Big Tobacco's Dollars Douse Push for Fire-Safe Cigarettes

Many people know that http://www.cigarettespub.net/marlboro/gold is considered the nation's leading preventable cause of death. But it is less widely known that cigarettes also are the leading cause of fatal fires, responsible for about a quarter of all U.S. fire deaths. Often, the 1,000 victims each year are not just smokers who drifted off to sleep, but children and other innocent bystanders.Yet many scientists and fire officials say these deaths could often be avoided because small design changes in cigarettes would make them less prone to start fires.
And indeed, during the last quarter-century, many bills have been introduced in state legislatures and Congress to require cigarettes to meet a fire-resistance standard.
But tobacco companies, claiming fire-safe cigarettes would not be commercially feasible, have repeatedly overpowered or outflanked such efforts. And the way they have done it, secret documents and interviews show, is a textbook example of a powerful industry using its wealth and ingenuity to stave off regulation.
They have done it through a sophisticated, two-pronged strategy that has included bankrolling in-house scientists and outside consultants to debunk the technical feasibility of safer cigarettes.
At the same time, they have attracted the strangest of bedfellows by doling out millions of dollars worth of grants, contracts and services to cement an ingenious alliance with fire-safety organizations. In the process they have won the favor, and in some cases the silence, of credible groups whose whole purpose is saving lives.
And they have shifted the fire-resistance burden to manufacturers of everything from mattresses and furniture to pajamas.
"Their answer [is] to fire-proof the world against our torches," said Rep. John Joseph Moakley (D-Mass.), who began pushing fire-safe-cigarette legislation in 1979 after a family of seven perished in a cigarette-caused fire in his district.
But some fire groups, grateful for tobacco's financial support, appear to have accepted the industry's argument that fire-safe cigarettes remain a pipe dream.
"I can't overemphasize the good that this money has done," said Fred Allinson, president of the National Volunteer Fire Council, which has received heavy support not only from cigarette manufacturers but from smokeless tobacco giant United States Tobacco.

Firms Deny Any Cynical Motives

Sen. Lautenberg wants to snuff out electronic cigarettes

Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) wants to ban a smoking device that several House Republicans have trumpeted for helping them quit smoking.
The battery-operated device, known as an electronic cigarette, looks like a normal cigarette, but contains no tobacco and instead of smoke emits a nicotine vapor when the user inhales. Reps. Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.), Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) and Collin Peterson (D-Minn.) have all been spotted using the device on Capitol Hill.
But the device, which is sold over the Internet and at select mall kiosks, needs to be tested by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) before it is deemed safe for general use, Lautenberg wrote in a letter to the FDA on Monday.
“Manufacturers and retailers of these products claim that e-cigarettes are safe, and even that these products can help smokers quit traditional cigarettes,” he wrote.
“However, there have been no clinical studies to prove these products are effective at helping smokers quit, nor have any studies verified the safety of these products or their long-term health effects.”
Stearns shot back at Lautenberg on Monday, saying that there is no evidence that the device is harmful.
“Before the FDA takes any immediate action, it should put forward scientific evidence that these products are harmful or unsafe,” he said in a statement.
“These e-cigarettes are smokeless and do not produce carcinogens. The nicotine in e-cigarettes is controlled in a capsule that can help in smoking cessation by allowing the user to reduce gradually the nicotine level, hopefully to zero.”
Stearns has sent electronic cigarettes to House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) and President Obama to help them quit smoking. He’s been seen using the device in the Speaker’s Lobby, where Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) banned smoking two years ago. Her office did not respond to a request for comment by press time.
A longtime opponent of smoking, Lautenberg authored the law that banned smoking on airplanes and a law that banned smoking in federal facilities that serve children.

Celebrities smoking cigarettes.

