More public health focus on snus bans...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • darkwing
    Member
    • Oct 2007
    • 415

    More public health focus on snus bans...

    Oregon Gazette Times:

    Hooley supports banning flavored tobacco
    Hooley supports banning flavored tobacco
    By THERESA HOGUE
    Gazette-Times reporter
    FDA would regulate marketing, products

    Last year, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco came out with a new product that had a distinctly girlish touch. The new brand of cigarettes is called “Camel No. 9.” Packaged in a pink-and-black box, the cigarettes are wrapped in pink foil. In some marketing campaigns, the cigarettes are accompanied by a little pink purse and some lip gloss, exactly the kind of thing a 14-year-old girl might fancy.

    Dr. John Gotchall, a Corvallis pulmonary care specialist, said it’s clear that very young women are among the young people being targeted by the tobacco industry’s marketing. Gotchall, who is the medical director of the Corvallis Clinic’s critical care program, is opposed to the way tobacco companies target young people, and he’s taking his opposition to the top.

    In January, Gotchall lobbied his representatives in Washington, D.C., to support a bill currently before Congress that would put tobacco sales under the control of the federal Food and Drug Administration.

    “We’d like to elevate tobacco regulations to the current level we have for dog food,” Gotchall said, explaining that because of FDA restrictions, consumers know more about what goes into their pet food and toothpaste than what their cigarettes contain.

    The bill, HR 1108: The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, would authorize the FDA to regulate tobacco products in a number of ways, from preventing misbranding or misleading labeling to restricting the ways in which tobacco is marketed to children.

    The bill has passed a House subcommittee and is being considered today by the House Energy and Commerce Committee, where Oregon’s U.S. Rep. Darlene Hooley, a Democrat, is a member. Hooley said Tuesday that she supports the bill. She said she expects it to make it out of committee for a House floor vote.

    “It’s a critical public health issue,” Hooley said. Tobacco-related disease is the leading cause of preventable death in the United States, and lung cancer is the most common type of cancer to kill women.

    Although smoking as a social habit continues to decline, Gotchall said that one way tobacco companies are trying to get younger people to try their products is with flavored cigarettes, cigars and smokeless tobacco. Some of these tobacco products are flavored to taste of lime, toffee, berry blend and cream.

    The bill would prohibit cigarettes from containing these kind of flavors.

    “A lot of this predatory activity is aimed toward children,” Gotchall said.

    Hooley said it’s hard to conclude otherwise: “If you look at the packaging and the marketing (of flavored products), there is no way adults would smoke those.”

    Dana Galle-Strowbridge, Corvallis School District tobacco prevention education coordinator, said there are plenty of examples locally of tobacco companies targeting young smokers. She said the most recent product aimed at the youth market is a smokeless, spitless chewing tobacco that originated in Scandinavia called “snus.” The new product is designed to be milder tasting and is often flavored to taste of mint, spice or the like.

    “It makes it less abrasive to the body,” Galle-Strowbridge said, and therefore, more appealing to those who have never smoked or chewed before.

    The Corvallis School District now offers anti-tobacco education at the fourth- and fifth-grade level, with additional programs at the middle and high school levels. By including games and other activities, Galle-Strowbridge tries to engage students and explain the roles of media and peer pressure, as well as the physiology of addiction.

    Gotchall said that now that he has become aware of the marketing campaign toward youth, he’s noticed things such as tobacco ad placement. For instance, in convenience stores, cigarette ads are often attached to the sliding top on freezer cases containing ice cream bars.

    “They’re very sneaky about it,” he said.
  • Craig de Tering
    Member
    • Nov 2006
    • 525

    #2
    The bill would prohibit cigarettes from containing these kind of flavors.
    Hahahahaha, then they should get ready to play whack-a-mole every time the industry comes up with a new taste.
    Dumbasses.

    How do they want to start banning "tastes"? So what if a company markets a product with the taste of, say, "shit". You pop one in and yet it tastes like licorice. (???) Then what? :lol:

    Comment

    • TropicalBob
      Member
      • Feb 2008
      • 316

      #3
      This much we know: We do not want the FDA regulating tobacco. It has been made crystal clear that if they do regulate it, they will want all addictive and carcinogenic contents removed (bad for our health, you understand). Goodbye nicotine. In ALL tobacco products that would be sold in America.

      Back in 2002, a lawsuit involving (I believe) P. Lorrilard (maker of my beloved Kent cigarettes at that time) went all the way to the Supreme Court on the issue of the FDA regulating tobacco. The Supremes ruled the FDA had no authority to regulate tobacco content or sale. It said then that the only way the FDA could get that role would be from an act of Congress.

      So that's where we are now. This would be that "act of Congress." Just read some Surgeon General comments to know what would happen if this Congressional proposal becomes law.

      The proposal is the American tobacco lover's worst nightmare. Yet put a finger to the pulse of America and know that anti-tobacco fervor is real, rabid and supported by the majority. Big Tobacco and its allies in Congress have always rebuffed attempts at such regulation. Can they still do it?

