Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CBC)   US tobacco companies forced to admit what everyone already knows   (cbc.ca ) divider line
    More: Obvious, United States, Altria, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.  
•       •       •

4472 clicks; posted to Business » on 28 Nov 2012 at 9:53 PM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



49 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2012-11-28 09:20:03 PM  
That 4 out 5 doctors agree Tarryltons taste best?
 
2012-11-28 10:03:18 PM  
And yet they are still legal, heavily taxed and the companies are allowed to stay in business while admitting they kill people and take their money while they do it.
 
2012-11-28 10:08:54 PM  
That they have secretly been working for God? The Lord was merely testing his creation. Those who succumbed to temptation were judged and He made a tidy profit.
 
2012-11-28 10:09:19 PM  
That Tareyton smokers will kill their mothers and bury them in the basement than switch?
 
2012-11-28 10:16:26 PM  
Consider this, however: If tomorrow the big tobacco companies decided that as of January 1st, 2013,they would never sell another cigarette in North America, the government types yelling the loudest for them to pay for their sins would be tripping all over each other in a desperate rush to convince them to change their minds. Way too much money and jobs involved.

/For the record, doesn't smoke, doesn't support Big Tobacco
 
2012-11-28 10:26:17 PM  
That smoking makes you look cool?
 
2012-11-28 10:43:45 PM  
"Defendant tobacco companies intentionally designed cigarettes to make them more addictive."

it still floors me that nobody went to jail for this.
 
2012-11-28 10:52:41 PM  

Hector Remarkable: That smoking makes you look cool?


www.popularsmokers.com
 
2012-11-28 11:02:10 PM  
"Smoking kills, on average, 1,200 Americans. Every day."

... and yet, rather than ban this deadly substance, state and federal governments are content to let it continue to kill people as long as the taxes keep coming in.
 
2012-11-28 11:53:05 PM  
Warning labels first appeared on U.S. cigarette packs in 1965 and before that people called them coffin nails, as in drive another nail in your coffin when you lit one up. Anyone that says they didn't know they would kill you is full of crap.
Did the companies lie, probably, but not any more then any other company in the world.
Surprised that the article came on Fark so late, I read this in the morning paper. East Coast
 
2012-11-29 12:05:27 AM  

cig-mkr: Anyone that says they didn't know they would kill you is full of crap.
Did the companies lie, probably, but not any more then any other company in the world.



Yeah, with that user name, I'm totally read to accept your objective analysis on this one.
 
2012-11-29 12:08:41 AM  

HotWingAgenda: cig-mkr: Anyone that says they didn't know they would kill you is full of crap.
Did the companies lie, probably, but not any more then any other company in the world.


Yeah, with that user name, I'm totally read to accept your objective analysis on this one.


I'll admit a vested interest.
 
2012-11-29 12:19:06 AM  
Make all the execs stand on street corners holding up signs.

www.theblaze.com

media.cleveland.com
 
2012-11-29 12:26:01 AM  

cig-mkr: Anyone that says they didn't know they would kill you is full of crap. Did the companies lie, probably, but not any more then any other company in the world.


"Defendant tobacco companies intentionally designed cigarettes to make them more addictive."

What about people who didn't know this? Seeing as how cigarette companies lied about the addictiveness of cigarettes up until the point they were forced by the lawsuits to admit it, I'd say that goes a bit beyond what other companies in the world do.

Personally, I have no problems with companies selling me things that are bad for me. I like to eat steak, I like to drink, I'm glad I can buy those things and consume them even though they are bad for me. If they were intentionally making steak and alcohol more addictive while telling me they weren't addictive? Then I'd be pissed, and they should be punished. As an aside, I wouldn't be surprised if soda makers are in this spot in 20 years or so, having to admit they knew HFCS could be addictive but they kept using it anyway because it was cheap.

Now, whether this public shaming is actually an effective deterrent or a just punishment, that's a different question. Personally, it seems pretty pointless to me. The cat is out of the bag, tobacco companies can't pretend cigarettes aren't bad anymore or they aren't addictive because now we know better, so making them do this is about like pissing in the ocean. No one's going to notice.
 
2012-11-29 12:55:26 AM  
In 30 years, these warnings will be on every pack of legal, regulated, taxed marijuana.

/yeah, i went there.
 
2012-11-29 01:09:42 AM  
For the historical-legal-minded, the millions of documents from the big Tobacco Lawsuit of several years ago is sitting online. You'd be *amazed* what you find in here, and might find the hours passing away unnoticed:

http://archive.tobacco.org/Documents/documents.html


/you'll find the highly revealing alongside the truly mundate (tobacco company lawsuits against those making unlicensed but brand-named candy cigarettes, for example). Highly recommended!
 
2012-11-29 01:10:58 AM  

HotWingAgenda: cig-mkr: Anyone that says they didn't know they would kill you is full of crap.
Did the companies lie, probably, but not any more then any other company in the world.