I have come across over a couple of things about celebrities smoking cigarettes that can be categorized neither as absurd nor as strange. They are not even funny, though. Fine, here we go.
1.There are celebrities, especially movie stars, that smokes on screen like they are addicted but aren’t in actual place.
2.Smoking celebrities, sometimes sports stars, endorse cigarettes very rarely, if ever; but they are declared smokers in their private lives with some needing to have a drag in between shots.
3.Celebrities raising their voices in support of smoking cessation movements of course draw big attention but are rarely taken seriously.
4.Celebrity smoking influences adolescents to follow suit. Youngsters want to replicate their demigods.
5.Celebrities of the bygone era have remote chances of having picked up the habit watching their heroes.

Well, these are just some of my gibberish talks that I guess might have crossed everyone’s minds. But is it true that celebrities really desist from endorsing cigarettes of all hues? Is it because they are conscious of their social responsibilities? Of course, I, for one, want to believe this line. Pictures of celebrities smoking appear glamorous and civilized, regardless of the context of the scene in a movie and thus it strikes a cord with teens. They are shown at parties with a cigarette which pushes young people to emulate them. The brands they smoke, cheap Marlboro cigarettes, Camel, Winston, Virginia Slims, Salem etc, become a point of campus discussion.

There are two prominent websites dedicated to smoking celebrities; rather one is a yahoo group. These are definitely not promoted by any of them but their fans who also are into smoking. These two sites list smoking stars from real life and on screen. The website I stumbled upon is on female celebrities who chain smoke on screen. You get a blow by blow account of ‘when and what’ they smoke and in which movie! Wow, so much to that!

How does it all relate to the rest of us? After all, we only get to see one face of them, enjoying a good smoke. Do we come to know of their efforts to keep fit or do we know that not many of them are smokers at all? Well, do you want to emulate them – then ponder these points, too.
1.Can you afford 40-60 Marlboro cigarettes a day if you don’t buy them from a tax free online store or a discount sale?
2.Cheap cigarettes at discount price may be an option but is it a license to smoke more?
3.Many celebrities only smoke socially; they just don’t like to be left out because they don’t smoke.
4.Celebrities can easily afford high cost healthcare, just in case.

Neither cheap discount cigarettes of reputed brands nor generics bought at cheap price tobacco shop can be castigated as being cheap quality. Most of these generics and branded cheap cigarettes are regulated in their respective countries of manufacture and because of price and tax difference between your and origination country that they become cheap. Cheap Marlboro cigarettes, however guaranteed they are, are not your insurance to smoke more. Neither menthol nor Lm falls into the category, for that matter. The bottom line is here: celebrity endorsement or not, cheap or not, cigarettes are always known to give smokers a momentary relief but a long time trouble.

Tobacco companies target girls

Tobacco marketing in South Korea has been deliberately aimed at girls and young women. Research published in the open access journal Globalization and Health has shown that transnational tobacco companies (TTCs) are using tactics long used with devastating effect in Western countries to snare new female smokers in Asia. Kelley Lee from the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine led a team of researchers who studied internal documents from the tobacco industry that reveal the scheme to seduce a generation of girls. She said, "Since the opening of the South Korean tobacco market in the late 1980s, females have been targeted by TTCs as an important source of future market growth and profitability. The rise in smoking rates among females within certain age groups since the late 1980s suggests that these efforts have been successful".

The tactics used recall advertising campaigns carried out in the United States and Europe since the 1920s that link smoking with feminism and the liberation of women. According to Lee, "Product design associating smoking with body image and female emancipation, familiarly deployed elsewhere, have been extensively used in South Korea to appeal to female smokers. So-called "ultra light", "low tar" and "superslim" cigarettes have been particularly effective, falsely suggesting certain brands offer a healthier or safer option, as well as appealing to female concerns about weight gain. Tighter restrictions on the use of such descriptors, alongside public education on the fallacy of such claims, are badly needed in South Korea".

