Major Cigarette makers sue over new tobacco law
- Thread starter Grammie
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
AWESOME
The FDA gets to regulate what goes into tobacco products.
I'm SURE that will mean they will take out that long list of cancer causing poisons and other toxins...
Right?
Oh - they're not really concerned about our health?
Hmmmm- are you sure about that?
30 years of smoking...
Vaporized by my ScrewDriver!
The FDA gets to regulate what goes into tobacco products.
I'm SURE that will mean they will take out that long list of cancer causing poisons and other toxins...
Right?
Oh - they're not really concerned about our health?
Hmmmm- are you sure about that?
30 years of smoking...
Vaporized by my ScrewDriver!
Here we go again - doesn't any of the grownups that work for the FDA like candy?????
ads geared towards children?! I don't know what ads they have seen but I've never seen an ad geared towards children....lol I've never seen dora the explorer or candyland type ads. where do these people get this crap? 
ads geared towards children?! I don't know what ads they have seen but I've never seen an ad geared towards children....lol I've never seen dora the explorer or candyland type ads. where do these people get this crap?
Usually they point to ads posted at around 3' off the ground at gas stations, and billboards near school zones. It's not the content of the ad exactly, it's the placement.
I think the only thing that gives them an excuse to say their marketed towards children is the flavors, WTF adults don't like fruit and candy? its the same story we heard in the ecig confrence call.
And don't they realize that lowering the nicotine level will only make people smoke more? Smokers' bodies are used to a certain amount of nicotine and they will have to smoke more to maintain that level. It is no wonder that Alteria supported the bill, they'll sell more cigarettes. Of course this also means smokers will be taking in more tar and carcinagens than they were before since the only thing they are lowering the amount of is the one thing in cigs that is safe for most people. Makes total sense (insert sarcastic voice here).
Maybe those who are continuing tobacco smokers should put together a class action suit against the FDA to prevent them from lowering nicotine content. There is plenty of proof that this will harm their health.
Hmm... and wouldn't it be interesting if they also threw in the fact that they might have given up the tar and other poisons years ago if the FDA had ever approved nicotine replacement products with adequate replacement levels of nicotine.
Hmm... and wouldn't it be interesting if they also threw in the fact that they might have given up the tar and other poisons years ago if the FDA had ever approved nicotine replacement products with adequate replacement levels of nicotine.
ads geared towards children?! I don't know what ads they have seen but I've never seen an ad geared towards children....lol I've never seen dora the explorer or candyland type ads. where do these people get this crap?
Surely I'm not the only one that was influenced by this?
I loved the Flintstones...I needed to BE the Flintstones. At first, it was just outfits made of pelt, then I tried living in a cave, but it wasn't enough. I needed, no craved, to recreate the whole 'Bedrock' experience. Then one day it hit me. Yeah, I could make appliances out of pets and wear rocks and bones, but the only way I would ever achieve my Flintstonian Utopia would be to cozy up against a boulder and inhale deeply on a cigarette, and thank God that someone before Fred and Barney had invented fire.
I guess you could call it my 'gateway' cartoon.
Moonflame
Smoking more is exactly what they want to see, smoke more, spend more money=more tax money into thier pockets. I say go tobacco companies, maybe it will take some of the heat off us
Smoking more is exactly what they want to see, smoke more, spend more money=more tax money into thier pockets. I say go tobacco companies, maybe it will take some of the heat off us
This lawsuit -- widely expected -- addresses First Amendment issues created by the politically correct writers of the legislation. Many here saw that the restrictions placed on communications from tobacco companies to adult consumers were illegal. Congress did not care. A majority of the voting public will support any level of restriction placed on tobacco. A total tobacco ban might actually have majority public support.
Such obvious unconstitutional language merely reflects the depth to which smoking and tobacco usage has fallen. Even Congress would strip a guaranteed constitutional right (freedom of speech) to slap at tobacco.
Don't confuse this lawsuit with some perceived constitutional right to e-smoke as "personal freedom of choice." Different matter entirely, dealing with selling snake oil to Americans. That's how e-smoking is seen by the FDA -- and, with Congress' recent actions -- is there any reason to believe that Congress would stand up and cheer e-cigs?
Not a chance.
Such obvious unconstitutional language merely reflects the depth to which smoking and tobacco usage has fallen. Even Congress would strip a guaranteed constitutional right (freedom of speech) to slap at tobacco.
