Former FDA Commish has a Cigarette Plan

[CJsKee]

If anyone is interested, I found this on another forum...it appears the nic content of most cigs is around 1 mg...

Erowid Tobacco Vault : Info on Nicotine Content of Cigarette Brands

 

[yvilla]

If anyone is interested, I found this on another forum...it appears the nic content of most cigs is around 1 mg...

Erowid Tobacco Vault : Info on Nicotine Content of Cigarette Brands

Yes, but they are, again, referring to the nicotine "yield" of cigarettes - another way of saying the amount effectively delivered to the smoker. That does not mean the amount contained in the cigarette in the first place.

From the first sentence of the page you cited to: "This report contains data on the "tar," nicotine, and carbon monoxide yields of 1206 varieties of cigarettes manufactured and sold in the United States in 1994."

And here is an article from tobacco Control, that reveals that upon testing 92 brands of cigarettes, it was found that: "The total nicotine content of tobacco and percent nicotine (by weight of tobacco) averaged 10.2 mg". Filter ventilation and nicotine content of tobacco in cigarettes from Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States

Bottom line, "content" is not the same as "yield".

 

[CJsKee]

O, thanks, Yvilla!! I've been a little "foggy" today, but I think I got it now LOL...and thanks for the other link.

"Fools" still applies

 

[Vocalek]

I've started a poll to find out how "lights" (reduced nicotine cigarettes) affected people's smoking. http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/polls/100527-light-cigs-smoke-more-less-same.html

In my case, I was merrily smoking a pack a day of regular red-pack Winstons for years and years. Along came the federal government and said, "If you can't quit, at least switch to lights." So I did and a while later came to the realization that I was smoking 50 Benson & Hedges Lights per day instead of 20 Winstons. Nevertheless, thinking this was somehow less harmful to my health, I went on this way for years and years. When I finally put 2 + 2 together and realized "lower nicotine = more cigs smoked" it occured to me that the reverse would probably be true. I looked for the highest nicotine content I could find (wasn't easy because they had stopped publishing numbers) and switched to American Spirits Full Flavor. By doing this, I got down to only 10 cigs a day, plus about 6 pieces of Nicorette.

I know there are some folks who smoked the same amount and maybe some who were able to quit as a result of switching to lights, but I would venture to guess that the majority of us did "compensatory smoking" -- either smoking more or inhaling more deeply. In my case, the inhaling more deeply came about when they started sending me outside to smoke.

 

[kristin]

It's scary that these officials who are supposedly looking out for us are so misinformed. It's a bloody nightmare.

 

[onionpants]

Brewster as an American living overseas I find your Avatar offensive and I wish you would remove it. I thought this was an electronic cigarette forum. Keep politics out of it and if you feel like bashing the President of the United States, do it elsewhere.

 

[Captu4ik]

I thought this was an electronic cigarette forum. Keep politics out of it and if you feel like bashing the President of the United States, do it elsewhere.

Keep politics out of the e-cig Forum ?

I thought that that was what it was all about ...

 

[TropicalBob]

Politics is most assuredly NOT what an e-cig forum should be about. Not this kind of ugly, insensitive representation of our President. I totally agree with Onionpants. That avatar should be offensive to EVERY American.

 

[Turco Chips]

I can see this thread de-railing quickly. So - if it was a Pro-Obama flowers and sunshine avatar....y'all would be ok with it? Keep complaining about it and then the folks running the site will turn off all avatars.

PS - I'm a Veteran


TC

 

[rothenbj]

I can see this thread de-railing quickly. So - if it was a Pro-Obama flowers and sunshine avatar....y'all would be ok with it? Keep complaining about it and then the folks running the site will turn off all avatars.

PS - I'm a Veteran


TC

I've had this urge for weeks to morph Henry Waxman's face with a pig, but thus far I've resisted the urge.

 

[onionpants]

Keep politics out of the e-cig Forum ?

I thought that that was what it was all about ...

Certainly if it is related to e-cig legislation, etc. it would be very relevant. However a defaced photograph of the President of the United States has no relevance whatsoever. If you wish to display the President in a humiliating manner, there are many other places to do that.

 

[Kate51]

I don't know why everyone is in a tizzy over lowering or raising nicotine levels in cigarettes....that's been a practice of BT for many years, "un-officially" of course.
Now put the FDA in charge of BT and everyone is surprised at the unabashed unashamed Power of an Entity???
Don't look now, folks, but this ain't our country anymore. The public is running risk of disappearing under the sludge of run-away power and control. Oops, did I just say something political? Sorry about that....but sometimes there IS a monster behind the clown face.
I believe some folks are starting to see that. But not nearly enough to save our own butts. Pun intended. Vocalek hit the right button...we've been so programmed to think someone is watching over our health and happiness, it rather is a let-down to know they're just concerned about status quo~maintaining some kind of sick ideology.