Yeah, with that user name, I'm totally read to accept your objective analysis on this one.


Only an idiot would willingly suck smoke into their lungs and not think at least once that its causing damage to their health, hell I smoked in high school then made the connection when trying to run at football practice........

Oh and MADD is going to hate this one:

"More people die every year from smoking than from murder, AIDS, suicide, drugs, car crashes, and alcohol, combined."

They always want to assert that drinking causes more deaths than anything else.
 
2012-11-29 01:11:17 AM  
^^^Whoops, bad singular/plural agreement there. Mea culpa!
 
2012-11-29 01:13:15 AM  
img203.imageshack.us

They're forced to admit that tomacco is better?
 
2012-11-29 01:16:41 AM  
Been using their fine product for 35 years, and my lungs feel great.
My liver, however, had me served with an order of protection last week.
 
2012-11-29 01:41:00 AM  

poisonedpawn78: And yet they are still legal, heavily taxed and the companies are allowed to stay in business while admitting they kill people and take their money while they do it.


jjorsett: "Smoking kills, on average, 1,200 Americans. Every day."

... and yet, rather than ban this deadly substance, state and federal governments are content to let it continue to kill people as long as the taxes keep coming in.


Because it's a choice. The tobacco companies aren't running around forcing people to purchase and consume their product. Freedom of choice is still kind of a thing, no matter how badly you authoritarian types want to protect people from themselves. So here is where you'll drag out the second-hand smoke dead horse.

What pisses me off is all the added chemicals they put in them. The latest thing is a fire-retardant so little old ladies don't burn themselves up when they fall asleep in their bathrobe with a lit cig. So now about 3/4 of the way through the cig it tries to go out on its own, they taste not nearly so awesome, and I imagine they manage to be even more horrible for you than clean tobacco would be. Also they put salt-peter in them to make them burn faster. *boggle*

I tried rolling my own for a while to get away from all the additives they stick in there, but I never could find any that tastes good to me. Sigh. I really miss the days when you could smoke in-doors, a decent percentage of the population also smoked and wasn't vilified for it, and you could find a pack of cigarettes that didn't taste like...chemicals.

I think the funniest thing about it all is the people biatching about the smell. Like my aunt, she makes fake coughing noises at me and gets biatchy if I exhale anywhere near her general direction while I'm smoking. Her husband smoked cigars (and cheap nasty ones too) for most of his adult life and she had no problems with it, but she's bought into this kick. My parents used to smoke around me as a kid all the time, and every once in a while they'd light one up that was the most heavenly smell ever. Like a tobacco curing barn in autumn. I still love the smell of a fresh pack of smokes. I really think a lot of the hate is because every time people who have never been around smokers smell it they're thinking "oh fark I'm going to get cancer!" so it becomes this evil smell. Objectively, tobacco smoke can be quite pleasant. That's kinda how the whole fad came about to start with.
 
2012-11-29 02:01:14 AM  
Our roommate (housemate, actually, and he owns the place) is a nonsmoker, and he does prefer that we don't smoke in the house, but the smell of tobacco smoke doesn't bother him. He likes to tell this story...

"My brother and I used to pretend-fly model airplanes around the house. Our favorite place was in our father's den, because we could fly our airplanes through the clouds. Our dad was a chain smoker, and when the doctor told him he couldn't smoke cigarettes any more, he switched to a pipe. We loved flying our airplanes through the clouds."

I smoke about 3 cigarettes a day, 1/2 a cigarette at a time. Been doing that for years. My wife smokes cigarette tobacco in a corncob pipe without actually inhaling, and she's been doing that for about 40 years. The only thing that bothers me about climbing several flights of stairs is my arthritis. I don't remember the last time I was out of breath...

People need to chill out a bit about tobacco itself and think about the crap put into it to make it more addictive. This is coming to light, which is good. People also need to do a little bit of a cost/risk analysis on other things in their lives. How many carcinogens to I inhale while filling my car up with gas? Etc., etc., etc. ;)
 
2012-11-29 02:16:43 AM  

poisonedpawn78: And yet they are still legal, heavily taxed and the companies are allowed to stay in business while admitting they kill people and take their money while they do it.


Damn those evil tobacco companies for putting a gun to my head and forcing me to smoke.


/The risks and consequences of smoking are well known and even more well publicized. Hell, even when I started 30 years ago, the surgeon general's warning was right there on the side of the pack.

//I quit over two years ago. My lungs are just starting to return to something resembling normal function.

steamingpile: They always want to assert that drinking causes more deaths than anything else.


They cheat to get that statistic - if alcohol is any tangentially involved, they count it.
 
