Vice: America's Strange Nicotine Regulations

[LoveVanilla]

America's Strange Nicotine Regulations Somehow Just Got Even Weirder

Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced that it would permit the sale of two new tobacco products: Moonlight and Moonlight Menthol, cigarettes that contain a much lower amount of nicotine than others currently available on the market.

It is a sign of the failings of the FDA's law that the agency is pursuing policies that make it easier to get the lethal smoke without the nicotine while simultaneously making it harder to get the nicotine without the smoke,"

"This is the exact opposite of how tobacco product regulation should work. It should be the more hazardous products that have to justify their existence, not the much safer ones."

This a good read; dated Dec 18,2019.

 

[CarolT]

Those low-nicotine cigarettes are just a way to outlaw tobacco while pretending not to do so, because nobody will want to smoke the worthless junk, even after they ban everything else.

 

[Nermal]

Those low-nicotine cigarettes are just a way to outlaw tobacco while pretending not to do so, because nobody will want to smoke the worthless junk, even after they ban everything else.

Oh, no. You just rip off the filters and smoke more per day.

 

[Jman8]

It should be the more hazardous products that have to justify their existence, not the much safer ones.

I would bet they spent a lot of money in justifying the existence of their new product.

 

[CarolT]

Oh, no. You just rip off the filters and smoke more per day.

What if ripping off the filters isn't enough, and the number you'd have to smoke is ridiculous?

 

[thanswr1]

This makes no sense unless you're on BT payroll.

The harm is not in the nicotine. The harm is in the burning tar. But everyone here knows that.

Apparently, not the FDA. They're still, pardon the expression, "blowing smoke".

 

[Rossum]

You guys may recall that a year or two ago, the FDA was talking about forcing a reduction in nicotine to "non addictive" levels. Somebody had to prove this could actually be done and was likely promised a PMTA for it. That somebody was the 22nd Century Group.

 

[sofarsogood]

My understanding is the low nic is by using a modfied tobacco variety that doesn't make much nic. If that's the only way it will be a while before it could be common. An interesting use would be to smoke those while simultaneously making the switch to vaping. Might make the transition easier.

 

[dripster]

This makes no sense unless you're on BT payroll.

They most definitely are... google for "vice pmi" and then click on the ft.com news article that appears near the top of search results. (I can't give you the direct link because it redirects to a different page with a subscription notice.)

 

[thanswr1]

Want to know what really gravels me? The first "electronic cigarette" was invented in 1964. It couldn't get traction. Given the fact the Surgeon General's report had just come out, this should have been seen as a godsend. If it had been manufactured and widely distributed, how many millions of lives could have been saved worldwide?

One other thing: We always hear from the vaping haters "We don't know what harm vaping can cause? Look how long it took for us to find cigarettes were harmful"?

1) We do know, from several peer reviewed legitimate studies, there is very little harm from vaping.

2) Cigarettes were known to be harmful a good 20-30 years before the Surgeon General's report. The Surgeon General's report confirmed what was already widely known.

The history of the discovery of the cigarette–lung cancer link: evidentiary traditions, corporate denial, global toll

 

[CarolT]

2) Cigarettes were known to be harmful a good 20-30 years before the Surgeon General's report. The Surgeon General's report confirmed what was already widely known.

The SG report was in 1965. In 1945, there had been some case series, but ZERO epidemiological studies. So there was no scientific basis for such "knowledge." However, there had been various theologically- or aesthetically-based rants against tobacco since the 1600s. Is this what you're applauding?

Also, the Surgeon General reports are fraudulent junk because they falsely blame smoking for diseases caused by infection, a fact of which those who think they're so smart for agreeing with what "everybody knows" are oblivious.
The Surgeon General Lies About Cancer
The Surgeon General Lies That Smoking Causes Heart Disease

 

[Jman8]

The SG report was in 1965. In 1945, there had been some case series, but ZERO epidemiological studies. So there was no scientific basis for such "knowledge." However, there had been various theologically- or aesthetically-based rants against tobacco since the 1600s. Is this what you're applauding?

Also, the Surgeon General reports are fraudulent junk because they falsely blame smoking for diseases caused by infection, a fact of which those who think they're so smart for agreeing with what "everybody knows" are oblivious.
The Surgeon General Lies About Cancer
The Surgeon General Lies That Smoking Causes Heart Disease

Can not agree more with this. Vapers that hate on smoking and cite what amounts to ANTZ rhetoric to say how harmful it is, are IMO primed to do the same when vaping data comes from same sources. As in "vaping is known to cause 27,000 deaths annually." Sounds preposterous right now, doesn't it? Give it time, such data will SURELY exist. And it will be junk.

I would think from 2019 data, the number has to be around 2000 currently (die annually). I would think all vapers that keep up with actual science would recognize that number is complete junk with regards to vaping nicotine. And yet, non-vapers actually currently take it as fact that vaping nicotine could probably kill you, and science has "shown" this.

 

[Nermal]

The SG report was in 1965. In 1945, there had been some case series, but ZERO epidemiological studies. So there was no scientific basis for such "knowledge." However, there had been various theologically- or aesthetically-based rants against tobacco since the 1600s. Is this what you're applauding?

Also, the Surgeon General reports are fraudulent junk because they falsely blame smoking for diseases caused by infection, a fact of which those who think they're so smart for agreeing with what "everybody knows" are oblivious.
The Surgeon General Lies About Cancer
The Surgeon General Lies That Smoking Causes Heart Disease

I don't care. I started in 1954 approximately. We were already calling them cancer sticks and coffin nails. Hey, anybody can quit smoking. It takes a man to face up to cancer!