brilliant reuters story

[James]

Good reuters story on the new tobacco legislation: Cool, Refreshing Legislation for Philip Morris | Green Business | Reuters

 

[cyberwolf]

GREAT article. Thanks for posting.

 

[bri1270]

That is a great article.

 

[Vapor Pete]

Thanks for the post James.
Every time I see this stuff I just get so angry. This is such a small ordeal in the face of the USA's bigger problems and agendas. And if one is not a consumer of nictoine, this kind of crap isnt really of any importance.
But it clearly proves that the f'ing government needs to stay out of my business. It also proves that the government can be BOUGHT. And that is a sad comentary.
Its sickening. And I cannot for the life of me understand why the American public isnt aware that this kind of bullsh*t is going on right in front of them. And why isnt this being brought to light so all can see that the government has no interest in their well being unless you are paying them.

Sickened,
-VP

 

[Caesarea]

Now if only the national press would run with this kind of input!!!!!


C.

 

[James]

It may yet be picked up. That's the purpose of reuters, after all.

 

[Caesarea]

Come on then the nationals - pick up, pick up!!!

C.

 

[Smokin'Sandy]

I loved this part here:

The next most popular flavored cigarette, clove, accounts for .09 percent of the market. Those cigarettes will be banned under the bill. Indonesia, which provides 99 percent of the clove cigarettes to the U.S. market, has complained to the U.S. trade representative about the disparity with menthol. If Indonesia brings a protectionist complaint to the World Trade Organization, it would compel our government to prove cloves were banned for health reasons. Namely, the United States would have to show that the flavor of cloves enhances cigarettes' addictive properties. If it can't, the ban could be considered a trade violation.

It's a lose-lose proposition. If the United States proves it banned clove cigarettes strictly for health reasons, it would be admitting that menthol cigarettes, manufactured domestically, are getting a free pass despite their clovelike increased health risks. Which puts the FDA, as the tobacco regulator, in the position of justifying a ban on cloves but not menthols. This is the type of case Siegel refers to when he told me the bill lets "the tobacco companies produce and market the cigarettes and the FDA approve them. The ramifications of this bill go far beyond tobacco control. The bill completely undercuts and undermines the entire system of federal public health regulation in this country."

In other words, the United States will have two choices in the above scenario, both hairy: protect the FDA's independence by admitting it banned cloves but not menthols only to protect Philip Morris' market share or let the FDA manufacture an explanation, contrary to recent studies, by which menthol cigarettes, which are used to lure children to smoke, are just as safe as unflavored cigarettes.

Oh yeah, "hairy" situations indeed.

 

[James]

I used to smoke clove cigarettes when I lived in Indonesia. Sampoerna mild, used to cost about 30 pence, which was a good chunk of the average man's wages. Wonder if it would be worth writing to the Indonesian newspapers about this.

 

[Smokin'Sandy]

I used to smoke clove cigarettes when I lived in Indonesia. Sampoerna mild, used to cost about 30 pence, which was a good chunk of the average man's wages. Wonder if it would be worth writing to the Indonesian newspapers about this.

It wouldn't hurt. Maybe push them a little to actually bring a protectionist complaint to the World Trade Organization if this passes. Maybe there is grounds for some kind of lawsuits being brought against the FDA with regards to freedom even though the bill states that it is in compliance with the first amendment. I guess it may require a judge to determine if any of it is unconstitutional.

I think this bill is going to bring all sorts of repercussions that I'm not even aware of.

 

[WerkIt]

And I cannot for the life of me understand why the American public isnt aware that this kind of bullsh*t is going on right in front of them.

Because the media is in cahoots with government and industry. So they 'soothe' us with important news, like what Paris Hilton did today, or repeat government lies that Saddam was in cahoots with the 9/11 attackers, etc and so on.

 

[James]

They are certainly failing in their job if they don't pick up on the massive flaws in this bill.

 

[WerkIt]

The article repeats what we already know, that government wishes to bend the public over on behalf of Phillip Morris with this legislation. However, the entirety of the menthol rant, claiming menthol is somehow more addictive than cigarettes themselves is typical anti-bs. My sister started smoking with menthols, which was Salem full flavor I believe, many, many, years ago. However, she quit smoking menthols years ago also and switched to regular light 100s. She has had no desire since to ever return to menthols either.

I smoked for 28.5 years and smoked ultralights except for three of those years, during which time I switched to menthol lights. I quit smoking menthol lights MANY years ago and never bothered to return to smoking menthols. Oh wait, I did in fact smoke two pounds of ryo menthols ultralight in spring of last year, and the menthol was so utterly addictive that I promptly went right back to smoking my usual non-menthol ultralights after that, as I always had.

I can not imagine what the point is to claim that the 'evil' menthol is somehow more addictive than smokiing itself is, unless it is just an excuse for the antis to exert even more control of the populace and demonize Big Tobacco further (not saying they don't deserve it, only saying they don't deserve to be demonized for mentholated cigarettes) by attempting to turn this into a racial issue with respect to menthol flavoring.

And when in the hell are they going to start shrieking that banana daquiris and strawberry margaritas should be banned for enticing 'THE CHILDREN(tm)' to drink alcohol?

 

[Smokin'Sandy]

I can not imagine what the point is to claim that the 'evil' menthol is somehow more addictive than smokiing itself is, unless it is just an excuse for the antis to exert even more control of the populace and demonize smokers further by attempting to turn this into a racial issue with respect to menthol flavoring.

I think this article is using to claim the absurdity of getting rid of other flavors and not menthol. Why get rid of any flavors? They were saying the if Indonesia objects, they will have to prove that menthol is less harmful than clove. And while they're at it, they should prove that regulars, chocolate, strawberry, etc are less harmful than menthol. That would be fun!