      Comment

      • aika
        Member
        • Mar 2008
        • 133

        #4
        AFAIK Sweden has governmental oversight of snus, must declare contents and keep TNSA levels and other chemical levels low, etc.

        HOWEVER, this isnt Sweden. In America, its all about making everything PC, child friendly, dull, unoffensive, unobstrutive, uninteresting, bland, safe, G rated.. my man Doug Stanhope explains it all.

        P.S. Lorrilard made my favorite cig before I kicked the habit. Gotta love Newport.

        <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/2n34eeXWjUQ&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/2n34eeXWjUQ&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

        Comment

        • Craig de Tering
          Member
          • Nov 2006
          • 525

          #5
          Originally posted by TropicalBob
          This much we know: We do not want the FDA regulating tobacco. It has been made crystal clear that if they do regulate it, they will want all addictive and carcinogenic contents removed (bad for our health, you understand). Goodbye nicotine. In ALL tobacco products that would be sold in America.

          Back in 2002, a lawsuit involving (I believe) P. Lorrilard (maker of my beloved Kent cigarettes at that time) went all the way to the Supreme Court on the issue of the FDA regulating tobacco. The Supremes ruled the FDA had no authority to regulate tobacco content or sale. It said then that the only way the FDA could get that role would be from an act of Congress.

          So that's where we are now. This would be that "act of Congress." Just read some Surgeon General comments to know what would happen if this Congressional proposal becomes law.

          The proposal is the American tobacco lover's worst nightmare. Yet put a finger to the pulse of America and know that anti-tobacco fervor is real, rabid and supported by the majority. Big Tobacco and its allies in Congress have always rebuffed attempts at such regulation. Can they still do it?
          Then congress would have to amend the constitution somehow I think!?
          But let 'em try. In the remote chance they succeed, all that would achieve is that a multi-billion dollar industry disappears from US shores and that individuals start -once again- to grow their own tobacco.

          Government shoots itself in the foot twice; goodbye revenue, goodbye control.
          Big government = loss of freedom, and in absence of a totalitarian/Soviet-style state, people will always find a way to circumvent prohibition.
          They should crack open a history book at the 1920's mark. Heck, they still have a War on Drugs that's going just wonderfully last I checked. Can't find those anywhere now, can we!? :lol:

          Comment

          • chainsnuser
            Senior Member
            • Jan 2007
            • 1388

            #6
            Re: More public health focus on snus bans...

            Originally posted by darkwing
            Oregon Gazette Times:
            Last year, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco came out with a new product that had a distinctly girlish touch. The new brand of cigarettes is called “Camel No. 9.” Packaged in a pink-and-black box, the cigarettes are wrapped in pink foil. In some marketing campaigns, the cigarettes are accompanied by a little pink purse and some lip gloss, exactly the kind of thing a 14-year-old girl might fancy.
            Sweet! But American cigarette-companies are quite lame. In Germany they would also add a pink condom. :lol:

            Cheers!

            Comment

            • MelangeMan
              Member
              • Mar 2008
              • 139

              #7
              That guys awesome, aika. Might be the first comedy dvd I buy since Mr. Show.

              Comment

              • STORM6490MT
                Member
                • Mar 2008
                • 138

                #8
                Sweden really needs to get on the ball and register the name SNUS to their country just like champagne france. It would be a shame if US tobacco got a hold of it and produced low quality garbage loaded with carcinogens and chemicals. Oh wait, they already tried with Marlboro and Camel... People would associate snus with spit tobacco and think they are in the same ballpark as far as health risks.

                p.s. nice video

                Comment

                • eli
                  Member
                  • Apr 2008
                  • 243

                  #9
                  I'm afraid it may be too late for sticking an appellation control on SNUS as both Camel and Marlboro have their brands on the market. They could go the Parmesan route and append another word to snus to let the consumer know they're dealing with the real product made according to the Swedish methods. Parmesan cheese with the Reggiano appended only refers to those cheese made in the Parma region in Italy according to strict tradition (as a matter of fact if the cows graze on the wrong pastures the cheese has to get another name!).

                  Comment

                  • Xobeloot
                    Member
                    • Jan 2008
                    • 2542

                    #10
                    Originally posted by STORM6490MT
                    It would be a shame if US tobacco got a hold of it and produced low quality garbage loaded with carcinogens and chemicals. Oh wait, they already tried with Marlboro and Camel...

                    Doesnt Swedish Match make Camel snus? I do not believe they would lower their standards just because they are producing an American-branded snus.

                    Comment

                    • TropicalBob
                      Member
                      • Feb 2008
                      • 316

                      #11
                      You're right. And do I detect a kind of reverse nationalism here? If it's Swedish, it's got to be good. If it's American, it's gonna be crap.

                      That's nonsense. Sellers will sell what buyers will buy. We in this group are a franctional subset of tobacco users. And I must confess that I've put some dreadful Swedish snus in my mouth. I mean foul-tasting. I grinned and said I'd get used to the taste.

