Nicotine levels up 10%-20%
 

Nicotine levels in cigarettes up 10%-20% in the last few years. Anyone else surprised/shocked at the tabacco co's efforts to stay alive (by shortening their customer's lives).

Why are they still here???

You need a, "I don't, but as long as it's legal, who am I to judge," option.

I quit almost two years ago, and I gotta say I'de like a smoke:(

Not gonna happen, but I'de really like a smoke.

Anyway, to each their own.

Oh, that's negotiable. It's only a question of enough people getting fed up with the insurance and healthcare costs, not to mention the lost "slacker time" of smokers as they disappear for a butt. And then there are the tobacco farmer's subsidies...

Once enough people get fed-up with it, then it won't be legal anymore. Legal just means that a concensus of people didn't agree to make something illegal. As far as I know the constitution doesn't say anything about tobacco, but it does speak a lot about governing for the common good. Passing a law that would...
- 1) Increase the health of the population
- 2) Decrease healthcare costs
- 3) Cut government subsidies

What's not to like about it?

I'm fed up with paying for high healthcare costs caused by fatties also... Let's ban fat people.

Yeah and what about those dangerous sports car owners! Lets ban all of them!

I hear you. But food is a requirement for life, and the food companies aren't necessarily manipulating the content to make you eat more of it. Pretty much everyone agrees good tasting food is a public good, even if some people abuse it.

Tobacco on the other hand isn't a necessity for life, and the tobacco companies apparently are manipulating it's contents to ensure that people can't quit even if they wanted to.

Besides, the existance of other social evils doesn't change the discussion about this one. If you want to start an obesity thread go ahead. This is a tobacco thread.

Yeah, but Porsche and other manufacturers do not design the car such that they can't be opened from the inside to let a driver out if they want to leave. But tobacco companies are essentially doing that.

I don't smoke. Never have. But I'll defend the right of anyone to smoke as long as I don't have to smell it. There are too damn many rules as it is.

Why are we so intent on restricting dangerous activity? Freedom is much more important than safety. Do we really want to develop a culture where risk taking is unacceptable? As long as people are willing to accept personal responsibility for their behavior, leave them alone.

At least during the warranty period :p

How 'bout everyone makes their own damn lifestyle choices and pays the premiums according to them. No free healthcare, none o' that stuff. Want to pork up on beef sandwiches every day? Go ahead, but guess who's paying for your quadruple-bypass? YOU. Want to smoke up? Freebase heroin? Live on Pez? Go ahead, but you're responsible for finding and paying for your own damn insurance.

I am so tired of people perpetuating urban myths when they have absolutely no accurate knowledge of the subject.
I've done a great deal of research on the subject to support a term paper I wrote in college.

MYTH: smoking tobacco increases medical costs and insurance costs.
BS. The US surgeon general's office has published many studies that prove the opposite. Smokers actually rack up lower lifetime health costs than non-smokers because they do not live as long.

MYTH: smoking puts a financial burden on society and the government. Again, BS. Smokers do not draw as much social security as non-smokers and they pay a great deal more taxes on their tobacco. Smoking is financially beneficial to society.

MYTH: second hand smoke is worse than first hand smoke.
BS. Again, the US surgeon general's office has paid for and published studies trying to prove that second hand smoke is worse. What they proved and quitely presented as to not draw much attention is that the opposite was true. Secondhand smoke was shown to be much less dangerous than first hand smoke. In fact, the clinical study that I cited in my term paper in 1999 indicted that they were unable to identify or provide direct evidence that second hand smoke was directly responsible for ANY deaths.
I'm not saying that second hand smoke is safe. I am saying that the stupidass health nazis made up most of their so-called evidence to scare people into supporting their cause and lots of sheep are buying into their propaganda.

Now, I could say that I don't care for something that others consume. Does that give me the right to ban it? Of course not.
We are all free to make personal choice. If we want to smoke, we can and will. If we don't, then we don't but DO NOT STICK YOUR NOSE IN MY BUSINESS and try to tell me how to live my life and I will extend you the same courtesy.
And please refrain from spreading manure. Check your facts.

PS, I'm sure some of you will try to post little quips that condradict my statements. They are all over the net, on every health nazi website there is. Lets try to stick to factual, unbiased, professional and accurate information, shall we? No extemist drivel, just real information.
I suggest the surgeon general's office as one, the library of congess might be another.
JAMA is very a good source as long as the information is clinical and not editorial in nature.