 

[WerkIt]

I think this article is using to claim the absurdity of getting rid of other flavors and not menthol.

I know, but comments such as the following are nonsense, in my opinion:

"By the numbers, the menthol exemption practically paints a bull's-eye on the lungs of African-American smokers."

It is basically saying the tobacco companies are targeting African-Americans with flavorings, which is no different than saying the tobacco companies are targeting 'THE CHILDREN(tm)' with flavorings, yet they dont make such spurious claims while frothing at the mouth, when discussing banana daquiris or strawberry margaritas with respect to alcohol and 'THE CHILDREN(tm).'

Why get rid of any flavors?

It's the antis' wet dream, as is any method to limit and control the pleasures and enjoyment of others. The antis are entitled to their vice of choice, but the smokers are not, because cigarettes make the baby Jesus cry and kill innocent puppies.

They were saying the if Indonesia objects, they will have to prove that menthol is less harmful than clove.

I have had a professional in the healthcare industry tell me clove cigarettes are indeed far more damaging to the lungs than tobacco cigarettes. However, at this point it is all hearsay since I have seen no data or studies to back up the claim.

And while they're at it, they should prove that regulars, chocolate, strawberry, etc are less harmful than menthol.

The thing with chocolate is the MOST absurd. Cocoa has been used to flavor cigarettes for decades. Hell, it is what MADE the Marlboro flavoring. Yet, no cigarette flavored with chocolate actually tastes like chocolate when you smoke it, unless you get the Roland brand from D & R, but nothing like that exists in the world of premades. Coca/chocolate is such a staple in the flavoring of cigarettes, it would be like claiming salt is used to target African-Americans in foods. The point of the salt is not the flavor itself, but to bring out the flavor that already exists in the food, just as the point of adding cocoa is to bring out and enhance the flavor already existent in tobacco and not to make a cigarette taste like a Hershey's bar.

 

[nitewriter]

Great article!

I think President Obama needs to read it.

 

[TropicalBob]

Too much attention re flavors for cigarettes. The real and enormous impact will be on pipe tobacco and nasal snuff. Yes, we who know how to add flavors can get around it, but a ban on flavoring will decimate 99% of the market for these products I really feel for companies like Toque.

Even cigars like Phillie Blunts will take more of a body blow than any cigarette brand.

 

[Smokin'Sandy]

I know, but comments such as the following are nonsense, in my opinion:

"By the numbers, the menthol exemption practically paints a bull's-eye on the lungs of African-American smokers."

It is basically saying the tobacco companies are targeting African-Americans with flavorings, which is no different than saying the tobacco companies are targeting 'THE CHILDREN(tm)' with flavorings, yet they dont make such spurious claims while frothing at the mouth, when discussing banana daquiris or strawberry margaritas with respect to alcohol and 'THE CHILDREN(tm).'

It's the antis' wet dream, as is any method to limit and control the pleasures and enjoyment of others. The antis are entitled to their vice of choice, but the smokers are not, because cigarettes make the baby Jesus cry and kill innocent puppies.

I'm sorry, that last part struck me as hilarious! I understand what you are saying, but they did state this:

"And there are, of course, 217 other co-sponsors, mostly white, ignoring the fact that despite menthol's cultural identification with 4 million African-Americans, double that number of white smokers also partake in the minty tobacco."

So, it's not just African Americans...double that number of whites smoke menthol.

The thing with chocolate is the MOST absurd. Cocoa has been used to flavor cigarettes for decades. Hell, it is what MADE the Marlboro flavoring. Yet, no cigarette flavored with chocolate actually tastes like chocolate when you smoke it, unless you get the Roland brand from D & R, but nothing like that exists in the world of premades. Coca/chocolate is such a staple in the flavoring of cigarettes, it would be like claiming salt is used to target African-Americans in foods. The point of the salt is not the flavor itself, but to bring out the flavor that already exists in the food, just as the point of adding cocoa is to bring out and enhance the flavor already existent in tobacco.

It's all gotten out of control IMO.

Here is another little snip from the article:

"Waxman notes that after an FDA study, menthol could be banned as well but didn't explain why menthol merited a study period and chocolate cigarettes did not."

It is all absurd when you take a government that is willing to let a substance stay on the market that is a known health risk, yet ban certain elements of it as if those elements are going to make them even more harmful. I mean really, what difference does it make? (That is rhetorical ) That's like claiming that rust on a dirty knife will cause you more harm when you are stabbed.

 

[OutWest]

Too much attention re flavors for cigarettes. The real and enormous impact will be on pipe tobacco and nasal snuff. Yes, we who know how to add flavors can get around it, but a ban on flavoring will decimate 99% of the market for these products I really feel for companies like Toque.

Even cigars like Phillie Blunts will take more of a body blow than any cigarette brand.

Agreed. Sadly, the politicians pushing for this are deliberately ignoring other tobacco and are focusing on cigs when speaking (despite the fact that it affects all tobacco) in order to push their "for the children" lies. After all, if they mentioned pipe tobaccos, it would toss the whole "marketed to children" theory out the window.

 

[Surf Monkey]

I said it in another thread, but it bears repeating here:

The "it comes in flavors so it must be marketed to children" line is by far and away the weakest position the anti-smoking lobby takes. It doesn't bear up to even the most cursory examination. If there were ANY truth to it, every ingestible product ever made would have to be characterized as "marketed to children" and banned. Every restaurant under the sun would have to close. Every supermarket would have to be legislated out of existence. Do these people think we're idiots? Do they only consume things that taste rancid because they're adults? Who exactly do they think they're fooling with that rhetoric? Pathetic.