tobacco products were mainly consumed by women, while smoking was at that time an essentially male practice. In a large number of countries, tobacco companies identified women as a potential growth vector. In particular, in many countries where there was a low smoking prevalence among women (due to the poor social image of female smoking), the tobacco industry massively promoted menthol products. The latter were perceived by cigarette companies as a key initiation element for millions of women around the world.[15]The Japanese example is a particularly edifying illustration for understanding this phenomenon.[16]. From 1986, Japan ended the state monopoly on tobacco by the Japan Tobacco Industry to open the market to foreign competition. Tobacco companies, particularly American ones, deployed a colossal advertising effort to establish themselves in this new market. Thus, of the sixty billion yen spent on tobacco advertising in Japan in 1993, half was due to non-Japanese companies. Very quickly, the tobacco industry saw menthol as an effective marketing tool to address the female market, which had been limited until then. Cigarette manufacturers thus developed ranges of menthol cigarettes specially dedicated to women, giving them attributes designated as feminine: thinner, less irritating cigarettes, containing lower tar levels and therefore presented as safer for health, and as real fashion accessories.[17]. These are then products designed solely to facilitate the initiation of smoking by young girls: studies conducted on this subject show that as they consume more, women will gradually turn to products with higher nicotine and tar content, at levels similar to those of men. Once again, the internal documents of the tobacco industry constitute a valuable resource for understanding and objectifying the industry's strategies:“Women who smoke menthol are generally more satisfied with menthol cigarettes than men, because current menthol cigarettes meet a wider range of needs for them (particularly psychological needs, such as fashion, or self-expression). femininity) "In Japan, the growth of menthol has thus systematically exceeded the total growth of the local tobacco market. The menthol strategy by foreign companies has also been crowned with success: as early as 1992, 58% of the menthol tobacco product market was held by foreign companies. Over the years, this market has taken on an increasingly considerable place: while menthol products only made up 5% of the total Japanese market in 1995, they represented more than 20% in 2008. This craze for menthol cigarettes is particularly observed among young Japanese women: in 1996, 22.7% of teenage female smokers consumed menthol products, compared to 8.2% of young teenage boys. Only four years later, the proportion reached 48.1% for the former and only 11.7 for the latter. Menthol is partly responsible for the increase in smoking prevalence observed among the Japanese female population at the end of the 20th century.th century. Between 1995 and 2000, the proportion of Japanese women smokers, aged 20 to 29, almost doubled, going from 10% to 19% in the space of just five years. The Japanese example is a warning for public health policies to anticipate and prevent the predatory strategies of the tobacco industry in emerging markets, or in countries characterized by a low smoking prevalence among women.The Afro-Americanization of menthol: a marketing success, a health disaster
From the 1960s, at the height of the fights for civil rights in the United States, Martin Luther King and the " black pride », the Kool brand decided to be the first to engage in an ethnic marketing strategy. The tobacco company acted as a real catalyst, a social and ethnic marker for an entire category of population. So much so that this marker has become one of the elements of the African-American imagination of this decade. The strategy was a total commercial success: at the beginning of the 1970s, 56% young adult black smokers smoked the Kool brand, considered then as the “ Black Marlboro[18] ".A product associated with the African-American cultural imagination
To address this new growing market, the tobacco industry has been able to position its products from the angle of novelty, hype, youth and health.[19]. Brands like Kool have been able to establish themselves among this minority thanks to effective and skillfully orchestrated marketing strategies. Tobacco companies have thus sought to attract the sympathy of the Black community by sponsoring a number of cultural events, by investing funds in media dedicated to the Black minority or even in working-class and African-American neighborhoods.Music has been a particularly popular tool for the tobacco industry to address African-American youth. The company Brown & Williamson distinguished itself in this respect by offering the first Kool Jazz Festival in 1975[20], the Kool City Jam in the 80s, or by launching the Kool Mixx campaign in the early 2000s, notably offering packages featuring DJs, rappers, and even dancers[21]. The tobacco industry has continued to increase its advertising efforts in favor of menthol, increasing from 13 to 76% of total expenditure between 1998 and 2006. This intensification was particularly felt in the African-American press: between 1998 and 2002, the magazine Ebony, aimed at this minority, was 9.8 times more likely than People to contain advertising in favor of menthol[22]. The tobacco industry thus became a charitable pillar of black cultural, educational and political organizations, while seeking to be well-regarded by the African-American community through an ostensibly progressive policy. As early as the end of the 1950s, a white supremacist newspaper called for a boycott of Philip Morris for having the highest racial mix of any major company in the United States, for hiring blacks in positions of responsibility, or for advertising in the press dedicated to African-Americans. This was in fact to support the idea of a community of destiny between the tobacco industry and the American black minority. In 1987, an article written by an RJ Reynolds manager in the National Black Monitor went so far as to compare the oppression suffered by blacks in the United States to the " relentless discrimination ", " transnational » against the tobacco industry and « 50 million ordinary citizens who smoke »[23]The effort by American cigarette companies to target their menthol products is so broad and systematic that the phenomenon is referred to as " Afro-Americanization of menthol cigarettes[24] ".Aggressive commercial practices
