FDA Proposal to Reduce Nicotine
- Thread starter irishearl
- Start date
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
Site Sponsors
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
- Status
I made it to page 29 of 99.
About 10 statistics were repeated numerous times, in different orders.
It seems that a predetermined agenda disallows a broad review of all facts, specifically any that counter the intended purpose.
I need another pipe now...
About 10 statistics were repeated numerous times, in different orders.
It seems that a predetermined agenda disallows a broad review of all facts, specifically any that counter the intended purpose.
I need another pipe now...
My usual question, how are tobacco and alcohol comparable? Two entirely different subjects, both from a scientific and a social acceptability perspective. One subject at a time.
Interesting tactic that, reduce the exposure to the cancer causing elements by reducing nicotine, the addictive element, levels. Fascinating! The logic is incontestable. Now, what are the unintended consequences?
Interesting tactic that, reduce the exposure to the cancer causing elements by reducing nicotine, the addictive element, levels. Fascinating! The logic is incontestable. Now, what are the unintended consequences?
Here are a couple quick hit excerpts from the text concerning pipes.
If FDA were to establish a nicotine tobacco product standard that covered only cigarettes, some number of addicted smokers could migrate to other similar combusted tobacco products to maintain their nicotine dose (or engage in dual use with other combusted tobacco products), potentially reducing the positive public health impact of such a rule. Because the scope would impact the potential public health benefits of a nicotine tobacco product standard, FDA is seeking comment on whether the standard should cover any or all of the following products: combusted cigarettes (which FDA has previously interpreted to include kreteks and bidis), cigarette tobacco, roll-your-own (RYO) tobacco, some or all cigars, pipe tobacco, and waterpipe tobacco. FDA intends that any nicotine tobacco product standard
would cover all brands in a particular product category and, therefore, those products currently on the market and any new tobacco products would be expected to adhere to the standard.
For example, researchers have found that current exclusive cigar smokers and current exclusive pipe smokers have an increased risk for lung cancer and tobacco-related cancers overall, as compared to those who reported never using any type of combusted tobacco product (Ref. 32). We note that there is a dose-response relationship between the number of cigars and pipes smoked and the risk of disease (i.e., the larger the number of cigars or pipes smoked, the higher the risk of disease) (Ref. 31 at 110), but cigar and pipe users are still subject to the addictive effects of nicotine through nicotine absorption (and to the health impacts of long-term use that may follow from regular use due to addiction) even if they report that they do not inhale (Refs. 33-35).
Researchers also have found that the risk of dying from tobacco-related cancers is higher from current exclusive pipe smokers and current exclusive cigar smokers than for those who reported never using combusted tobacco products (Ref. 32).
To explore the potential impact of a product standard that would maximally benefit population health, the experts were asked to assume that combusted tobacco products that could be viewed as highly likely to serve as substitutes for traditional cigarettes (i.e., RYO tobacco, pipe tobacco, nonpremium cigars) would be included in the policy, while other tobacco products (i.e., premium cigars, waterpipe/hookah, ENDS, smokeless tobacco) would be excluded.
If FDA were to establish a nicotine tobacco product standard that covered only cigarettes, some number of addicted smokers could migrate to other similar combusted tobacco products to maintain their nicotine dose (or engage in dual use with other combusted tobacco products), potentially reducing the positive public health impact of such a rule. Because the scope would impact the potential public health benefits of a nicotine tobacco product standard, FDA is seeking comment on whether the standard should cover any or all of the following products: combusted cigarettes (which FDA has previously interpreted to include kreteks and bidis), cigarette tobacco, roll-your-own (RYO) tobacco, some or all cigars, pipe tobacco, and waterpipe tobacco. FDA intends that any nicotine tobacco product standard
would cover all brands in a particular product category and, therefore, those products currently on the market and any new tobacco products would be expected to adhere to the standard.
For example, researchers have found that current exclusive cigar smokers and current exclusive pipe smokers have an increased risk for lung cancer and tobacco-related cancers overall, as compared to those who reported never using any type of combusted tobacco product (Ref. 32). We note that there is a dose-response relationship between the number of cigars and pipes smoked and the risk of disease (i.e., the larger the number of cigars or pipes smoked, the higher the risk of disease) (Ref. 31 at 110), but cigar and pipe users are still subject to the addictive effects of nicotine through nicotine absorption (and to the health impacts of long-term use that may follow from regular use due to addiction) even if they report that they do not inhale (Refs. 33-35).
Researchers also have found that the risk of dying from tobacco-related cancers is higher from current exclusive pipe smokers and current exclusive cigar smokers than for those who reported never using combusted tobacco products (Ref. 32).
To explore the potential impact of a product standard that would maximally benefit population health, the experts were asked to assume that combusted tobacco products that could be viewed as highly likely to serve as substitutes for traditional cigarettes (i.e., RYO tobacco, pipe tobacco, nonpremium cigars) would be included in the policy, while other tobacco products (i.e., premium cigars, waterpipe/hookah, ENDS, smokeless tobacco) would be excluded.
Actually in the press release to MSNBC they state there will be a separate rule made for premium cigars. What that rule is wasn't released at this time.
Amen to that! I’m definitely well off cause I started building my cellar over 9 years ago but this will still be very hard to just stand by and watch, what a mess. Man oh man!
When all you see is negative with zero positive, it is rather foolish to ignore it. To me, that means it is moving forward essentially unopposed. On other words, it's not if, it's when.
I put a little bit of fun money from my portfolio into some choice marijuana stocks... best performance pick for the year, that one.
Don't knock the green rush! At least wait until I've taken my money out...
Don't knock the green rush! At least wait until I've taken my money out...
Listen, just light a bomber and all of your tobacco worries will melt away. Just be sure to pick from a company I'm invested with, will you?
Not that this isn't alarming, but the FDA hub-bub is just a request for information. With everything, it's much more complicated than it seems. And... the tobacco industry has one of the most ruthless PR machines going, so no doubt they are working hard on pulling strings. Seems likely that this is years down the road, if at all.
But, it does raise an interesting question. If it were possible to remove nicotine from blends, and somehow maintain the original flavour (I know it's a stretch), would you still smoke the pipe? As much as you do now? More?
I suspect my levels would maintain, but I wouldn't be too surprised if a lot of people did give it up. Those who are really devoted and interested in the flavour profiles and nuance are forever, but there seems to be a large share of people who migrate to the pipe to wean themselves off of cigarettes. If it didn't have nicotine, maybe they wouldn't stick to it? Either way, it's likely bad news for pipe tobacco.
Not that this isn't alarming, but the FDA hub-bub is just a request for information. With everything, it's much more complicated than it seems. And... the tobacco industry has one of the most ruthless PR machines going, so no doubt they are working hard on pulling strings. Seems likely that this is years down the road, if at all.
But, it does raise an interesting question. If it were possible to remove nicotine from blends, and somehow maintain the original flavour (I know it's a stretch), would you still smoke the pipe? As much as you do now? More?
I suspect my levels would maintain, but I wouldn't be too surprised if a lot of people did give it up. Those who are really devoted and interested in the flavour profiles and nuance are forever, but there seems to be a large share of people who migrate to the pipe to wean themselves off of cigarettes. If it didn't have nicotine, maybe they wouldn't stick to it? Either way, it's likely bad news for pipe tobacco.
- Status