The "Global Settlement" With the Tobacco Industry: 6 Years Later
Michael Givel, PhD and
Stanton A. Glantz, PhD
At the time of the study, Michael Givel was with the Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California, San Francisco, and the University of Oklahoma, Norman, Okla. Stanton A. Glantz is with the Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, Institute for Health Policy Studies, Cardiovascular Research Institute, University of California, San Francisco.
Correspondence: Requests for reprints should be sent to Stanton A. Glantz, PhD, Tobacco Control Research and Education, University of California, San Francisco, CA 94143-1390 (e-mail: glantz{at}medicine.ucsf.edu).
On June 20, 1997 a group of attorneys and health advocates proposeda "global settlement" of all public and private litigation againstthe tobacco industry. This agreement was controversial, andthe subsequent implementing legislation was defeated. We soughtto determine whether the global settlement represented a "missedopportunity" or a dead end.
We compared the global settlement with subsequent laws, regulations,settlements, and judgments against the tobacco industry andfound that other than Food and Drug Administration regulationof tobacco, tobacco control advocates have achieved many ofthe policies included in the global settlement and several beyondit.
The policies that have been developed since 1997 have advancedtobacco control substantially, often beyond the provisions ofthe global settlement.
This article has been cited by other articles:
R. S. Magnusson Mapping the Scope and Opportunities for Public Health Law in Liberal Democracies
J. Law Med. Ethics,
December 1, 2007;
35(4):
571 - 587.
[PDF]
E. M Sebrie and S. A Glantz "Accommodating" smoke-free policies: tobacco industry's Courtesy of Choice programme in Latin America
Tob. Control,
October 1, 2007;
16(5):
e6 - e6.
[Abstract][Full Text][PDF]
E. M. Sebrie and S. A. Glantz Attempts to Undermine Tobacco Control: Tobacco Industry "Youth Smoking Prevention" Programs to Undermine Meaningful Tobacco Control in Latin America
Am J Public Health,
August 1, 2007;
97(8):
1357 - 1367.
[Abstract][Full Text][PDF]
M. Givel FDA legislation
Tob. Control,
August 1, 2007;
16(4):
217 - 218.
[Full Text][PDF]
R. Rajkumar, C. P. Gross, and H. P. Forman Is the Tobacco Settlement Constitutional?
J. Law Med. Ethics,
December 1, 2006;
34(4):
748 - 752.
[PDF]
D. T. Studlar Unfiltered: Conflicts over Tobacco Policy and Public Health; Smoke in Their Eyes: Lessons in Movement Leadership from the Tobacco Wars; The Fight Against Big Tobacco: The Movement, the State, and the Public's Health
Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law,
April 1, 2006;
31(2):
395 - 407.
[PDF]
F A Sloan, C A Mathews, and J G Trogdon Impacts of the Master Settlement Agreement on the tobacco industry
Tob. Control,
December 1, 2004;
13(4):
356 - 361.
[Abstract][Full Text][PDF]
E K Tong and S A Glantz ARTIST (Asian regional tobacco industry scientist team): Philip Morris' attempt to exert a scientific and regulatory agenda on Asia
Tob. Control,
December 1, 2004;
13(suppl_2):
ii118 - ii124.
[Abstract][Full Text][PDF]
B C Alamar and S A Glantz The tobacco industry's use of Wall Street analysts in shaping policy
Tob. Control,
September 1, 2004;
13(3):
223 - 227.
[Abstract][Full Text][PDF]
L L Mandel and S A Glantz Hedging their bets: tobacco and gambling industries work against smoke-free policies
Tob. Control,
September 1, 2004;
13(3):
268 - 276.
[Abstract][Full Text][PDF]
C. G. Healton, M. L. Haviland, and E. Vargyas Will the Master Settlement Agreement Achieve a Lasting Legacy?
Health Promot Pract,
July 1, 2004;
5(3_suppl):
12S - 17S.
[Abstract][PDF]