Author Topic: House Passes Sweeping Control Over Tobacco Industry  (Read 2231 times)

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 66495
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
House Passes Sweeping Control Over Tobacco Industry
« on: April 06, 2009, 11:52:41 AM »
Sort of flying under the radar. 

House Passes Sweeping Control Over Tobacco Industry

Thursday, April 2, 2009 1:53 PM

U.S. lawmakers voted overwhelmingly Thursday to give the government unprecedented powers over the tobacco industry, including new curbs on marketing tactics and cigarette ingredients.

The US House of Representatives approved The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act by a 298-112 margin, sending the legislation to face an uncertain fate in the Senate, where it died in 2008.

"This is truly a historic day in the fight against tobacco," said Democratic Representative Henry Waxman of California, the measure's chief author. "Now we all can breathe a little easier."

Supporters of the bill hope that backing from US President Barack Obama -- who admits to having an occasional smoke -- and years of successfully expanding restrictions on who can smoke, and what, and where, will spell success in 2009.

"FDA regulation of cigarettes -- the most lethal of all consumer products -- is long overdue. I am confident that the Senate will approve it expeditiously, and send it to President Obama for his signature," said Democratic Senator Ted Kennedy, the measure's Senate champion.

The bill, backed by health groups like the American Cancer Society, American Heart Association and American Lung Association, gives the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) the power to regulate tobacco products.

Waxman says the legislation is needed because 400,000 Americans die from tobacco-related illnesses each year and more than 1,000 children start smoking each day.

Foes say that it would suck down FDA funds needed to meet the agency's already cash-strapped core missions, such as ensuring food safety and testing cancer treatments and medication to ease chronic pain.

The measure would require the FDA to enforce a rule that would ban all outdoor tobacco advertising within 1,000 feet of schools and playgrounds, and end all tobacco-brand sponsorship of sport and entertainment events.

It would also limit tobacco advertising in publications with a significant teenage readership, in outdoor areas where children can be present and to black-and-white text only.

It would also restrict vending machine and self-service sales to adult-only facilities and require vendors to verify age for all over-the-counter sales of tobacco products.

The legislation would require tobacco companies to disclose to the FDA the ingredients in their products, and allow the agency to require changes to protect public health, though not to reduce nicotine content to zero or ban a class of tobacco products.

It would also require larger, more specific health warnings, which would cover the top third of the front and rear panels of the package and give the FDA the power to require graphic warning labels that cover half of the front and rear panels.

"The FDA is strapped for resources and failing in many of its core missions," said Republican Mike Rogers of Michigan. "This bill today takes away precious resources."

"The bill is supported by 1,000 public health and other groups," countered Waxman. "They would not support this bill if it did what the gentleman from Michigan claims it does."
 
http://www.newsmax.com/politics/house_tobacco/2009/04/02/199029.html

shootfighter1

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5674
  • Competitor- NABBA Nationals Overall Champ
Re: House Passes Sweeping Control Over Tobacco Industry
« Reply #1 on: April 06, 2009, 12:12:52 PM »
Some of these things may be ok but its concerning how much power the gov is receiving....and whats next on the chopping block?

Hedgehog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19464
  • It Rubs The Lotion On Its Skin.
Re: House Passes Sweeping Control Over Tobacco Industry
« Reply #2 on: April 06, 2009, 12:26:54 PM »
I'll bet you anything that this fcuker Mike Rogers is backed by some tobacco lobby.
Fcuking menace to society.
As empty as paradise

BM OUT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8229
  • Getbig!
Re: House Passes Sweeping Control Over Tobacco Industry
« Reply #3 on: April 06, 2009, 12:58:35 PM »
Im not for banning anything[Im actually anti-drug laws] and Im especially bothered when the government gets involved in industry.However,if they are going to make steroids a controlled substance.then ceretainly smoking should have some regulations as well.

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: House Passes Sweeping Control Over Tobacco Industry
« Reply #4 on: April 06, 2009, 01:05:15 PM »
Im not for banning anything[Im actually anti-drug laws] and Im especially bothered when the government gets involved in industry.However,if they are going to make steroids a controlled substance.then ceretainly smoking should have some regulations as well.

no shit.  Make them $20 a pack.