South Korea's cigarette market was opened to the world in 1988 under the threat of US trade sanctions. In 1989, the country passed laws banning tobacco advertising, marketing and sponsorship directly targeted at women and children. During the authors' literature search, they found evidence of the companies' efforts to circumvent this law by, for example, using images of couples in their adverts – something not covered by the country's guidelines, but known to appeal to the female market. One TTC wrote "Although obviously targeted to women, the campaign extension would also not be as overt in markets sensitive to female targeting".

Lee concludes, "The implementation of comprehensive tobacco control measures in South Korea, as set out under the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, is urgently needed to protect and promote the health of Korean women and girls".

Cigarettes less likely to burn.

The latest salvo from Canada's four-year-old Federal Tobacco Control Strategy calls for all cigarettes manufactured or sold in Canada to be of a reduced ignition propensity. Bill C-260, an act to amend the Hazardous Products Act, says that as of October 1, 2005, all cigarettes--imported or otherwise, must conform to the Standard Test Method for Measuring the Ignition Strength of Cigarettes adopted in 2002 (ASTM E2187-02b). Are the manufacturers ready?

The standard says manufactured cigarettes--which make up 85% of all tobacco products sold in Canada--can burn their full length no more than 25% of the time during 40 replicate tests on 10 layers of filter paper. The test uses standard filter paper as a heat sink, allowing a cigarette to self-extinguish once its coal has cooled. Health Canada chose the 25% standard because it is the strictest standard demonstrated to be achievable over 20 years of research, since a US Congress-mandated study determined that a low-ignition-propensity (LIP) cigarette was commercially feasible.

Under the authority of Canada's Tobacco Act, anyone manufacturing a tobacco product that does not conform to the new standards faces fines of up to $300,000 and imprisonment for up to two years. Compliance would be monitored through sampling and analysis, and targets all cigarettes manufactured or imported in the country.

This method of testing, say critics like John Wildgust, head of corporate affairs at JTI-Macdonald Corp, is misleading. The use of filter paper instead of furniture mock-ups, no crevice testing and no artificial airflow means, "the testing required under the current regulation does not correspond to real-world situations--involving, for example, flammable fabrics or other conditions under which cigarettes may be normally used. We are concerned that consumers may mistakenly believe that these products are 'fire-safe' and...

Altria stubs out Marlboro Ultra Smoothx

NEW YORK - Altria Group Inc's Philip Morris USA has cancelled its Marlboro Ultra Smooth cigarettes, highlighting challenges it faces in trying to grow its tobacco business despite a decline in U.S. cigarette sales, The Wall Street Journal reported on Monday.
Altria gets nearly all its revenue from Philip Morris USA after spinning off its Philip Morris International operations, the Journal reported.
Philip Morris's sales volume fell 4.6 percent last year, worse than the 4 percent decline in the overall U.S. cigarette market, the Journal reported. Underlying sales volume fell 3.6 percent, the Journal added.
The company expects overall cigarette sales to fall at an annual rate of 2.5 percent to 3 percent in coming years, the Journal reported.
Philip Morris has turned to developing tobacco products that are not as risky to their user's health, the Journal said. Ultra Smooth cigarettes include an activated carbon filter that delivers nicotine but with potentially less exposure to the carcinogens of conventional cigarettes, the Journal reported.
A Philip Morris spokesman was unavailable for comment.

