FDA Bans Flavored Cigarettes

[Select]

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/booster ... ettes.html

Looking for a better article, but that's the first I saw. Anyone think they'll go underground now? I have no idea how hard they are to produce so I can't say.
I'm personally fine with the ban if it's effective in reducing new smokers.

Edit: I'm wondering if higher taxes were considered first.

[Taxious]

I don't smoke but the ban seems a little ridiculous to me. If we are that worried about health risks from cigs, why not make them illegal outright instead of pussyfooting around it like this?

I liked one of the user comments on that page:

Here's a new bill for you. It's guaranteed to stop teen smoking, drinking, and pregnancies. It's called parenting.

We need to stop relying on other sources like school and gov't to parent our children. School is where kids should be educated about newton's laws. The gov't should provide us with vital resources such as the police and fire dept. And parents should parent.

[Jarochai Alabaster]

Here's a new bill for you. It's guaranteed to stop teen smoking, drinking, and pregnancies. It's called parenting.

We need to stop relying on other sources like school and gov't to parent our children. School is where kids should be educated about newton's laws. The gov't should provide us with vital resources such as the police and fire dept. And parents should parent.

OMFG this.

This really is just another little snipe at the smokers by the nonsmokers, just like the smoking bans in public places such as bars and restaurants. Eventually, it really will come down to genuine attempts to outright ban tobacco products, and we all know how effective prohibition is.

[Lurker]

That user comment is pretty stupid. It's true there's no substitute for good parenting, but it doesn't follow that the Government has no role to play in protecting consumers. Taking simple and common sense steps to prevent tobacco companies from marketing their products to teenagers is a no-brainer.

[Jarochai Alabaster]

it doesn't follow that the Government has no role to play in protecting consumers

The government has already fulfilled its role in protecting the consumer by setting restrictions on the age one can purchase the product. Business' responsibility is to ensure that employees obey the laws when making sales. Society's responsibility is to ensure underage smoking is discouraged on all fronts.

The government's responsibility is to make the law restricting sales based on age, not to eliminate the freedom of manufacturers to provide a wider flavor of products that many adults, myself included, enjoy. This will have no impact whatsoever on underage smoking, because choices in flavor is not the problem.

[Lurker]

The user comment that you "OMFG" agreed with said the government should mind it's own business. Now you're saying the government does have a role to play, you just think they are going too far in this case. Why the "OMFG this"?

This will have no impact whatsoever on underage smoking

You don't know that. We prevent cigarette companies from marketing their products to children because they have a documented history of doing exactly that. They aren't making fruit flavored cigarettes to appeal to adults.

[Taxious]

His point was that the government has gone far enough in its job of protecting consumers by setting and enforcing an age restriction on tobacco. If the government is still worried about teens smoking, why not raise the age limit to something higher instead of outright banning certain flavors of smokes that many adults still enjoy?

As well as banning flavored cigarettes, tobacco companies are no longer able to advertise their “light,” “low-tar” and “mild” versions of their products.
http://washington.bizjournals.com/washi ... ily21.html

[Jarochai Alabaster]

Where did the text that Tax and then I quoted say "the government should mind its own business"?

They aren't making fruit flavored cigarettes to appeal to adults.

And yet they appeal to adults. I happen to be one of them.

[Lurker]

Where did the text that Tax and then I quoted say "the government should mind its own business"?

From the user comment...

The gov't should provide us with vital resources such as the police and fire dept. And parents should parent.

To which you replied, "OMFG this".

And yet they appeal to adults. I happen to be one of them.

Tough. You weren't the target audience.

RJR_Memo.jpg

[Harlowe]

I think it's ridiculous, if tobacco isn't illegal altogether there should be no regulation on what damn flavor they make them. Whether they are the official target audience or not, adults - who can legally smoke - like the flavors.

[Select]

I do think they want to outright ban it, but can't because of lobbying and the likely reaction (and rioting) from the general public. So they inch along.

[Lurker]

Harlowe,
How do you propose we stop a company from coming up with marketing ploys to sell dangerous products to children? "Adults like it too" doesn't seem like a good enough defense when the whole point of the product was to appeal to children.

[Freecare Spiritwise]

Here's a new bill for you. It's guaranteed to stop teen smoking, drinking, and pregnancies. It's called parenting.

That's the most delusional thing I've read all day. Nothing is guaranteed when it comes to raising kids. Anyone that would speak in such absolutes has either never raised kids or given themselves more credit than they deserve for their kids turning out ok.

Good parents raise bad kids and bad parents raise good kids every day. I think parenting is probably the biggest factor in how a child turns out, but it's not the only factor by any means. I read something the the other day that said kids raised in the bible belt (an area known for strict, conservative, family values) had a higher teen pregnancy rate.

I've said for years that if your daughter makes it to 18 without geting pregnant then its more luck than good parenting, not that it hurts to be a good parent.

[Harlowe]

I just don't think grown adults should be denied anything legal on the basis that kids might like it. Hell, there are numerous cheap, fruity alcohols that teens would love as well. You want to stop them from making that too?

You might as well make alcohol and cigarettes required to be dog-ass flavored to ensure kids won't like it.

[Lurker]

It's not that kids might like it; the companies made the product specifically to go after kids. That's what I have a problem with. How do you think we should prevent or fight against that sort of cynical marketing of dangerous products?

[Partha]

Execution of the people who thought marketing to kids was a good idea. Tends to have a deterrent effect.

[Select]

I've said for years that if your daughter makes it to 18 without geting pregnant then its more luck than good parenting

Luck that she turned out intelligent? Or luck that someone's son was intelligent? Personally, I think it's more about teaching proper protection - which is good parenting. Then it's a little bit of luck that they're not too stupid that it went in one ear and out the other I agree with the rest you wrote.

And yea, I've seen studies like that before. You can really see it in studies on higher teen pregnancy rates in abstinence-only taught schools. Bible States tends to have more abstinence-only education so it makes sense.

Back on topic - Can't the companies be even more devious now and "pretend" something new is for adults when they mostly want the kids?

[Lurker]

Smokeless tobacco products in little mints style packaging. The 15ish looking girl in the background is a nice touch, isn't it.

[Harlowe]

First, these provisions impact like .02% of cigarettes sold in the US, secondly, teen smoking was 34% in 1997 and is 20% now. This isn't going to affect it, the only thing that has proven to (other than education programs) is the price. I think they've already addressed the overt marketing over the past 10-15 years anyway.

What you do not do is deny adults products that are legal just because it might appeal to a teen. There have been flavored cigarettes for eons, they've been very popular in other cultures - it's not something new invented for children. The US tobacco companies just honed in on it for their own dubious purposes, but that was 35 years ago when they could actually launch devious marketing plans that promote to youth.

You don't deal with an issue by denying adults choices, it's utter bullshit.

ETA: um Lurker I don't believe that is a real Camel advertisement (it looks "shopped" as hell), also Orbs were marketed for people to use at work or in public where they can not conveniently have a smoking break.

[Freecare Spiritwise]

You don't deal with an issue by denying adults choices, it's utter bullshit.

Agreed. It really boils down to people imposing their own morality in the guise of "protecting the children".

Ban video games, porn, free speech, tobacco/alcohol/weed, or whatever. It's all to protect the children *wink* *wink*.