Cigarettes may cost more than $10 per pack in New York under the state’s latest plan to close a $9 billion budget gap. In New York City, the tax alone on a pack of cigarettes would rise to $5.85. And cigarettes aren’t the only carcinogens set for a tax bump under the proposal. [More]
The Centers for Disease Control have announced the results of a study that shows that people who smoke certain U.S. cigarette brands have higher levels of “cancer-causing tobacco-specific nitrosamines (TSNAs),” (which are apparently the major carcinogens and cancer-causing agents in tobacco products) than people who smoke some foreign cigarette brands. [More]
It’s been fifteen years and three presidents since it was first proposed, but the FDA has now signed off on a new set of rules for tobacco companies that seek to limit the marketing of cigarettes and chewing tobacco to teens and children. These new rules cover both advertising and distribution and will essentially put an end to tobacco-branded clothing, tobacco-sponsored sporting and music events, and the use of music in tobacco ads on the radio. [More]
“Tobacco products today are really the only human-consumed product that we don’t know what’s in them,” the director of the FDA’s Center for Tobacco Products said to the Associated Press. To address that, the agency has told tobacco companies to provide a list of the ingredients in their cigarette brands by June 2010. The FDA says it won’t publicize a lot of the data in order to protect trade secrets, but that by June 2011 it will publish a list of “harmful and potentially harmful” ingredients, at which point tobacco companies will have to start listing the amounts of each one on their products. [More]
This advertisement for Camel cigarettes appeared in the November 23, 1936 edition of LIFE magazine. It earnestly demands that you smoke a Camel after each course of Thanksgiving dinner — “for digestion’s sake.” [More]
Unless you’ve just arrived in 2009 on a time machine, you know that smoking isn’t good for you. Did you know, that smoking isn’t good for your computer, either? It’s true, at least according to Apple. Two readers in different parts of the country claim that their Applecare warranties were voided due to secondhand smoke. Both readers appealed their cases up to the office of
God Steve Jobs himself. Both lost.
Inside: Poll – Would you “smoke” e-cigarettes?
Back in June we noted that the FDA was about to get a lot more say over the tobacco industry if the Senate approved a new bill. Well they did, and so yesterday the FDA flexed its new muscles by banning fruit, herb, spice, and candy flavorings from cigarettes. That’s right: clove cigarettes were just banned by the FDA, which is bad news for gothy teens and great news for everyone else.
A new study published in the Journal of Public Health has found that people rate cigarettes in attractive packages as less deadly than others. Or, to put it another way, the study found that people who are asked to compare cigarettes based on their packages are inclined to prefer the smartly packaged ones:
The Senate has approved FDA regulation of tobacco. No more “low tar” labels or flavored tobacco, and the FDA will now need to know and approve all ingredients in tobacco products. It is likely to pass the House, and President Obama plans to sign the bill. [MSNBC] (Thanks, Greg!)
The New York Times is reporting that Richard M. Burr, the “tobacco-state senator who tried a filibuster this week against a bill that would allow the Food and Drug Administration to regulate the cigarette industry” has apparently given up, clearing the way for the bill to pass the Senate. A similar bill has already passed the House and Obama says he will sign the legislation.
Major health insurance companies own nearly $4.5 billion worth of stock in tobacco companies, according to a Harvard University study. It kinda makes sense: health insurers know tobacco sickens people, and so as long as people are smoking, why not profit from the killer? It’s what David Himmelstein, a co-author of the study, calls “the combined taxidermist and veterinarian approach: either way you get your dog back.”
Cigarette companies have conspired for decades to defraud and mislead the public about the health risks of “light” and “low-tar” cigarettes, a federal appeals court said yesterday. The DC Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously ruled that a federal district judge was right to ban the terms from appearing on cigarette packages. Under the ruling, cigarette companies may soon be required to issue a public mea culpa admitting that they were killing people when they said cigarettes were safe and non-addictive.
The House this week voted to empower the FDA to regulate tobacco, just in case people still smoke even after new taxes push the cost of cigarettes to over $9 per pack and the recession bankrupts everyone. Under the measure, which passed 298-112, the FDA would be able to set nicotine levels, control cigarette advertising, and require companies to provide a full list of cigarette ingredients. As usual, the killjoys in the Senate may force the House to smoke a light version of the cigarette bill…
Smokers around the country are freaking out as a huge federal cigarette tax increase goes into effect.
Man, cigarettes were awesome in the past, if these old ads collected by Stanford University are to be believed. They calmed your nerves so you’d stop humming nervously! They soothed your throat! They made you a movie star and helped you capture animals on your big game hunt! We don’t know what tobacco was made of before the mid-80s, but no wonder everyone smoked.
Sorry, light cigarette smokers! The Second Circuit denied you class-action status in your suit against the tobacco companies. A district court judge had held that “virtually all Americans who had purchased cigarettes labeled as ‘light’” could be part of the class. The appellate court laughed at this broad certification, saying it would not “reduce the range of issues in dispute and promote judicial economy.” [Consumer Law & Policy Blog]