 

[kristin]

I don't know why everyone is in a tizzy over lowering or raising nicotine levels in cigarettes....that's been a practice of BT for many years, "un-officially" of course.
Now put the FDA in charge of BT and everyone is surprised at the unabashed unashamed Power of an Entity???
Don't look now, folks, but this ain't our country anymore. The public is running risk of disappearing under the sludge of run-away power and control. Oops, did I just say something political? Sorry about that....but sometimes there IS a monster behind the clown face.
I believe some folks are starting to see that. But not nearly enough to save our own butts. Pun intended. Vocalek hit the right button...we've been so programmed to think someone is watching over our health and happiness, it rather is a let-down to know they're just concerned about status quo~maintaining some kind of sick ideology.

The problem with the FDA lowering nicotine levels is that it's the complete opposite of what public health groups were up in arms over a few years ago, when BT "implied" that low tar and filtered/light cigarettes were less risk. They claimed that it was misleading the public and that "light" cigarettes caused users to smoke even more. It's the very reason why there are now "Marlboro Golds" not "Marlboro Lights."

Now the public health groups/FDA want to do exactly what they disagreed with BT over - claim that lowering nicotine in cigarettes is somehow less risk or is going to help smokers, when the exact OPPOSITE is true. If they lower the nicotine levels, cigarette smokers will actually INCREASE consumption to gain those former nicotine levels and expose themselves to more even smoke and therefore, even MORE risk.

It's a ridiculous, hypocritical and stupid move - IF they decide to follow this suggestion.

 

[kristin]

Ironically, INCREASING nicotine in cigarettes would most likely be better for smokers - they would need to consume less cigarettes to feel relief and therefore, expose themselves to less smoke!

The idea that more nicotine would increase addiction is erroneous.

 

[Vocalek]

It worked for me. I was finally able to get my consumption down to half a pack when I switched from the lights I had smoked for years to "full flavor" (i.e. high nicotine) cigarettes. It took the e-cigarette to get me off the smoke altogether. But I had to up my nicotine level to 24 to reach "normal" on the Sudoku meter.

Abnormal on that meter is when I catch myself putting two 3s in the same column. And then catch myself putting another 4 into a row that already has one. You get the picture.

 

[Kate51]

Yes, I do exactly! get the picture...I swear, maybe it's because I've been involved with this e-cig trip and the FDA, but I never realized before how much of our so-called "security" is bound over to incompetent and overly-moralized people who really have no clue what damage they are collectively doing.
Look now at the oil spill, how much was BP's fault, but how much at fault is our own MMS and other so-called check-and-balance agencies, including congressional committees. Another is the border. Another is our food safety programs, transportation, + a million more.
Over the years there have been so many breaches in a reasonable expectation of safety it is just incredible. And these are things that we know about. What are some of the things we will never know?? Did we have any expectation during the congressional hearings with Big Tobacco that there would actually be shocking practices made public, or was that all just for political play as well. I'm beginning to think it is all about the latter.
And, by the way, have not and probably will not have any response so far from the Surgeon General's office regarding e-cig policies. If and when I do, I will sure post it!

 

[skinny]

onionpants,
why would you be offended by the photo? That's what he looks like before he puts his makeup on and comes out to talk to us all.
I understand how it can hurt to see what our hero's really look like in person

 

[Captu4ik]

Ironically, INCREASING nicotine in cigarettes would most likely be better for smokers - they would need to consume less cigarettes to feel relief and therefore, expose themselves to less smoke!



The idea that more nicotine would increase addiction is erroneous.

I might have to disagree with that, just from my own personal experience ...



Many years ago (back in the mid or late '80's) I smoked Kools, about 2 packs/day. As cigarette prices were steadily rising, I changed brands and began smoking Richland Menthol. When they first came out, I was able to buy them at a cost even lower than the price charged for generic cigarette brands. They didn't taste bad, seemed like a good substitute for Kools. I noticed no change in my smoking habits ...



After a couple months, the price was raised to maintain parity with other generic cigs, and the discount outlet where I had been purchasing them stopped stocking them. I went back to Kools (they were significantly discounted).



Much to my surprise, my Kool habit had actually increased to almost 3 packs/day ! Over the next few months, I made a conscious effort to cut back, but never did get back to the 2 packs/day. (I've always been cheap, LOL!)



It wasn't until several years later that I found out that the Tobacco company that produced Richland's was actually elevating the Nicotine levels, and although the tar was about the same as my Kools, the nicotine content was significantly higher.



Just my experience ... Ed.

 

[Vocalek]

Out of curiosity, I created a poll asking people what effect "lights" had on their smoking.

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/polls/100527-light-cigs-smoke-more-less-same.html

Looks like the majority smoked more of them. My husband was one of the exceptions that prove the rule. When he switched to lights he managed to go down to half a pack. But I believe that this was a conscious decision on his part.