At least with steroids, you only inject your own body.  Smokers (especially the ones who bitch about having to contain their second hand smoke) disgust me.

Imagine if I walked around with a farting machine, sitting at tables net to people or in traffic, blowing farts into their car.  It's just about the same thing.

Hedgehog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19464
  • It Rubs The Lotion On Its Skin.
Re: House Passes Sweeping Control Over Tobacco Industry
« Reply #5 on: April 06, 2009, 01:18:08 PM »
Im not for banning anything[Im actually anti-drug laws] and Im especially bothered when the government gets involved in industry.However,if they are going to make steroids a controlled substance.then ceretainly smoking should have some regulations as well.

What pisses me off is how the tobacco industry is targeting kids.

They don't seem to be bothered if 14 year old junior high school girls are hooked on cigarettes and are looking at a life of addiction, bad health and early death.

All they see is that daily payoff from another cigarette addict.

Pisses me off.

As empty as paradise

shootfighter1

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5674
  • Competitor- NABBA Nationals Overall Champ
Re: House Passes Sweeping Control Over Tobacco Industry
« Reply #6 on: April 06, 2009, 01:19:46 PM »
That I agree with.  Cigarette and alcohol companies should be prevented from advertising to kids.  We have a duty to protect our youth.

Hedgehog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19464
  • It Rubs The Lotion On Its Skin.
Re: House Passes Sweeping Control Over Tobacco Industry
« Reply #7 on: April 06, 2009, 01:33:25 PM »
I just hope beer is not next :)

I know what your argument is.

"If you take away cigarettes - then what is preventing the government from taking away our alcohol?"


But shit bro, it ain't the same.

Alcohol, while having plenty of negative effects, actually have positive effects as well. People will become more sociable when under slight influence of alcohol.

How many relations are the result of a slight alcohol induced state? We'll never know.

But with cigarettes there is absolutely no positive effect. Zero.

No health benefit, no nothing.

You can even argue that a glass of red wine is good for your general health.

But cigarettes? One cigarette a day is good.. for what? No. There's absolutely no positive with cigarettes.

So don't make the cigarette-alcohol association.

It ain't flyin.

Alcohol, while being a bad habit and actually a potentator for a lot of violent crimes, still isn't dangerous when used in moderate amounts.

You won't find hardly anyone who argues this.

But cigarettes are bad - even when used in low doses.

Bad.

Period.

As empty as paradise

Hedgehog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19464
  • It Rubs The Lotion On Its Skin.
Re: House Passes Sweeping Control Over Tobacco Industry
« Reply #8 on: April 06, 2009, 01:42:57 PM »
no actually that wasn't my argument, I wasn't making one, I swear...  I just don't want beer to be targeted.  :)

Alrighty then... Let's move on... nothing to see here.
As empty as paradise

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: House Passes Sweeping Control Over Tobacco Industry
« Reply #9 on: April 06, 2009, 01:54:37 PM »
alcohol increases the birth rate, im sure of that!

The ChemistV2

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2008
Re: House Passes Sweeping Control Over Tobacco Industry
« Reply #10 on: April 06, 2009, 02:29:43 PM »
They should just increase the Federal sales tax on it....and while they're at it, add sales tax to all worthless,unhealthy products. Tax fried pork rinds, Grape Soda, useless sugary cereals, Twinkies, etc. They could probably do away with income tax and maybe parents would think twice about feeding their kids all that crap and we'd end up with less obesity and diabetics. That would lower the burgeoning medical costs that have resulted from all the lowlifes, third worlders and losers who live on junk food.