The policies described above are coupled with a particularly aggressive marketing and commercial strategy against African-Americans. Numerous studies conducted on the subject show that black neighborhoods in the United States have a higher density of retailers than the national average. Similarly, a research study published in 2010 highlighted the fact that there are more tobacconists near schools attended by minorities and disadvantaged populations.[25]. The researchers, in studying how menthol tobacco was marketed to schools, found that for every 10% increase in African-American students in a school, the advertising volume for menthol products increased by 6% in the direct vicinity of the school. establishment[26]. Described as predators, cigarette companies have finally been singled out on several occasions for offering cheaper tobacco products and for intensifying the advertising effort in favor of menthol in African-American neighborhoods: a study conducted in Washington in 2013 showed that the latter had up to ten times more tobacco advertisements than others.[27].A health devastation
The results of this community targeting are also particularly eloquent. A 2013 study conducted in California showed, for example, that students from the African-American community were three times more likely than others to identify the Newport brand, the leader in menthol tobacco products in the United States.[28]. Similarly, almost 90% of African-American smokers smoke menthol tobacco products, compared to fewer than 30% of white smokers.[29]. Menthol is also popular with young African-Americans (12-17 years old), since 70% of smokers in this age category report smoking menthol products.[30]Public health research estimates that in the United States, menthol is one of the explanatory causes of existing inequalities between whites and blacks in terms of health.[31]. Indeed, while the smoking prevalence among African-Americans is significantly lower than that observed among the entire American population, the Black community is proportionally more victims of preventable chronic diseases attributable to tobacco. Figures published by Truth Initiative in 2018 finally highlight that 45% of Black smokers would say they would stop smoking if menthol tobacco products were banned. [32]Menthol as a loss leader: targeting younger generations
Although menthol tobacco products were not initially designed for adolescents and young adults, cigarette manufacturers quickly understood the potential of menthol to attract younger generations to smoking by reducing initial aversive experiences, as mentioned above. For example, a study conducted in 1971 by Philip Morris showed that Newport King smokers were on average much younger than smokers of other brands (24.8 years for the former versus 38 years for the latter), demonstrating that menthol, even at low concentrations, characteristic of this brand, particularly appealed to young consumers.[33]These results will set the tone for the marketing strategies of most tobacco companies: from the 1980s, all the major tobacco companies will offer a range of cigarettes with a low menthol dosage, in order to specifically target this age group.[34]. Although tobacco companies have systematically denied targeting young people, internal documents show that this practice is in reality a structural and endemic element of the tobacco industry's strategy:“Creating a cigarette ostensibly geared toward young people […] would involve a specific name, blend, flavor, and marketing technique. For example, a flavor that would recall the taste of candy while giving the satisfaction of a cigarette.” “ The first reaction of smokers is generally negative. […] The first negatives can be mitigated with a low level of menthol. »This general shift observed in the 1980s is easily explained: it is estimated that nine out of ten smokers started smoking before the age of 18.[35]. Recruiting new generations of smokers is thus becoming an economic survival issue for the tobacco industry, which must constantly replace older generations of smokers. To target young people, a brand like Newport did not hesitate, in the 90s, to create advertisements depicting childish and puerile situations, as shown in the image above. Flavored tobacco products in general, and mentholated tobacco products in particular, play the role of a recruiter for younger generations, in order to introduce them to and keep them smoking. It is estimated that a teenager who starts smoking with a flavored product is three times more likely than another to become a regular smoker. In a study published in 2015 in the Journal of the American Medical Association, 81% of young people who had used tobacco products said they had started with flavored products. The proportion of menthol cigarette consumers is significantly higher among 12-17 year olds (54%) than among adult smokers (32%). Two thirds of adolescent menthol cigarette consumers explicitly state their appetite for the particular taste that these products give them.[36]. Thus, the internal documents of the tobacco industry demonstrate that the latter has developed an extremely precise knowledge of its consumers, and put in place particularly effective marketing tools, targeting its messages according to an ethnic, gender, generational and sexual categorization (the LGBT community being one of the priority targets of menthol tobacco products).[37] : it is estimated that 71% of young smokers from the LGBT community in the United States consume menthol products[38]).