Forida Preventing Fires By Issuing Tickets For Tossing Cigarettes

That last pull on your Marlboro may deliver the desired hit to your lungs, but flicking it out the window of your car could put a hit on your wallet.
Hillsborough County sheriff's deputies are stepping up their enforcement of the littering law, since the area is in the throes of a seemingly never-ending drought. The parched vegetation along the roadsides is just looking for an excuse to flare up.
Getting a ticket for tossing lit cigarettes from the window isn't cheap.
Sheriff's Cpl. Donald Morris said that between Jan. 1 and Tuesday, 30 tickets for tossing butts out the window were issued, costing each guilty flicker $100.
Such an offense is a violation of the Florida litter law and the fine was hiked in October, Morris said. It is a nonmoving violation, so it doesn't go on a violator's driving record, and doesn't result in points on a license, he said.
"A $100 fine might appear to be steep, but look at the magnitude of the situation," said Morris, who supervises the traffic unit in northwest Hillsborough County. "If you throw a cigarette butt and it ignites a brush fire, you've got the cost of firefighters, the traffic slowdown and the potential harm to the firefighters.
"Most people," he said, "don't realize that little cigarette butt can cause that amount of damage and be a threat to people's lives."
With the state firmly in the grip of a drought, and with wildfires springing up virtually every day, sheriff's officials decided to step up enforcement, he said.
"We are averaging as many as 15 brush fires a week," said Hillsborough Fire Rescue spokesman Ray Yeakley. "We can't always determine the exact cause, but the biggest offender is people flicking cigarette butts out of their cars."
Conditions are dry now, and with no rain in the near future, they are going to get drier, he said. That means fires that start along the roads will spread and intensify much quicker.

Tourists unwittingly 'smuggling' cigarettes

Holidaymakers to some European Union countries are unknowingly breaking the law by bringing back more cigarettes than they are allowed to. Unlike the rest of the EU, only 200 cigarettes can be brought back from Bulgaria, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania and Slovakia. It means tourists can be charged with smuggling if they go over the limit and face fines of up to £800.
Britain, along with a number of other western European countries, applied the rules in 2004 and 2007 when the eastern countries with low cigarette taxation joined the EU.
A greater amount of cigarettes can be brought back from other EU countries, as long as it can be proved they are for personal use. But some Britons are falling foul of the rules. Tourist Dave Hunt had 1,800 cigarettes confiscated by customs officials at Gatwick airport after coming back from the Bulgarian capital, Sofia.
The 35-year-old said: 'I didn't realise I couldn't bring that many in. These are EU countries and we're meant to have free trade between them so why have they made up these strange rules?'
HM Revenue and Customs maintains that travellers are receiving adequate warnings of the limits, with posters at airports and leaflets.

Camel Cigarettes without a camel.

The company Japan Tobacco International displays to market a limited series of its brand Front with radically modified design. This "limited edition" is already practising one of the JTI competitors - the company Philip Morris. Experts note that such actions are designed to attract additional attention to the brand is already available to consumers, have become increasingly widespread. These techniques are particularly relevant to products whose advertising activity is limited by law.

In September, the 25 largest cities in selling limited Camel Cigarettes party with a new design. Instead of the classic camel on the package shows an entire track: camel goes on trees along the winding road, and the usual stack of yellow background patterns decorated with cigarettes. In doing so, taste, shape and price of cigarettes remained unchanged. This is the largest sale in issuing limited series.

Such a limited series of its brands already produced several times in Russia company Philip Morris. Thus, in March this year to sell Marlboro cigarettes came in the pockets of silver, opened the side. And one of the parties in Parliament was painted metallic blue color.

