Search This Blog

Friday, 4 August 2017

Reduced nicotine cigarettes and other insanities

Here is a picture from an article by an idiot in the New York Times

Taking the Addiction Out of Smoking

This picture is supposed to show how taking the nicotine out of cigarettes will help smokers smoke LESS. (fourth image)

I kid you not!

So I am going to suggest this picture should be reversed to show what happens when you take the nicotine out of cigarettes.

Lets call the images one, two, three, four.

Number four image is the face with the least smoke around it. To my mind and from my own personal experience, image four is a picture of a person who smokes GOOD STRONG CIGARETTES!

Number one image is the smoker who has been forced by insane meddling to reduce nicotine, to smoke a product that is harming them. They are smoking more - MORE. They are obliterated by smoke.
Cigarettes with nonaddictive nicotine levels would be radically different from what used to be known as “low tar” or “light” cigarettes, marketing gimmicks now barred by law. Those cigarettes were advertised as delivering less nicotine and tar into the lungs, even though there was no actual reduction.
No - there WAS a reduction in the experience of the consumer buying the product. They were terrible things! People smoked more.
Under the F.D.A. proposal, nicotine in cigarettes would be set at a level so low that smokers would not be able to extract enough to create or sustain addiction. Cigarette makers today keep the nicotine at between 1 and 2 percent by weight, having found this to be the Goldilocks optimum, neither too harsh nor too mild. Reducing this percentage by a factor of 10 would make it very difficult for cigarettes to become addictive. Reducing it even further would make addiction virtually impossible. Kids might start smoking, but they wouldn’t have trouble quitting.
Really? What a load of bollocks!  Nicotine has already been reduced - cigarettes today are not like they used to be before they were meddled with.
The beauty of the Tobacco Control Act signed by President Barack Obama in 2009 is that while the F.D.A. is barred from requiring the removal of allnicotine from cigarettes, or from banning cigarettes altogether, the agency can set a maximum nicotine level in the interest of public health. So though the tobacco industry cannot be forced to reduce nicotine to zero, it could be required to cut the level by, say, 99 percent.
The BEAUTY? Beauty?

Come on.
If the industry is serious about what it claims to want, maybe cigarette makers should sit down with the F.D.A. and hammer out a plan to end this catastrophic and entirely preventable epidemic.
This catastrophic and entirely preventable epidemic has been made worse by Tobacco Control interfering with the product. Give smokers proper cigarettes made with proper NATURAL tobacco as it once used to be. It should have been required that cigarettes be manufactured to high standards, with the best ingredients.  THAT'S what you should have done.