.

             In total, the advertising and marketing restrictions go far beyond what U.S. tobacco control advocates envisioned as achievable just a year or two ago. Now that the tobacco control terrain has shifted, many public health critics of the agreement say the industry will easily be able to circumvent the restrictions. .

             "The advertising requirements in the proposed settlement, as written, will not appreciably inhibit the tobacco industry's ability to influence the 12-to-17-year-old segment of our population," says John Garrison, managing director of the American Lung Association. "In fact, the settlement's ban on the use of human images and cartoon characters in tobacco advertising and promotion would be a mere inconvenience to the tobacco industry." .

             Other countries' experience with advertising restrictions suggests the tobacco companies are stunningly adept at working around ad limits. In the United Kingdom, for example, tobacco control advocates say a ban on the use of human images has not measurably affected the marketing of Marlboro: Philip Morris has retired the Marlboro Man, but Marlboro Country -- beautiful portraits of the U.S. West -- still appears in Marlboro advertisements that tobacco control advocates say are as effective as any. .

             Perhaps the most innovative element of the agreement is a "look back" provision, which would require the tobacco companies to pay a fine if they failed to reduce teen smoking rates by 30 percent in five years, 50 percent in seven years, and 60 percent in 10 years. The fines would amount to $80 million for each percentage point the industry fell short of the target and would be capped at $2 billion a year. .

             There are numerous shortcomings to the look back provision, however, shortcomings so severe that there is consensus in the public health community about the need for reform. The potential fines would work out to little more than a nickel a pack, an amount the industry could easily pass on to consumers.