They still insist nicotine is addictive. Dangerous, even. “They” claim more dangerous than heroin. That’s pretty drastic. Kind of scares me. Fine, dear reader, it doesn’t scare me. It scares the government enough, though, eh?
(Note: Updates are at the end!)
These are my questions, asked repeatedly over social media:
Is combustion reduced?
Will health benefits increase?
Are other ingredients reduced?
Will this cause more casual smokers?
Can you define “minimally” or “non-addictive”?
Is this nothing more than prescribing smoking?
What is being added to tobacco to reduce nicotine?
I’d like to sit down with “they” for a few hours, have some coffee. Discuss a few finer points of life in general, chat a bit, and tell them now they’re trying to convince everyone it’s the nicotine.
No one would want the public confused, would they?
Of the “thousands” of chemicals, nicotine is the addictive ingredient?
It isn’t like it hasn’t been tried before in 1989:
The ultra-low-nicotine cigarette is the latest entry in an increasingly feverish race among tobacco manufacturers to stop a decline of 2 percent a year in cigarette consumption in the United States.
Tobacco industry executives say the process of removing nicotine that Philip Morris used to create the Merit Free is similar to the decaffeination process used on coffee beans.
”It’s a pretty common, patented process that we’re all aware of,” said Douglas Keeney, chairman of C. A. Blockers.
What happened before?
In 2008, bold is my emphasis:
In summary, a toxicological analysis does not indicate that low-nicotine and nicotine-free Quest® cigarettes have less adverse toxicological effects in the laboratory than conventional cigarettes. This should draw the attention of the consumers and policy makers.
I say it’s NOT the nicotine. Stimulant, like coffee I’ll agree with. Drug? Fine.
Addictive? No. I’ve covered that here.
You know that doesn’t matter!
Update: Nicotine is not addictive.
They’re not listening to us. They have tobacco fields to tend to!
Are there other chemicals that cause addiction in tobacco?
The FDA says – and non-committal as it sounds, that it does not “appear to have significant potential for abuse or dependence….. ” (addiction).
So, to make my prediction, since the New England Journal of Medicine released this
Aaaand – The National Institute on Drug Abuse released this:
(Took their time to create and then tweeted this state of the art graphic:)
Briefly – they mention towards the end of their “official” story:
(This is where they perpetuate their lie) –>Nicotine is responsible for the addictiveness of tobacco, but it is not the ingredient that causes cancer and heart and pulmonary diseases.
Smoking still causes nearly half a million deaths each year in our country. Research now suggests that reducing the nicotine in cigarettes to a fraction of its current levels may be one way to lessen the health-destructive power of these products.
Now, with all that, the media – because they do love a good story, I predict that this:
“It is our hope, that because that this is such an intrinsic health concern that we will be able to get this approved in a swift and fast process,” Gellman said.
The company will be working toward FDA approval by the end of 2016…… Huh.
I hate math, but let us do it quickly, shall we? I have a prediction to make!
Will lead to this:
Thank you, Jake Jacobson:
People will still smoke. People will try and use these, and someone in the professional health field will still say these are “safer”.
People will believe this is “safer”. Because they said so. Tobacco obviously isn’t the issue.
So, e-cigarettes are not safer? Huh.
Are. You. Stupid?
I’m a friggin’ mind reader. Predictions come true…
They don’t mind the tobacco.
“The U.S. Food and Drug Association (FDA) funded a landmark study that showed 22nd Century’s proprietary Very Low Nicotine cigarettes were “associated with reductions in smoking, nicotine exposure, and nicotine dependence, with minimal evidence of nicotine withdrawal, compensatory smoking, or serious adverse events.” See study here: Randomized Trial of Reduced-Nicotine Standards for Cigarettes.”
The prediction is better than I though:
“…scientists with The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) published a detailed characterization of the Company’s SPECTRUM® Variable Nicotine Research Cigarettes, calling 22nd Century’s proprietary cigarettes an “important tool in clinical studies for investigating…
“the independent study was conducted by a prestigious team of 18 senior CDC scientists”
And added 05/02/17
I can’t believe my eyes.
The company’s cigarettes are part of an estimated $20 million FDA initiative to determine “the best method to quit smoking: an immediate reduction in nicotine to non-addictive levels vs. a gradual reduction in nicotine.”
The FDA said Monday it has nothing to share concerning the 22nd Century statement.
Well, I could be wrong…
And they wonder why Vapers have contempt toward government and health officials over e-cigarettes
Remember, Simon says: Quit or die.
Speaking of BAT in the UK: Now there’s a “safer” e-cigarette – because “scientists” developed it, it must be true.
