America, you are digging your grave with your spoon--should the FDA tell you that on food labels?

IF 0.3 4区 医学 Q4 FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Food and drug law journal Pub Date : 2013-01-01
Melissa M Card
{"title":"America, you are digging your grave with your spoon--should the FDA tell you that on food labels?","authors":"Melissa M Card","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Food & Drug Admin. discussed whether the FDA's promulgation of graphic images violated tobacco companies' First Amendment rights. While the tobacco companies contested the graphic images, the tobacco companies did not contest the promulgation of nine textual statements about the adverse effects of cigarettes. This uncontested mandate opens a door for the FDA to further expand its regulatory scheme. If the FDA can mandate textual statements about the adverse effects of cigarettes, can the FDA mandate textual statements about the adverse effects of sugar to combat the obesity crisis? This Article presents three textual statements about the adverse effects of sugar, to define the line between acceptable and unacceptable forms of compelled commercial speech under Central Hudson. Establishing this line ensures that the commercial speech doctrine does not deny the FDA from its authority to provide consumers with accurate information. While three textual statements are presented, this Article advocates that one of the textual statements is likely to serve as the best solution to the obesity crisis. The chosen textual statement serves as an effective solution because it presents meaningful information to the consumers enabling consumers to make healthful decisions about their food and encourages manufacturers to modify their products.</p>","PeriodicalId":12282,"journal":{"name":"Food and drug law journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2013-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Food and drug law journal","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Food & Drug Admin. discussed whether the FDA's promulgation of graphic images violated tobacco companies' First Amendment rights. While the tobacco companies contested the graphic images, the tobacco companies did not contest the promulgation of nine textual statements about the adverse effects of cigarettes. This uncontested mandate opens a door for the FDA to further expand its regulatory scheme. If the FDA can mandate textual statements about the adverse effects of cigarettes, can the FDA mandate textual statements about the adverse effects of sugar to combat the obesity crisis? This Article presents three textual statements about the adverse effects of sugar, to define the line between acceptable and unacceptable forms of compelled commercial speech under Central Hudson. Establishing this line ensures that the commercial speech doctrine does not deny the FDA from its authority to provide consumers with accurate information. While three textual statements are presented, this Article advocates that one of the textual statements is likely to serve as the best solution to the obesity crisis. The chosen textual statement serves as an effective solution because it presents meaningful information to the consumers enabling consumers to make healthful decisions about their food and encourages manufacturers to modify their products.

美国,你是在用勺子自掘坟墓——食品药品监督管理局应该在食品标签上告诉你吗?
雷诺兹烟草公司诉食品药品管理局案。讨论了食品和药物管理局颁布的图形图像是否侵犯了烟草公司的第一修正案权利。虽然烟草公司对这些图形图像提出异议,但烟草公司并没有对有关香烟有害影响的九项文字声明的颁布提出异议。这一无争议的授权为FDA进一步扩大其监管计划打开了大门。如果美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)可以强制要求对香烟的不良影响进行文字说明,那么为了对抗肥胖危机,FDA是否可以强制要求对糖的不良影响进行文字说明呢?本文提出了关于糖的不良影响的三个文本陈述,以定义中央哈德逊下可接受和不可接受的强迫商业言论形式之间的界限。建立这条界线确保商业言论原则不会剥夺FDA向消费者提供准确信息的权力。虽然本文提出了三个文本陈述,但本文主张其中一个文本陈述可能是解决肥胖危机的最佳方案。所选择的文本声明作为一个有效的解决方案,因为它向消费者提供有意义的信息,使消费者能够对他们的食品做出健康的决定,并鼓励制造商修改他们的产品。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Food and drug law journal
Food and drug law journal 医学-食品科技
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
50.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>36 weeks
期刊介绍: The Food and Drug Law Journal is a peer-reviewed quarterly devoted to the analysis of legislation, regulations, court decisions, and public policies affecting industries regulated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and related agencies and authorities, including the development, manufacture, marketing, and use of drugs, medical devices, biologics, food, dietary supplements, cosmetics, veterinary, tobacco, and cannabis-derived products. Building on more than 70 years of scholarly discourse, since 2015, the Journal is published in partnership with the Georgetown University Law Center and the O’Neill Institute for National & Global Health Law. All members can access the Journal online. Each member organization and most individual memberships (except for government, student, and Emeritus members) receive one subscription to the print Journal.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信