10 facts about tobacco smoking

1. Tobacco use by Native Americans throughout North and South America dates back to 2000BC.Tobacco was brought to Europe by Christopher Columbus’ crew. Smoking enveloped Spain and the rest of the world, through trade.
2.Tobacco smoke contains nicotine and harmane (MAO inhibitors), which combined cause addictive. When the primary or irregular use of nicotine, there is improvement in attention and memory, and mild euphoria.
3. A typical sigarete contains 8-9 milligrams of nicotine, a cigar - 100-200 milligrams. Five cigarettes contain the amount of nicotine, enough to kill a person. But with each smoked cigarette smokers actually get 1-2 milligrams, the rest of nicotine burns or remains in cigarette butts. Cigarettes contain other toxic substances such as arsenic, polonium and prussic acid.
4. The main health risks in tobacco pertain to diseases of the cardiovascular system, in particular myocardial infarction (heart attack), cardiovascular disease, diseases of the respiratory tract such as Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), asthma, emphysema, and cancer, particularly lung cancer and cancers of the larynx and tongue.
5. About 1.1 billion people in the world smoke (1 in 6 or 16.7%) .About half of all smokers die from smoking-related diseases. In average the life expectancy of smokers is 8 - 12 years shorter than that of non-smokers.
6. Stopping smoking can make a big difference to smoker health. It is never too late to stop smoking to greatly benefit health. For example, if stop smoking in middle age, before having cancer or some other serious disease, you avoid most of the increased risk of death due to smoking.
7.The main cigarette manufacturers are the USA and China. The largest number of tobacco consumers lives in China, Yemen, Cambodia, Djibouti.
8. In spite of the enormous volume of accumulated data on the dangers of smoking, there are scientific works, speaking to the contrary. Ulcer colitis is revealed in the non-smokers twice as often than in the smokers. Nicotine of tobacco smoke has antiinflammatory properties.
9. On 27 February 2005 the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, took effect. The FCTC is the world’s first public health treaty. Countries that sign on as parties agree to a set of common goals, minimum standards for tobacco control policy, and to cooperate in dealing with cross-border challenges such as cigarette smuggling. Currently the WHO declares that 4 billion people will be covered by the treaty, which includes 168 signatories.
10. In November 2004, Bhutan became the first country in which the sale of tobacco and tobacco products is prohibited and imports of tobacco products for personal use are subject to 100% duty.

Cheap cigarettes from little tobacco companies

Cheap cigarettesfrom little tobacco companies have fouled up the $246 billion deal that big tobacco companies made with taxpayers. 
Little companies grabbed eight percent of the market from 1997 to 2003, according to a March 27 report from the Brattle Group in San Francisco.
The report could trigger a reduction of annual payments from tobacco companies to the 46 states that signed the 25-year agreement.
Illinois is supposed to receive more than $9.1 billion -- or approximately $364 million annually -- from the Master Tobacco Settlement Agreement through the year 2025. llinois' payout is the fifth largest from MTSA, after California, New York, Pennsylvania, and Ohio, respectively. 
Companies have paid $41 billion so far, according to the March 28 Financial Times. 
The agreement calls for companies to pay $6.5 billion on April 17, but it also requires adjustment if states have failed to enforce laws that should cripple competition.
Under identical law in 46 states, companies that did not sign the agreement gain no financial advantage by staying out. Outsiders must pay into escrow accounts.
Outsiders get their escrow back in 25 years, if no state successfully sues them.
From an outsider's angle, the agreement looks like a state sponsored cartel. 
"The agreement made states directly interested in the profits of the big companies," said Everett Gee, general counsel of S & M Brands Inc. in Keysville, Va.
S & M Brands makes Baileycigarettes. Gee said the Bailey family has grown tobacco for five generations. He said they started making cigarettes in 1994.
Gee disputed the Brattle Group's finding that companies lost market share because of the agreement. He said they lost market share because of greed. 
He said they increased prices more than enough to pay the states. He said, "These prices shocked the consumer." 
He said signers of the agreement would have lost more than eight percent of the market if states had not protected them. 
"At those prices you would expect 60 to 70 percent," he said. 
In 1998, Gee said, the Baileys received a letter from a law firm giving five days to sign the master settlement agreement. 
"We would have had to pay in states where we never sold a cigarette," he said. 
The Baileys did not sign. They started making escrow payments. 
"We have paid our escrow always," Gee said. "We are under the largest scrutiny." 
He estimated the escrow at $4.35 per carton, but won't know until next year. 
For companies that signed the agreement, the Brattle Group report gave owners three weeks to decide whether to adjust payments. 
R.J. Reynolds in Winston-Salem, N.C., had not decided as of April 5. 
He said states would have to prove to arbitrators that they diligently enforced the laws. 
States and companies that signed the agreement jointly hired the Brattle Group. States do not permit taxpayers to read the report. 
States and companies that signed the agreement jointly employ Price Waterhouse to calculate market shares. States do not permit taxpayers to read the report.