Jeff and Sammy hit the nail squarely on the head.

Sammy has some good points, and in reference to his post where did you (jluetjen) get your information that nicotine levels are up?

Subscribing - because I think this thread's gonna' be a good one.

BTW: ban breathing...SmileWavy

My local news paper/web site.

Sammy is probably right, both my Aunt and Uncle died in their early 50's and my neighbor across the street died in his mid 50's from smoking, actually, lung cancer from smoking.

They saved the world 30 years of medical expenses.

And look at it this way, 30 years of them not using our gas either.

Well, it makes perfect sense that 93-percent of manufacturers would raise the level of nicotine, only so thay can hold onto the shrinking minority of smokers.

IMO it is definitely an issue swept under the rug by the govt. In many ways I agree with Moses, and as I have more of a libertarian mindset, I believe one should do what they want, and smoking, much to the fortuitousness of those in govt, the decreasing numbers of smokers and the fair amount of "don't" warnings, makes this a non-issue for many. It's sort of like slavery and reparation to me - this was a true issue 150 years ago, however now, the subject of slavery is not nearly as viable or important.

Smokers, by now, should know the implications of their habit, and should have either quit or making plans to do so. In the end, quitting/never supporting the habit, will kill the industry.

The tobacco companies, on the other hand, do not seem to have acted illegally. Yes, the tobacco companies' lobbying power allows them to be very influencial toward shunning off government oversight, but then many American companies have if not the same, similar arrangements.

As a sideline... do they still sell low nicotine cigarettes?

(for you young-ins back in the 70's and 80's they had such things)

I don't smoke cigarettes and I acknowledge that they ruin you health.

However, a quote from the article:

"The study tried to measure nicotine levels based on the way smokers actually use cigarettes, health officials said, in part by partially covering ventilation holes as they smoke and taking longer puffs. Traditional testing methods which don’t take real-life smoking habits into account, typically report lower nicotine contents, officials said.

Of the 179 cigarette brands tested in 2004 for the report, 93 percent fell into the highest range for nicotine. In 1998, 84 percent of 116 brands tested fell into the highest range. "

Now if they have changed the testing procedure (from one that typically shows lower levels) isn't it possible the nicotine level is the same as before?

Smokers really get screwed with SSI. The early departure limits lifetime payments.

Then you'd have to ban beer too... ...and I'd have to hunt you down and kill ya. :D

I call BS on that - I bet in a few years somebody will prove that high fructose corn syrup is addictive and causes obesity and a host of other crap.

They make it addictive - sweet, salty...they know all the angles!

today , marks 3 months clean for me

http://www.pelicanparts.com/support/smileys/clap.gif Congratulations on the personal achievement. While personally I detest smoking, I really have to take my hat off http://www.pelicanparts.com/support/smileys/wat.gif to people who can manage to quit. That's a personal battle that I'm not sure that I could win.

I quit in January this year! After 30+ yrs of it gave it up cold turkey...............Just damn tired of smokin. I can still be around it and it doesn't seem to bother me. I have several friends that recently found out they had some type of cancer without ever havin smoke!! My sister-in-law was actually pissed at me for smoking when she found out that she had cancer, huh!! She never smoked and working in the medical field she was floored by it. If the doctors tell me I got cancer I'll go back to smoking for sure, by then what the h3ll. bottom line I don't care if you smoke or not and I don't care if you drink or take drugs or what ever. I'm doing what I want you do what you want..... Press 1 for Happy.

The WHO did a study that found similar results. IIRC, it said that second-hand smoke can aggrivate existing conditions, but didn't lead to a statistical rise in household asthma rates or cancer within families of smokers.

I do know one person who absolutely could die from second-hand smoke. He has extreme asthma and a few other conditions that basically combine and cause him to pass out during an attack. Asthma with (i think) laryngeal spasms... a bad combo. The vast majority of people might find the smoke a little irritating, but it's not going to kill them.

At the same time... society bans things that are deemed 'unacceptable' by the majority. Walking down the street naked doesn't hurt anyone, and neither does showing boobs on TV. The majority of people don't want to see it in public, so it's banned. Banning smoking in restaurants and bars seems like the same thing to me. Instead of using phony excuses about cancer, and hyping the evil of second hand smoke, why can't they just be honest and say that they don't want to smell it. There. end of story. If enough people don't want to smell it when they have dinner out with the family, that's a good enough reason for me.