Legislation on menthol: overview
Articles 9 and 10 of the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) address the issue of regulating the contents of tobacco products and information on these products. To assist governments in implementing these articles, the Conference of the Parties has issued partial guidelines on the restriction and prohibition of ingredients that may enhance the palatability of tobacco products, such as sugars, sweeteners, or flavouring agents. However, as a WHO report points out, no recommendations have yet been issued for menthol.[39]. In recent years, a number of states have regulated or banned the use of additives in tobacco products, seeking to reduce their appeal, particularly to younger generations. For example, while menthol was an exception to the ban on flavouring agents in tobacco products, decided by the amendment of the Canadian Tobacco Act in 2009, five provinces have nevertheless enacted the inclusion of menthol in this new regulation. Similarly, Ethiopia was one of the first countries to ban the sale and distribution of flavoured tobacco products without ignoring menthol, with the exception of hookah.[40]. It can also be noted that the European Union, which is banning menthol as of May 20, 2020, has already banned the use of menthol in convertible cigarette capsules as of May 20, 2016. However, beyond these few examples, the history of regulation shows a certain tendency towards the exemption of menthol in the ban on flavored tobacco products. Thus, in 2009, when the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) banned " characterizing flavors » at the federal level, menthol is not affected by this new regulation, while more than half of adolescent smokers aged 12 to 17 consume menthol tobacco products, 85.8% of African-American smokers, 46% of smokers of the Hispanic community, and 28.7% of white smokers[41]. The desire of some public decision-makers to legislate on menthol is faced with systematic opposition from the tobacco industry. And for good reason, menthol products represent approximately 10% of the total tobacco market, and exceed 25% in many key countries such as the Philippines or the United States.[42]. Furthermore, as we have seen, menthol represents a major challenge for the economic survival of tobacco companies, since it makes it possible to attract millions of young consumers each year. The properties of menthol finally make it a more difficult product to stop. Thus, menthol seems to considerably slow down the general trend of decline in tobacco consumption: in the United States for example, sales of menthol cigarettes remained stable between 2000 and 2005, despite a drop of 22% in the total packs sold during the same time interval[43].Industry interference
To understand the strategies mobilized by the tobacco industry to fight against public policies proposing a ban on the sale of menthol products, it is interesting to analyze them in light of the taxonomy developed by Anna B. Gilmore[44]. Since any form of regulation is considered contrary to the interests of the tobacco industry and its allies, they will oppose it by seeking to achieve one of six objectives: defeat the proposed legislation, postpone it, weaken it, lock it in, overturn it, or not comply with its provisions. To do this, the tobacco companies will deploy a number of discursive and instrumental strategies, including:Exaggeration of potential costs and denial of benefits
To prevent the implementation of the menthol ban, the tobacco industry will successively overestimate the costs that such a measure would generate, while denying or minimizing the benefits. If we take the example of Chile, national law gives the Ministry of Health the authority to restrict or prohibit substances in the composition of tobacco products, if they are likely to increase their harmfulness or addictiveness[45]. In accordance with this legal provision, the Minister of Health sought in 2013 to ban the sale of menthol products in the Chilean market. The response from the tobacco companies was not long in coming: Carlos Lopez, then director of institutional affairs at British American Tobacco, challenged the Minister in an open letter[46], citing the fact that there was no scientific evidence to date that menthol tobacco products were more harmful and addictive than non-menthol tobacco products. However, two years earlier, a report by the regulatory body Tobacco Products Scientific Advisory Committee (TPSAC) concluded that: " removing menthol tobacco products would benefit public health »[47]. The strategy is therefore twofold: at the same time as it allows a legal regulatory measure to be locked in, it minimises the health risks of menthol tobacco products. In the same vein, following the Senate's decision to ban menthol in 2015, BAT produced a press release stating that the measure " would affect thousands of responsible Chileans, who had worked legally for over a hundred years »[48]In the United States, industry spokesmen have estimated that black market sales of menthol would represent a tax loss of " several billion dollars ”, and would lead to “ the loss of more than 500,000 American jobs »[49].Third-party mobilization