Don't confuse this lawsuit with some perceived constitutional right to e-smoke as "personal freedom of choice." Different matter entirely, dealing with selling snake oil to Americans. That's how e-smoking is seen by the FDA -- and, with Congress' recent actions -- is there any reason to believe that Congress would stand up and cheer e-cigs?
Not a chance.
Hey Moonflame...this is a common myth that often repeated has become the truth to many. The reality is there may be an increase initially but the physical cues of smoking kick in and adapt to lower levels of nicotine. One example is the portion of the cigarette one is used to smoking the cigarette down to. I put mine out halfway thru the cigarette.
The myth can further be disproved by vaporers who start at high to super-high levels but can get by a lower nicotine levels. As a heavy smoker...there is no way that I could be satified vaping low, med, and high nicotine content interchangably. My first carts were low and medium..I keep various levels around depending on my mood and choice. Using the "smoke more for the hit" model I would be inhaling more with low than I do with high levels and that simply is not true.
From my understanding, if any part of a bill is found to be unconstitutional, the entire bill becomes null and void. Assuming that is indeed correct, tobacco and tobacco derivatives might be yanked away from FDA control if they can successfully prove that their constitutional rights have been violated by this bill.
Personally, I find most of the bill to be utterly ridiculous - flavors does not make a product targeted to kids; reducing nicotine content will only cause more harm, and there are so many other things wrong with it. If anything, they need to UP the nicotine content in tobacco products so that people will smoke less.
Personally, I find most of the bill to be utterly ridiculous - flavors does not make a product targeted to kids; reducing nicotine content will only cause more harm, and there are so many other things wrong with it. If anything, they need to UP the nicotine content in tobacco products so that people will smoke less.
Dr. Siegel analyzes the lawsuit today at http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/
Last edited:
The flavor argument is a joke. I guess fruit flavors in alcohol are ok and not marketing to kids (they even call it lemonade sometimes.) Usual govt and societal double standards.
No need to use this analogy because the gov't and societal double standards you're talking about are even worse than that!
ACTUAL Nicotine Replacement Products (gum, lozenges, etc.) which are OTC for anyone to buy, come in fruity flavors too and they even advertize it that way "Intense Flavor", etc. right on the box.
It's hard to name a worse double standard.
This is my understanding too. Wouldn't that be great!?! Sad that a TON of money went into passing it in the first place... EDIT: Please see yvilla's comment #20 as it explains where I am wrong here
BUT... if this lawsuit is going on and say that Judge Leon finds that we are more so a tobacco product than we are a "new drug", then with this litigation going on it could very well buy us a bit more time before regulation comes about. Could get very interesting!!!!
Thank you! Posting again so others will READ!!!
Quote from post:
"There are two aspects of the legislation that are likely to be challenged on First Amendment grounds. First is the bill's advertising restrictions. Second is the bill's restrictions on truthful information that the tobacco companies are permitted to communicate to their customers. The bill's advertising restrictions are unlikely to be upheld by the Supreme Court because the Court has already struck down very similar regulations that were issued in Massachusetts."
"The second aspect of the legislation which will almost certainly be challenged in court is the bill's prohibition on cigarette companies making truthful statements about FDA regulation of tobacco products. The House version of the bill prevents companies from even stating that FDA regulation of tobacco products exists, while the Senate version prevents companies from making any statement that could be implied as suggesting that the FDA approves cigarettes for sale and consumption. In both cases, the constitutionality of the legislation is doubtful because it prevents companies from making truthful statements and therefore is likely in violation of their First Amendment free speech rights.
Last edited:
ads geared towards children?! I don't know what ads they have seen but I've never seen an ad geared towards children....lol I've never seen dora the explorer or candyland type ads. where do these people get this crap?
The 'geared toward children' arguement is merely a means to an end for them. They don't give a damn about marketing to children, they merely want to wield more power over the consumer. If it takes a scare tactic like that, then they will use a scare tactic like that
I hope that they sue the .... off of the FDA. Not because I like big tobacco, but they have the money to make a dent in the FDA's armour. The FDA need to be taken down a couple of rungs, as we all know that power corrupts. Right?
Unfortunately, as to this bill, that's not accurate Outwest. It's the legal principal called "severability", and it provides that if any provisions of a legislative bill are found to be unenforceable/unconstitutional, then only they will be thrown out and the rest remain. Congress specifically includes that language in the tobacco bill, in Section 5 of the Act.
- Status
Similar threads