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
Re: House Passes Sweeping Control Over Tobacco Industry
« Reply #11 on: April 06, 2009, 02:37:24 PM »
They should just increase the Federal sales tax on it....and while they're at it, add sales tax to all worthless,unhealthy products. Tax fried pork rinds, Grape Soda, useless sugary cereals, Twinkies, etc. They could probably do away with income tax and maybe parents would think twice about feeding their kids all that crap and we'd end up with less obesity and diabetics. That would lower the burgeoning medical costs that have resulted from all the lowlifes, third worlders and losers who live on junk food.
you just described 95% of the available products found in grocery stores :D

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 66495
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: House Passes Sweeping Control Over Tobacco Industry
« Reply #12 on: April 06, 2009, 02:48:06 PM »
Cigarettes are unique IMO.  They cause suffering and death when used as intended.  No abuse required.  I doubt a company could take any of the known carcinogens in cigarettes and sell them today.  Would never get FDA approval. 

The most outrageous thing is tobacco companies cannot stay in business without hooking kids.  I read a while back that most addicts start when they are kids.  Tobacco companies know this. 

Hedgehog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19464
  • It Rubs The Lotion On Its Skin.
Re: House Passes Sweeping Control Over Tobacco Industry
« Reply #13 on: April 06, 2009, 03:17:33 PM »
Cigarettes are unique IMO.  They cause suffering and death when used as intended.  No abuse required.  I doubt a company could take any of the known carcinogens in cigarettes and sell them today.  Would never get FDA approval. 

The most outrageous thing is tobacco companies cannot stay in business without hooking kids.  I read a while back that most addicts start when they are kids.  Tobacco companies know this. 
Very true.
The worst part of it all is how these tobacco corps not only condone kids smoking.
It's actually a vital part of their moneymaking strategy.
Fcuking assholes.
As empty as paradise

Butterbean

  • Special Guests
  • Getbig V
  • ******
  • Posts: 19324
Re: House Passes Sweeping Control Over Tobacco Industry
« Reply #14 on: April 06, 2009, 03:20:16 PM »


Imagine if I walked around with a farting machine, sitting at tables net to people or in traffic, blowing farts into their car.  It's just about the same thing.

 ;D
R

thelamefalsehood

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1392
  • I love lamp
Re: House Passes Sweeping Control Over Tobacco Industry
« Reply #15 on: April 06, 2009, 05:54:02 PM »
I guess I'm an idiot, because you guys all claim that cigarettes are marketed towards kids, but I just don't see it. No commercials, none in movie previews, very few in print ads and its becoming more rare in movies and TV. I smoke occasionally and that is my right. I don't blow it in anyones face, chase kids around trying to hand them out, or run up to people when I see them coming so they can walk through my smoke. Smokers are treated like leppers in todays society, its become a joke. McDonalds and Burger Kings on every corner just waiting for your kids business. Commercials talking about Happy Meals and Double Whoppers on all the time.  Yet, I discreetly smoke a ciggarette, and I'm looked down on like a degenerate. You want to know whats marketed to kids, check out all drugs that have commercials on every 15 minutes, because every kid and adult has an ailment these days, or at least thats what you are told. So, I will continue to enjoy my occassional cigarette and pay for your childs health insurance, and the Senates pet programs. Don't throw stones when you live in a ....................

grab an umbrella

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2034
Re: House Passes Sweeping Control Over Tobacco Industry
« Reply #16 on: April 07, 2009, 12:19:59 AM »
Wow, quoted for absolute truth.  When cigarettes start killing as many people as heart disease and diabetes, then we can talk.


Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 66495
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: House Passes Sweeping Control Over Tobacco Industry
« Reply #17 on: April 07, 2009, 12:56:30 PM »
I guess I'm an idiot, because you guys all claim that cigarettes are marketed towards kids, but I just don't see it. No commercials, none in movie previews, very few in print ads and its becoming more rare in movies and TV. I smoke occasionally and that is my right. I don't blow it in anyones face, chase kids around trying to hand them out, or run up to people when I see them coming so they can walk through my smoke. Smokers are treated like leppers in todays society, its become a joke. McDonalds and Burger Kings on every corner just waiting for your kids business. Commercials talking about Happy Meals and Double Whoppers on all the time.  Yet, I discreetly smoke a ciggarette, and I'm looked down on like a degenerate. You want to know whats marketed to kids, check out all drugs that have commercials on every 15 minutes, because every kid and adult has an ailment these days, or at least thats what you are told. So, I will continue to enjoy my occassional cigarette and pay for your childs health insurance, and the Senates pet programs. Don't throw stones when you live in a ....................