The tobacco industry will mobilize intermediaries presented as legitimate and independent, in order to relay its positions. Tobacco companies will in particular associate with groups presenting “ common interests grafted ", that is, groups whose interests converge with the tobacco industry and are non-commercial. As we have seen above, African-American associations are an example of this type of group in the United States. As Anna B. Gilmore points out, the " Financial incentives are the main recruitment mechanism » from these support groups. This is also what the Center for Responsive Politics shows: in 2014, half of the Democratic members from the African-American community of Congress had received financial support from Lorillard, compared to only one member in 38 for non-African American Democrats[50]. American health organizations point out the difficulty of legislating on menthol without broad support from African-American organizations, some of which have accepted money from cigarette companies for decades, like the National Black Chamber of Commerce, the Congress of Racial Equality, the National Black Law Enforcement Executives (NOBLE), or the National Black Police Association (NBPA), which all actively oppose the ban on menthol.Management of information on menthol by the tobacco industry
Tobacco companies, in order to prevent or delay a measure such as the menthol ban, will produce and amplify a certain amount of information that is more or less proven. In this way, in the United States, opponents of regulation have put forward the idea that a menthol ban would lead to an increase in contraband and the black market, which, according to the Center for Regulatory Effectiveness, would be more dangerous for health than menthol products themselves. The argument of contraband is a refrain of the tobacco industry that has long been contradicted by independent studies. In her taxonomy, Anna B. Gilmore also notes that anti-smoking public policies always benefit groups " undeserving ", here the traffickers, while the negative effects are always borne by actors " deserving " (THE " 500,000 jobs » in the United States, or the “ thousands of responsible Chileans " The NBPA launched a campaign against the menthol ban, leading to more than 36,000 comments being posted on the FDA's website, including that " banning menthol cigarettes will lead to additional profiling, arrests and problems within the African American community » [51]. According to the researcher, " Co-opted academics are hired to develop and disseminate critiques of evidence provided by the public health community ". Contesting scientific evidence is indeed one of the tobacco industry's preferred strategies. Industry spokespeople have, for example, attacked the scientific justification for the menthol ban, arguing that research on menthol cigarette use and tobacco initiation is limited by measurement problems. In this way, the tobacco company Lorillard was able to challenge the entire report produced by the TPSAC on the dangerousness of menthol. According to the tobacco company: “ TPSAC’s methods are neither transparent nor evidence-based. TPSAC's methods for reaching its conclusions cannot be replicated and many conclusions are not scientifically supported. relevant »[52]. The tobacco industry is finally seeking to discredit and isolate the actors campaigning against the exemption enjoyed by menthol in the United States. Thus, while seven former directors of Health and Human Services called for a standardization of legislation on the flavors of tobacco products, in order to protect black youth, the cigarette manufacturer Lorillard directly responded in the African-American press: " Some self-described activists have proposed a legislative ban on menthol cigarettes in a misguided effort to force people to quit smoking by limiting their choices ”, warned an announcement. The industrialist adds, elsewhere: “ The history of African Americans in this country has been one of struggle against paternalistic limitations and for freedoms ".Deter by legal and financial threat
As Anna Gilmore points out, the tobacco industry will increase the number of disputes against public authorities, under national jurisdictions or commercial agreements. This practice has a dissuasive function, intended to increase the perception of public health costs among political decision-makers. This " regulatory cooling » thus nips a number of anti-smoking measures in the bud. For example, in 2013, the city of Providence, acting on behalf of the tobacco industry in Rhode Island, successfully challenged two ordinances: one banning the sale of flavored tobacco products (other than cigarettes), and one banning tobacco promotions. The industry argued that these ordinances were preempted by federal and state law, and that they violated the First Amendment.[53]. Financial threats are also a tool used by cigarette companies. They can be of different nature: financial disinvestment, withholding of advertising investments for the media, requests for compensation. Thus, in 2015, after denouncing the Chilean law against menthol " unconstitutional and arbitrary », British American Tobacco has started a process of divestment in the country, by dismissing 20% of its employees employed in Chile[54].In Europe