                      I finally decided "screw that." I'm past "acquiring" a taste for something that tastes awful. Too many things taste good. Snus that has any chance of appealing to America's 46 million cigarette smokers must (1) provide a nic hit equal to cigarettes; (2) Taste good.

                      Those that do will sell well. Those that don't will appeal to a subset. And disappear like N&J loose.

                      Comment

                      • STORM6490MT
                        Member
                        • Mar 2008
                        • 138

                        #12
                        Originally posted by TropicalBob
                        You're right. And do I detect a kind of reverse nationalism here? If it's Swedish, it's got to be good. If it's American, it's gonna be crap.

                        That's nonsense. Sellers will sell what buyers will buy. We in this group are a franctional subset of tobacco users. And I must confess that I've put some dreadful Swedish snus in my mouth. I mean foul-tasting. I grinned and said I'd get used to the taste.

                        I finally decided "screw that." I'm past "acquiring" a taste for something that tastes awful. Too many things taste good. Snus that has any chance of appealing to America's 46 million cigarette smokers must (1) provide a nic hit equal to cigarettes; (2) Taste good.

                        Those that do will sell well. Those that don't will appeal to a subset. And disappear like N&J loose.

                        No reverse nationalism. It's just that Big Tobacco turned a good thing in to an industry of death. Brand loyalty made them add chemicals to make you want a certain brand. They needed to sell more so they added burning agents. There are a few good smokes left that are made in the US, they are expensive and are not related to PM RJR or any other monster corporation. If IBig tobacco got a hold of snus, you know they would use the same tactics for brand loyalty and the bottom line. It may start out all nice but in the end the product will be compromised for the sake of the shareholders. You wont see that as much with Swedish Match.

                        Here in America, you can sell rocks if you market them properly. Snus is a very hot subject in tobacco these days. Our government and private organizations are killing big tobacco with anti smoking legislation and propaganda. The tobacco industry is looking for ways to keep an edge. Snus is one of the most simple and time tested alternatives. Gums don't do well, soft drinks with nicotine never worked and patches are for quitters. There is a huge potential market for snus and that is why PM and RJR invested millions into it's snus program. Us snusers may be only a fraction of the tobacco market but can you imagine the increase in snus usage when you cant smoke a cigarette in the entire nazi state? It's getting to be that way.

                        What I'm afraid of is that our large corporations that really don't a damn about anything besides profit will turn a Swedish tradition into junk tobacco. It's nice knowing that my snus is well treated and not a chemical playground. I believe that US Tobacco would do the same thing to snus as has been done to smoking tobacco and coffee.

                        Remember when smoking tobacco was just tobacco and not a piece of shredded paper made of tobacco parts?

                        Comment

                        • STORM6490MT
                          Member
                          • Mar 2008
                          • 138

                          #13
                          Originally posted by Xobeloot
                          Originally posted by STORM6490MT
                          It would be a shame if US tobacco got a hold of it and produced low quality garbage loaded with carcinogens and chemicals. Oh wait, they already tried with Marlboro and Camel...

                          Doesnt Swedish Match make Camel snus? I do not believe they would lower their standards just because they are producing an American-branded snus.
                          RODGER THAT! It's just a test market and saved them the setup cost. If they decide to go full out with the project you know damn well it won't be made in Sweden anymore.

                          Not sure where Marlboro when to have it done. I called Camel and they were sketched out when I asked them who produced it for them. Trade secrets I guess. Then I noticed a business trade with SM and RJR.

                          Comment

                          • darkwing
                            Member
                            • Oct 2007
                            • 415

                            #14
                            The thing I do not get about the non-Swedish brand products here in North America is why they have to be sweet or flavoured. Tobacco is tobacco, and cigarettes were never sweetly fruit and candy flavoured, so why does snus have to be? Tobacco is an acquired taste anyway, isn't it? Why not sell a simple salty old portion here and let people work it out themselves?

                            Comment

                            • STORM6490MT
                              Member
                              • Mar 2008
                              • 138

                              #15
                              Originally posted by darkwing
                              The thing I do not get about the non-Swedish brand products here in North America is why they have to be sweet or flavoured. Tobacco is tobacco, and cigarettes were never sweetly fruit and candy flavoured, so why does snus have to be? Tobacco is an acquired taste anyway, isn't it? Why not sell a simple salty old portion here and let people work it out themselves?
                              maybe they wanted snus to fail so others could use their model. that way, competition would be hesitant to start up snus production here. it would kill cigarette sales.

                              other than that CT, i have no idea why they would flavor snus with such terrible artificial flavors or market it to city folk!

                              here is an idea, import ettan and sell it as ettan with a removable warning label on the back that translates what it says. maybe something fun like "we are required by the FDA to say this product causes cancer but in europe the EU removed this warning when no relation to snus and cancer could be found. "

                              i bet it would sell like hotcakes.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X