It has been well documented for years.  Here is a sample article.  Note that they have to "recruit 5,000 new young smokers every day to maintain the total number of smokers (due to the number of people who quit or die from tobacco-related illness each year)."   

Tobacco Industry's Targeting of Youth, Minorities and Women

AHA Advocacy Position
The American Heart Association supports legislation that seeks to restrict or prohibit tobacco advertising, promotion and marketing to young people, minorities or women. The American Heart Association also works in partnership with the National Center for Tobacco-Free Kids on this important issue.

How does the tobacco industry target youth?

The tobacco industry has long targeted young people with its cigarette advertising and promotional campaigns.  One of the most memorable, the now-defunct “Joe Camel” campaign initiated by the R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, helped generate public outrage against tobacco company efforts to reach young audiences.  In the November 1998 multistate tobacco settlement, the major tobacco companies promised not to “take any action, directly or indirectly, to target youth … in the advertising, promotion, or marketing of tobacco products.”  But studies since then have shown that tobacco-industry marketing has reached record levels since the settlement, with much of the increase due to strategies aimed at young people.

In 1999, the first year after the multistate settlement agreement (MSA), the tobacco companies spent a record $8.4 billion on advertising and promotions, an increase of 22.3 percent from the previous year, the largest one-year increase since the U.S. Federal Trade Commission began tracking tobacco industry marketing expenditures in 1970.  Then, in 2000, they increased expenditures another 14 percent to $9.6 billion.  In 2001, the major tobacco companies increased their marketing expenditures to more than $11.4 billion, an increase in tobacco industry marketing of more than 66 percent since 1998. An August 2001 study in the New England Journal of Medicine showed that cigarette companies increased their advertising in youth-oriented magazines after the MSA was signed, especially for the three brands most popular with youth – Marlboro, Camel and Newport.

The National Survey on Drug Use and Health estimates that each day more than 4,000 people under 18 try their first cigarette.  That's more than 730,000 new smokers every year.  According to the Final Report of the National Commission on Drug-Free Schools, children and adolescents consume more than one billion packs of cigarettes a year. Economist Kenneth Warner, Ph.D., estimates that the tobacco industry needs to recruit 5,000 new young smokers every day to maintain the total number of smokers (due to the number of people who quit or die from tobacco-related illness each year). The Department of Health and Human Services estimates that 90 percent of smokers begin tobacco use before age 20; 50 percent of smokers begin tobacco use by age 14; and 25 percent begin their smoking addiction by age 12 (the 6th grade). Since 1991, past-month smoking has increased by 35 percent among eighth graders and 43 percent among 10th graders, while smoking among high school seniors is at a 19-year high. An April 1996 Journal of Marketing study concluded that children are three times more sensitive to advertising. According to a 1994 Centers for Disease Control report, 86 percent of underage smokers prefer Marlboro, Newport or Camel, the three most heavily advertised cigarette brands.

How does the tobacco industry target minorities?

During the last decade, the tobacco industry has aggressively increased its advertising and promotional campaigns targeted at minorities. One of the industry's most notorious, and ultimately failed, minority cigarette marketing campaigns was for "Uptown" cigarettes. The American Heart Association, the American Cancer Society and the American Lung Association, working jointly as the Coalition on Smoking OR Health, played an active role in the Philadelphia "Coalition Against Uptown Cigarettes." The coalition brought health, consumer and social justice groups together to oppose the test marketing of Uptown in Philadelphia. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., the manufacturers of Uptown, eventually withdrew the product under pressure from the coalition and HHS Secretary Louis Sullivan, MD. In addressing the issue of tobacco industry targeting of minorities, Dr. Sullivan said: "At a time when our people desperately need the message of health promotion, the tobacco industry's message is more disease, more suffering and more death for a group already bearing more than its share of smoking-related illnesses and mortality." Former District of Columbia Health Commissioner Reed Tuckson defined the tobacco industry's marketing practices as "the subjugation of people of color through disease." Recent studies have shown a higher concentration of tobacco advertising in magazines aimed at African Americans, such as Jet and Ebony, than in similar magazines aimed at broader audiences, such as Time and People. According to the Centers for Disease Control, in 1996 smoking rates among African-American males had doubled within four years. From 1992 to 2000 smoking rates increased among African-American 8th graders from 5.3 percent to 9.6 percent; among African-American 10th graders from 6.6 percent to 11.1 percent, and among African-American 12th graders from 8.7 percent to 14.3 percent.  Although African Americans tend to smoke fewer cigarettes per day and begin smoking later in life than whites, their smoking-related disease mortality is significantly higher.