Within the European Union, the Tobacco Products Directive (TPD) establishes the rules for the manufacture, presentation, and sale of tobacco and its derivative products. Entering into force in May 2014, the directive has been applicable in the member states of the European Union since May 20, 2016. This directive notably made it possible to authorize member states to prohibit the online sale of tobacco products, to introduce a system of identification and traceability throughout the European Union, to prohibit elements “ advertising and misleading » on tobacco products or electronic cigarettes, to systematize the affixing of health warnings on the front and back of 65% packets of cigarettes and rolling tobacco, or even to prohibit cigarettes and rolling tobacco containing of the " characterizing aromas[55] ", allowing to “facilitate the initiation of tobacco consumption or have an impact on consumption habits » [56]. Menthol, of which “ the sales volume at Union level represents 3 % or more in a given product category ", benefited from a period of time for its withdrawal from the European market, for " to agree consumers the time to switch to other products " This delay was actually obtained by the European Parliament following a massive lobbying campaign by the tobacco industry. According to a 2016 study by Tobacco Control on the subject, the tobacco company Philip Morris International (PMI) alone hired more than 160 lobbyists and spent more than €1.25 million to undermine the Tobacco Products Directive, compared to only five public health advocates. The tobacco industry also made extensive use of third parties to defend its interests, such as the European Tobacco Growers' Association, the European Food Federation, the Agricultural and Tourism Unions, and the European Federation of Tobacco Processors, which are active on issues of the composition of tobacco products.[57]. As the study shows, the campaign led by the tobacco companies sought to shift the focus of the debate, focusing on the supposed economic impacts of the directive rather than on the health consequences of the status quo. According to internal documents published by The Observer, the tobacco industry's strategy was to " to delay » or to “ to modify[58] » the directive, and that menthol be excluded from the list of characterizing aromas established by the TPD[59].The strategy of tobacco companies and their allies after the ban on menthol
Following the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic and the lockdown measures decreed on French territory, the European Confederation of Tobacco Retailers (CEDT), co-chaired by Philippe Coy (current president of the Confederation of Tobacco Retailers), sent a letter to the Directorate-General for Health of the European Commission, in order to obtain from it an additional period before the implementation of the ban on the sale of menthol cigarettes and rolling tobacco, claiming that the drop in sales by the tobacco industry would not allow tobacconists to sell off their stocks.[60].Faced with the ban on the sale of menthol cigarettes and rolling tobacco, tobacco companies have redoubled their creativity to circumvent the regulations: at the beginning of 2020, Imperial Brands began selling cardboard strips that could be inserted in cigarette packets or rolling tobacco pouches, in order to give them a menthol aroma. Rival Japan Tobacco has, for its part, introduced cigarillos with menthol capsules onto the market, the latter not being affected by the 2014 directive[61]. Cigars benefit from much less restrictive regulations than traditional cigarettes and rolling tobacco. The law on plain packaging does not apply to them, nor does the law on flavors, and packaging of less than twenty units is authorized for sale, when we know that smaller, cheaper formats are more likely to be purchased by younger people. In France, the legal definition of cigars is currently insufficient, and thus allows the tobacco industry to sell products that are in reality increasingly similar to traditional cigarettes, thereby undermining some of the progress made in terms of regulation. Similarly, taxation on cigars and cigarillos is much more advantageous. As the National Committee Against Smoking already pointed out in 2014, considering that the consumption profile of these products refers more to favored socioeconomic categories, cigars, due to their low taxation, constitute in themselves a tax niche paid for by the community. The legislation on electronic cigarettes is also insufficient: these products, exempt from the ban on menthol, are massively invested in by the tobacco industry to become attractive appeal products for younger generations. Instead of being considered as weaning tools, they are on the contrary presented as safer alternatives to traditional cigarettes. However, the presence of nicotine in electronic cigarettes makes them an addictive and dangerous object of consumption, and therefore to be kept away from younger generations. On the occasion of World No Tobacco Day, scheduled for May 31, focusing on the use of tobacco and nicotine among young people and the manipulation of tobacco manufacturers, it is important to recall the need to extend the current legislation on cigarettes and hand-rolling tobacco to all tobacco industry products, in order to that these products no longer play the role of Trojan Horse or gateway to smoking, whether cigars, cigarillos, heated tobacco or even electronic cigarettes. ©Tobacco Free GenerationIn France, until May 2016, advertising for tobacco products at the point of sale was authorized, subject to a certain number of criteria (the posters, in 60X80 format, had to maintain a refined presentation of the product , mentioning only the name of the product, its composition, its characteristics and conditions of sale, with the exception of the price, the name and address of the manufacturer and, where applicable, of the distributor, nor any other graphic representation or photographic as that of the product, its packaging and the brand emblem). Manufacturers have deployed their creativity to circumvent these formal constraints. As these images show, the posters serve as a real advertising showcase to highlight the products, evoking the refreshing properties of menthol. The semantics of the two posters in fact refer to the symbolic universe of cold, and are an obvious reminder of candies and menthol chewing gum, potentially likely to attract young people.
