A Surgeon General Who Thinks Like a Drug Czar

At yesterday's congressional hearing on smokeless tobacco as a safer alternative to cigarettes, Surgeon General Richard Carmona announced that he favors prohibition of all tobacco products. After staking out a position more extreme than most anti-smoking activists are willing to endorse, he conceded that "legislation is not my field." Neither is economics, apparently, since Carmona is not worried about the disastrous effects of creating a black market big enough to serve some 45 million American smokers.

The surgeon general also seems to be unfamiliar with the epidemiological data concerning the health effects of smokeless tobacco. According to The Washington Post, "He was adamant in saying there is no evidence that smokeless tobacco causes less harm than cigarettes." That's a claim that could only be made by someone who had not bothered to look at the evidence.

Comments

[Brian]

I can sum up the Bush Admin.'s reasons for appointing Carmona in two words: gun control.

Carmona, prior to his appointment as surgeon general, was both a trauma surgeon here in Tucson and a member of the Pima County SWAT team. He's badass--he can disable a perp with extreme prejudice and then save his life--but, as Jacob pointed out--this doesn't exactly make him a health policy expert.

However, at least we don't have a surgeon general who views private gun ownership as a "public health problem".

[Xrlq]

I have two words for anyone who doesn't believe smokeless tobacco is safer than smoking: lung cancer.

[Warren]

It seems the whole damn administration was recruited from the same wing of some psycho ward. Each of them fancies himself a prophet, doing the lords work, divinely inspired and never mind the facts.

[Todd Fletcher]

Warren, that's as good a definition of "politician" as I've ever seen.

[Trigger]

This is shocking, especially on the heals of the call for an immediate $2/pack increase on cigarettes by the American Society of Clinical Oncologists. They made no bones about wanting to use this tax for social engineering with a goal of ridding the world of tobacco.
If I may, I have a pretty good post on the subject at my blog including my keen observations after testifying before the Interagency Committee on Smoking and Health (ICSH) Cessation Subcommittee. My permalinks are off, but the title of the post is "Doctors want immediate $2 increase in Federal cigarette tax" about 1/3 down on June 1st.
I also hope I can make it to Chicago for Jacob's book signing next week for the Heartland Institute. You're an inspiration Jacob. Thanks.

[T. Hartin]

The addiction of cigarette smoker to nicotine is as nothing compared to the addiction of government to tobacco taxes and settlement payments.

The biggest opponents to outlawing tobacco would be the same state goverments who a few years ago were arguing, in order to extract a settlement from big tobacco, that tobacco use was about to bankrupt them.

The irony meter pegs, no?

[joe]

Maybe it's just me, but I read Cormona's statement as more of a "in a perfect world..." musing, than an actual policy recommendation. In this case, the problem is not that he's a totalitarian, but that he doesn't realize what a cabinet officer's job involves.