Black-owned and black-oriented magazines receive proportionately more revenues from cigarette advertising than do other consumer magazines. In addition, stronger, mentholated brands are more commonly advertised in black-oriented than in white-oriented magazines. Billboards advertising tobacco products are placed in African-American communities four to five times more often than in white communities.

According to the National Coalition of Hispanic Health and Human Services Organizations, the tobacco industry specifically targets Hispanic consumers because of the long-recognized "economic value of targeting advertising to low-income Hispanics and non-Hispanic blacks," and because "Hispanics tend to be much more 'brand-loyal' than their non-Hispanic white counterparts." The Hispanic coalition also concluded "Billboards and posters targeting (the) cigarette message to Hispanics have spotted the landscape and store windows in Hispanic communities for many years, especially in low-income communities... Recent innovations have included sponsorship of community-based events such as festivals and annual fairs."

How does the tobacco industry target women?

More than 178,000 women die every year from smoking-related diseases. Smoking among girls and young women increased dramatically during the 1990s.  From 1991 to 1999, smoking among high school girls increased from 27 to 34.9 percent. Lung cancer has become the leading cause of cancer death among women, having increased by nearly 400 percent in the past 20 years. That statistic led former U.S. Surgeon General Antonia Novello to comment that "the Virginia Slims Woman is catching up to the Marlboro Man."

Ironically, since the 1980 Surgeon General's Report on women and smoking, the tobacco industry has stepped up the introduction of cigarette brands targeted to women. The new wave of marketing to women includes cigarettes advertised for their perfumed scents and exotic flavors or whose names include the terms "slims" and "lights." Product packaging and advertising have also featured watercolors and pastels.

One of the most egregious examples of the tobacco industry's targeting of women was the introduction of "Dakota" by R.J. Reynolds in 1990. An internal Reynolds marketing plan revealed that Dakota was to be marketed to "virile females" between the ages of 18 and 24 who have no education beyond high school and who watch soap operas and attend tractor pulls. At a 1990 Interagency Committee on Smoking and Health meeting chaired by the Surgeon General, the Dakota marketing plan was called a "deliberate focus on young women of low socioeconomic status who are at high risk of pregnancy." The target market for Dakota also happens to be the one group of women where smoking rates have declined the least and who are more likely than other women to continue to smoke during pregnancy.  Cigarette companies continue to target women using themes in advertising that associate smoking with independence, stylishness, weight control, sophistication and power.

http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=11226

George Whorewell

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7362
  • TND
Re: House Passes Sweeping Control Over Tobacco Industry
« Reply #18 on: April 07, 2009, 02:05:33 PM »
I find it comical that in Europe, where an 11 year old can smoke cigarettes and drink wine and coffee out in the open, it doesn't seem like there is a rash of insane lawsuits and rampant government regulation. Part of that is cultural, the other part has to do with the fact that the European legal system doesn't abide by America's tort law. But maybe a third part, is that Europeans dont give a shit about this stuff.  Why are American socialists so obsessed with cigarettes and health?


Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 66495
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: House Passes Sweeping Control Over Tobacco Industry
« Reply #19 on: April 07, 2009, 02:25:28 PM »
I find it comical that in Europe, where an 11 year old can smoke cigarettes and drink wine and coffee out in the open, it doesn't seem like there is a rash of insane lawsuits and rampant government regulation. Part of that is cultural, the other part has to do with the fact that the European legal system doesn't abide by America's tort law. But maybe a third part, is that Europeans dont give a shit about this stuff.  Why are American socialists so obsessed with cigarettes and health?