No smokin' for me. My parents smoked when I was growing up, and I thought it was so disgusting, that I've never tried it. I think I am also not a personality to get addicted to things. I like the fact that most places don't allow smoking these days. It always sucks to go someplace to eat, shop, whatever and have smoke wafting at your face. I remember being a kid and seeing cigarette butts laying on the floor in grocery stores, department stores, or pretty much anyplace. Thank goodness times have changed.

Ban them? Well, I suppose in utopia there would be no alcohol, pot, nicotine, coke, heroine, etc..., but in this world even if you could successfully ban cigarettes, something else would just pop up in their place to provide addicts with what they want/need. I think we are doing well to regulate how much cigarettes affect others in public. Besides, cigarettes are potentially less harmful to others these days than alcohol or other drugs. Not many people have been killed because someone was smoking and driving.

i actually had a low speed curb bang in a sharp turn that took off left front wheel from the Saab , because i dropped a burning ciggie tip in my crotch and had to rescue the equipment from a burning heat the kind you don't wish on your worst enemy....

if that road would have been a mountain road... i could have been dead right there and then :D:D

Nicotine increasing in cigarettes
I wonder if it's because of cloned plants?

"There's something going on either with the type of tobacco they're using or the addition of more nicotine to the reconstituted tobacco. We just don't know," Connolly said.

I receive at least twice the nicotine levels as a heavy smoker. Swedish wet snuff.

If, hypothetically, someone were to invent cigarette smoking today it would probably be as illegal as heroin. And alcohol too. Culture and tradition are strong legislation steering wheels.

Markus,

I thought you were quitting dude....?

Tomorrow is week 6 of smoke-free for me. Still on the 1/2 dose patch. Based on the crazy junky brain antics going on in my head, there is no doubt that it's an incidious drug. [tinfoil hat] I wouldn't be suprised if they were maniupulating other chemicals in it too. [/tinfoil hat]

Here's another myth. Since the tobacco industry successfully avoided FDA scrutiny, that industry did it's own regulating. They made "Tar" the culprit.

There are low tar cigarettes. But the really insidious finding is that the tobacco companies found a way to grow tobacco that yields less tar while delivering more nicotine. Yeah, you can get low tar cigarettes......that are more addictive than the regular variety.

I quit a few years ago after smoking since adolescence, and I am sure that it destroys your health since my Dad is dying from throat cancer, but I would be 100% opposed to outlawing cigarettes. I have no doubt whatsoever that life was immeasurably better 50 years ago when every aspect of our existence was not legislated to death.

jluetjen, you say that you "detest smoking", do you mean when others smoke? Do you detest smokers? Because it's easy enough to solve the first problem by not smoking if you do not like it, but if you have a burning desire to control the lives of others that is another matter. If you detest people w/ vices, I hope that we never meet. I would be offended by your very presence.

They need to start a new country somewhere for all of the people who believe in never-ending, socialist/fascist legislating of life. Sort of a permanent exile/retreat for people w/ extreme control issues. They would all kill each other over condo association disputes and the like, but we could get rid of them and America could be a great place once again. Smoke 'em if you got 'em. :cool:

Well said speeder!
I also take issue with the remark about the workers being slackers taking a smoke break.... they wouldn't have to if there wasn't a ban in workplaces for smoking, they would simply keep on working and smoking. I quit years ago but I simply hate all this shiet regulations dropped down from the chosen ones.

As a side note,
It's funny how people in general express how nasty smoke smells, but burn leaves or seer some rotting flesh on a grill and that just wonderful. Seems bandwagon biased to me.

If you don't seer it you lose flavor! No way i'm wasting a quality cut of meat by letting the juice of life (aka protein) find its way into the grease trap.


Regarding smoking i'd like to make 4 points:

1-Menthols are soooo much better than regulars (and no i'm not black)
2-5 minute breaks behind the restaurant bull****ting with friends whilst enjoying a smokey treat (Kurt if you're out there i miss ya buddy!) are among my most fond memories from years ago.
3-It needs to be banned.
4-Every dollar spent on researching a cure for smoking caused illness is a dollar not spent on cures for childhood cancers, autism, etc.

The waste of resources spent essentially trying to find a way to allow people to smoke without consequence is disgusting and shameful.

You are doing great, Chris!

I am not. Obviously.. ;)