From 2007, FDA Director Dr. Andrew von Eschenbach had quite a bit to say:
“We could find ourselves in the conundrum of having made a decision about nicotine only to have made the public health radically worse. And that is not the position FDA is in; we approve products that enhance health, not destroy it,” said von Eschenbach, a urologic surgeon and oncologist who was confirmed as FDA commissioner in December.
Later in the article:
“In an hourlong interview with AP reporters and editors, von Eschenbach repeatedly said the FDA doesn’t need more regulatory authority. When asked if the FDA needed more money, he suggested the agency needs to look at “enhancing our efficiencies, maximizing our outputs for the dollar invested on part of the American people.”
Here’s that article
Um… they’re PRESCRIBING smoking.
X-22 is the first and only smoking cessation product in the form of a combustible cigarette.
X-22 is a six-week prescription treatment which utilizes Very Low Nicotine (VLN) cigarettes (95% less nicotine than conventional cigarettes) to satisfy a smoker’s craving for cigarettes while separating the act of smoking from the rapid delivery of nicotine.
Bold and red are my
This is its American brand sold in more than 600 stores. It is a high nicotine cigarette. It might seem counterintuitive, especially given the health benefits claimed by its very low nicotine cigarettes, but high nicotine cigarettes could have significant health benefits as well.
X-22 has certain advantages:
It’s a cigarette, people seem to prefer that
It has no side effects, apart from the harmful effects of cigarette smoke
It has been proved effective in six clinical trials
Brad Rodu said this in 2010:
Here’s what Clive Bates has to say about
Are there other chemicals that cause addiction in tobacco?
You still don’t believe this is happening? The U.S. Government invested $100+ million to keep people smoking.
Agencies of the U.S. federal government have invested more than $100 million:
Selling snowballs to Eskimos.
Bold is MY emphasis:
“The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and other agencies of the U.S. federal government have invested more than $100 million in numerous independent clinical studies that have demonstrated the public health benefits of 22nd Century’s proprietary Very Low Nicotine Content (VLNC) tobacco cigarettes.”
……a principal investigator in the trial, Dr. Dorothy Hatsukami, has already publicly disclosed that an immediate reduction in nicotine is “most likely to lead to less harm.”
The crimes continue… press release is to settle investors minds, in my opinion.
Cancer Action Network, American Heart Association, American Lung Association, Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids and the Truth Initiative co-authored a letter to Dr. Gottlieb and the FDA
Related via Carl V. Phillips
“There is no reason to believe that lowering the nicotine content of cigarettes will lower their carcinogenicity.”
Investors are questioning integrity:
Neal Benowitz himself said: (bold is my emphasis)
1. Smokers regulate their intake of nicotine to obtain the amount of nicotine that they need to sustain their addiction.
2. Spontaneous brand-switching studies suggest that there is no reduction in smoke intake per cigarette, and that any reductions that are seen in brand switchers depend upon whether or not those individuals also reduce their cigarette consumption.
3. Studies of smokers smoking self-selected brands showed a weak relationship between machine-measured nicotine yield and a smoker’s nicotine, CO, or thiocyanate exposure.
4. Considering the overall exposure data for individuals selecting their own brands, there is little reason to expect that smokers of low-yield cigarettes will have a lower risk of disease than those who smoke higher yield cigarettes.
That’s all here in
Paul also covered this here:
22nd Century isn’t the “only” one:
From Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller:
Minimally or “non-addictive” nicotine
Let me remind you of the accolades of lower nicotine:
Cliff Douglass of the American Cancer Society – thinks lower nicotine in cigarettes is “Absolutely everything”
NCI Director Ned Sharpless says “…good news for treating cancer and preventing cancer”
FDA’s Scott Gottlieb claims “Lower nicotine in the same product”
Matt Myers of Tobacco-Free Kids says “…to use products that won’t kill them”
Basing “minimally or non-addictive” levels of nicotine by lowering cigarette consumption by 1.6 less cigarettes… over two years… is a public health win? Here’s what they came up with after two years:
238 “non-daily” smokers… what?
over the course of two years...
lowered their smoking by 1.6 cigarettes…
“real-time reporting” and “cigarette butt counts.”
No – to slow progress… is this is what the Food and Drug Administration likes?
This headline calls it “staggering“.
You can check my math here:
From a twitter exchange:
15 to 19 year-olds are being “tested”:
Bold is my emphasis:
Lavery said the FDA “is careful not to reveal its thinking on any potential future actions it may take.”
“But we came away from this meeting with a view that a low-nicotine product standard may be less likely to have scientific support to show that it would be appropriate for the protection of public health.”
Have you met
my OUR friends at vapers.org.uk?
You can find me here trying to be cordial on Facebook
You can find me here being a bit more evil on Twitter
You can also find me on LinkedIn
Medical, Research, Science Professionals:
A Billion Lives
Your comments are NEVER filtered, always encouraged and welcome on this blog. There is definitely more to come.
Keep ON #Vaping On.