My primary problems with the industry are it produces a product that causes suffering and death when used as intended, and it is dependent on hooking kids to stay in business. 

I have other issues with them, like the fact they have pretty much always known that their product causes cancer.  That they have sold their product overseas to consumers in Third World countries that don't have the same oversight, so the overseas product is even more dangerous.  That they engaged in a decades-long disinformation campaign to conceal the harmful effects of their product.   

If I could be king for a day and shut down that industry I would do it. 

tu_holmes

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15922
  • Robot
Re: House Passes Sweeping Control Over Tobacco Industry
« Reply #20 on: April 07, 2009, 02:25:43 PM »
Seems redundant to me... I don't know anywhere that these limits are not already in place and enforced by the Tobacco industry already.

Do you?

Very silly to think you need a bigger "This is bad for you stamp."

More government control and bullshit... If I were the Tobacco companies, I'd just leave the country and take my tax dollars elsewhere.

thelamefalsehood

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1392
  • I love lamp
Re: House Passes Sweeping Control Over Tobacco Industry
« Reply #21 on: April 07, 2009, 03:17:19 PM »
Seems redundant to me... I don't know anywhere that these limits are not already in place and enforced by the Tobacco industry already.

Do you?

Very silly to think you need a bigger "This is bad for you stamp."

More government control and bullshit... If I were the Tobacco companies, I'd just leave the country and take my tax dollars elsewhere.

Totally agree. Look, smokers get it, its bad for you, yes I know, I understand. If I shave a few years off my life, so be it, those are the Depends Diapers years anyway. And as far as second hand smoke goes, smokers are ostricized everywhere they go, to the farthest reaches of the parking lot, or to the cold and rainy days outside the workcenters. Unless you are exposed to it on a daily basis, I just don't see how the one time you walked past a smoker will automaticlly cause you to drop dead years before you were supposed to. I rarely eat fast food, so I think its a good idea all the fat asses in America should pay a guilt tax for all the cheeseburgers and fries they eat. That has to cause as many problems, diabetes, heart disease, etc. as my cigarrettes and they are making the same choice as me to endanger there health by eating crap. But that wouldn't be to popular with the overwhelming number of fatties in our country. So go ahead with the vendetta with the easiest targets, smokers.

George Whorewell

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7362
  • TND
Re: House Passes Sweeping Control Over Tobacco Industry
« Reply #22 on: April 07, 2009, 03:49:13 PM »

My primary problems with the industry are it produces a product that causes suffering and death when used as intended, and it is dependent on hooking kids to stay in business. 

I have other issues with them, like the fact they have pretty much always known that their product causes cancer.  That they have sold their product overseas to consumers in Third World countries that don't have the same oversight, so the overseas product is even more dangerous.  That they engaged in a decades-long disinformation campaign to conceal the harmful effects of their product.  

If I could be king for a day and shut down that industry I would do it. 


Beach the two of us finally disagree on something- for I think the first time since I started posting here.

As far as exporting it to third world countries, we do the same thing with pesticides, rodentcides and fungicides that don't conform with TSCA and other federal regulatory statutes. We sell stuff like DDT all over the planet to the poorest of the poor knowing fully well how dangerous it is to the populations that will ingest it. That bothers me a hell of a lot more than cigarettes. From a practical standpoint, I don't think that lung cancer is of high concern to populations where food and water are scarce, disease is rampant, violence is common and most will die before turning 30. Also, how do you explain Europe? I mean, not smoking in Europe is considered nothing short of bizarre. In southern Europe especially, kids smoke before their teenagers and nobody says a thing. This is the same continent where there is a governmental authority that reviews what pornography goes on cable television.

