Lawmakers Call for Ban on Flavored Cigarettes

[jacki_PREV (deleted)]

Critics say tobacco companies targeting kids with sweet smokes

I was glad to read this one too. It scares me that big tobacco could get away with this. I'll admit to guilty, and have little room to talk, letting my daughter smoke when she was 15, but I figured she was mature enough to make the decision for herself. Had she been 12, I'd have said "NO". -- Jacki

(removed)

At least one tobacco company, Reynolds American Inc., has already stopped advertising them. Another, Altria, doesn’t make candy- or fruit-flavored cigarettes and supports a ban.

“These are designed to attract younger smokers,†said Michael Bopp of the American Cancer Society. “We don’t want to see a product introduced that will give back the gains we’ve made in this state in reducing teenage smoking.â€Â

'Sweeten the poison'

A survey released last week by Buffalo’s Roswell Park Cancer Institute found that 20 percent of smokers 17 to 19 smoked flavored cigarettes in the past month, compared with just 6 percent of smokers over 25.

“They are using flavors to sweeten the poison,†said Dr. Gary Giovino, a senior researcher at the institute.

Winston-Salem, N.C.-based Reynolds American does not target minors in its marketing but decided to stop advertising flavored versions of its Camel brands — Mandarin Mint and Dark Mint — after meeting with Sen. Charles Fuschillo, a sponsor of New York’s bill, said company spokesman Fred McConnell. The brands will still be sold, however.

“We recognize use of certain names on Camel Exotics have resulted in unintended concerns,†he said.

McConnell said the company opposes legislation to ban flavored cigarettes because it would also ban conventional cigarettes.

“Ingredients like cocoa, sugar, licorice and menthol have been used in cigarettes for 100 years,†he said.

[smokeacamel]

Jacki,
I'll have to cheerfully disagree with your statement "It scares me that big tobacco could get away with this."

I think you've fallen under the PC mindset that anything a tobacco company does to inprove their product is evil. What have they "gotten Away With". Adding flavorings to their cigarettes to make them taste better and give us consumers more choices. Apply that to any other industry, soft drinks, fast food, cosmetics and it just sounds like a company being responsive to consumers - a good thing if you wanna stay in business, even altruistic.

Remember that licorish, mint and chocolate plus hundreds of other ingredients have been added as flavorings to tobacco for over 100 years. This is not new not evil, just good product development.

Now I'm a Camel man so I've been aware and tried many of these flavors over the last 10 years and some are good and some aren't. The main reason I don't smoke them is cause they only do this with low tar cigarettes and they don't have the kick I need. That's right, all their new products are lights. If anything this seems to be an effort on their part to migrate their customers to "healthier" cigarttes by adding flavors to replace the tar and nicotine.

Cheerfully disagreeing

[jacki_PREV (deleted)]

I maintain that it's important to keep cigarettes away from children until they are mature enough to make the decision to smoke. A product which appeals to children doesn't help. Maybe if I enjoyed flavors, I'd feel differently. But since I've always enjoyed straight tobacco, I guess I'm not sympathetic to flavors.

My daughter was 15 when she decided to start. At first, I was going to forbid it. Or try to, which I figured at 15 might be futile, so I gave her credit that she was mature enough to make this decision for herself.

I was 12 when I started, and I often feel the decision to smoke was made for me. I indicated that simply I wanted to try, I was welcomed to do so by my mother, encouraged to do so by my sister, and the next thing I knew, I was a regular smoker. Nobody ever talked to me about cravings, health risks or anything. Where I'm very content to be a smoker, I sometimes feel like I should have more choice. I guess this is my opposition to having smoking appeal to children. At least until they're old enough to make mature decisions and understand potential consequences.

My two cents.

[smokeacamel]

I think you were smart to not try to forbid your daughter smoking at 15. 14-16 seems to be the standard age people start smoking and at that age forbidding them doing it is usually pointless and tends to just drive it underground and harm the relationship. Better to have a good relationship with your daughter.

I think your experience starting smoking was about the norm for the time. You were at the younger edge of what was normal for the mid 70's but certainly not unusual. The times were different, it seemed like most people smoked back then and it was very accepted. Even though the health effects and addiction of smoking were known about it really hadn't sunk into the conciousness of society and it certaily wasn't look at a a character fault or weakness as it is today.

My experience was similar to yours. Although I started a couple years older than you I had friends that started younger than you did and my younger sister started at 12 like you did. On the plus side you did not feel ostricized by your family for smoking and that probably gave you a better relationship with your family than you would have had otherwise and that's important too.