My problem isn't with the truth of your point, it is undisputed that cigarettes are harmful to ones health. However, these days, where everything is scrutnized up the ass and cigarette companies pay for advertising that encourages young people not to smoke, looking backward is a needless exercise in futility. I mean, the  hundreds of millions upon hundreds of millions of dollars cigarette companies have paid out in settlements and in court is enough IMO. These days everything has a big fat warning label, and I cant watch television without watching a disgusting commercial about people without voiceboxes or fingers because they smoked.

There are all kinds of rules and regulations these companies have to abide by now when advertising, the federal government taxes and regulates them tooth and nail. When you have an industry pay for advertising that encourages potential customers not to use it, I think that industry has done enough.

As far as hooking kids to stay in business- I think the blame rests with parents in this country and hollywood/TV just as much and even more so than the cigarette companies themselves.

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 66495
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: House Passes Sweeping Control Over Tobacco Industry
« Reply #23 on: April 07, 2009, 05:51:33 PM »
Beach the two of us finally disagree on something- for I think the first time since I started posting here.

As far as exporting it to third world countries, we do the same thing with pesticides, rodentcides and fungicides that don't conform with TSCA and other federal regulatory statutes. We sell stuff like DDT all over the planet to the poorest of the poor knowing fully well how dangerous it is to the populations that will ingest it. That bothers me a hell of a lot more than cigarettes. From a practical standpoint, I don't think that lung cancer is of high concern to populations where food and water are scarce, disease is rampant, violence is common and most will die before turning 30. Also, how do you explain Europe? I mean, not smoking in Europe is considered nothing short of bizarre. In southern Europe especially, kids smoke before their teenagers and nobody says a thing. This is the same continent where there is a governmental authority that reviews what pornography goes on cable television.

My problem isn't with the truth of your point, it is undisputed that cigarettes are harmful to ones health. However, these days, where everything is scrutnized up the ass and cigarette companies pay for advertising that encourages young people not to smoke, looking backward is a needless exercise in futility. I mean, the  hundreds of millions upon hundreds of millions of dollars cigarette companies have paid out in settlements and in court is enough IMO. These days everything has a big fat warning label, and I cant watch television without watching a disgusting commercial about people without voiceboxes or fingers because they smoked.

There are all kinds of rules and regulations these companies have to abide by now when advertising, the federal government taxes and regulates them tooth and nail. When you have an industry pay for advertising that encourages potential customers not to use it, I think that industry has done enough.

As far as hooking kids to stay in business- I think the blame rests with parents in this country and hollywood/TV just as much and even more so than the cigarette companies themselves.

George it's okay if we disagree on something.   :)  I agree with most of what you post on the board. 

I've been an anti-tobacco company militant since I was kid.  It all started when I was 4 or 5 and I convinced my dad to quit smoking.   :)

In general, I agree that so long as a company makes full disclosure about a product and the product may have some harmful side-effects, that the company shouldn't be held responsible.  I really just see this industry as something completely different.  Maybe I wouldn't think the industry was so evil if they didn't target and hook kids.  Remember Joe Camel?  These folks knew exactly what they were doing.  Yes parents share blame for not keeping their kids away from this stuff, but that doesn't get the industry off the hook (at least not with me). 

I just can't believe we ever allowed this industry to mass produce and sell poison, and subsidized it no less.  You mentioned DDT.  Did you know that's one of the toxins founds in cigarette smoke?  Imagine a company trying to market a DDT pill for human consumption today.  Or arsenic.  Or ammonia.  It really boggles my mind. 

I completely understand the point about steps being taken by the industry, warning labels, etc.  I think if we were talking about any other industry, I might agree that what they're doing is enough.  But I can't get past their history, what they have done and continue to do to kids, and how much sickness and death are caused by normal use of their product.   

grab an umbrella

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2034
Re: House Passes Sweeping Control Over Tobacco Industry
« Reply #24 on: April 07, 2009, 06:09:10 PM »
Beach, I think you're living in the past man. Yes cigarette companies advertised to kids, but not anymore.  As someone already mentioned, cigarette companies literally pay for commercials to tell people not to use their product.  What other industry has to do that?  It's ridiculous.  What if we started making coca cola and mcdonalds advertise against themselves and say how dangerous it was?