2012-11-29 03:55:30 AM  
I smoked for more than 25 years, although it was never more than half a pack a day and in later years consistently less than that. Sometimes it was menthol. My first brand: Brights. Like candy, as I recall.
Quit cold turkey nearly three years ago.
While I regret the money I spent over the years, I don't regret smoking per se. It gave me pleasure, I liked it, it occupied moments that needed to be occupied and I was perfectly OK with someone making a living off my habit.

At the time I was of the opinion, "Well, gotta die sometime."
I just decided I didn't want to die with a hole in my throat.
 
2012-11-29 07:04:27 AM  

Eddie Ate Dynamite: Objectively, tobacco smoke can be quite pleasant. That's kinda how the whole fad came about to start with.


"Objectively, this subjective experience is pleasant"?

Cigarette smoke (not all tobacco smoke) smells terrible enough to keep me from eating. To me, anyway.

\ Anecdotes, etc
 
2012-11-29 07:11:20 AM  

Eddie Ate Dynamite: Because it's a choice. The tobacco companies aren't running around forcing people to purchase and consume their product.


Actually, they are, if they are purposely designing their product to be addictive.
 
2012-11-29 07:40:04 AM  

AtlanticCoast63: Consider this, however: If tomorrow the big tobacco companies decided that as of January 1st, 2013,they would never sell another cigarette in North America, the government types yelling the loudest for them to pay for their sins would be tripping all over each other in a desperate rush to convince them to change their minds. Way too much money and jobs involved.

/For the record, doesn't smoke, doesn't support Big Tobacco


That's exactly why tobacco companies will never be going Galt and taking their ball home. Everyone is making tons of cash.
 
2012-11-29 07:42:28 AM  

Eddie Ate Dynamite: I really think a lot of the hate is because every time people who have never been around smokers smell it they're thinking "oh fark I'm going to get cancer!" so it becomes this evil smell. Objectively, tobacco smoke can be quite pleasant.


Pipe smoke can be quite pleasant. Also damn stylish. Sadly, I haven't seen a tobacco pipe in years. Whatever the fark is in cigarettes or cigars, there's more than just tobacco, and they smell absolutely nasty.

If I ever start smoking, it's gonna be pipe or nothing.

Snapper Carr: Damn those evil tobacco companies for putting a gun to my head and forcing me to smoke.


Not so much that as they hid dangers they KNEW about their product above and beyond what was already public knowledge at the time (namely that they were physically addictive), and intentionally designed the product to be MOAR dangerous. A lot of this goes back to when people who are sick now first started smoking, 2-4 decades prior. Almost everyone smoked back in the day. When the lung cancer started to set in, the states got hit with a lot of health care costs that were directly a result of the Big Tobacco agenda.

The Big Tobacco lawsuits were more in the same category as a product liability lawsuit like the Pinto than any attempt to avoid personal irresponsibility. Except even in the Pinto's case, the hazards were mostly caused by criminally negligent efforts to reduce costs. To reiterate, Big Tobacco actively sought out ways to make their product worse.
 
2012-11-29 08:27:23 AM  

mutterfark: That they have secretly been working for God? The Lord was merely testing his creation. Those who succumbed to temptation were judged and He made a tidy profit.


The opposite, in fact. From an interview on Frontline of a tobacco scientist:
Another incident was with Dr. Frank Colby. He as a senior scientist for R. J. Reynolds for 35 years and then was assigned to their law firms. When I asked Dr. Colby, who had insisted--and this was in 1997--that no American had ever died from smoking cigarettes. That was his position. I asked him if he had read the deposition of Jeffrey Bible that I had taken, who was the Chief Executive Officer of Phillip Morris, the big parent company. Who said 100,000 possibly die every year.

And he looked me straight in the eye and he said, "Mr. Motley, I don't believe in that Bible or the Bible." And I said, "Are you an atheist." And he said, "Yes." It strikes me as rather remarkable that a company that has a scientist who is supposed to be in charge of scientific morality is an atheist.
 
2012-11-29 08:54:57 AM  
The gov't needs to get over this issue and let people buy cigarettes in peace. If they want to smoke themselves to death, so be it.

Fine, they lied before, they've since been sued for lots of money. The issue is settled.

There is nobody in the US who is smoking right now who doesn't know it's both addictive and bad for them.
 
2012-11-29 09:17:38 AM  

poisonedpawn78: And yet they are still legal, heavily taxed and the companies are allowed to stay in business while admitting they kill people and take their money while they do it.


jjorsett: ... and yet, rather than ban this deadly substance, state and federal governments are content to let it continue to kill people as long as the taxes keep coming in.


Y'all remember how well Prohibition worked, right? We're better off with tobacco legalized, taxed, and publicly stigmatized than with it illegal.

Lots of shiat is bad for you but that doesn't mean it's any benefit to make it illegal.

/don't smoke, never have
 
2012-11-29 09:19:24 AM  

MugzyBrown: The gov't needs to get over this issue and let people buy cigarettes in peace. If they want to smoke themselves to death, so be it.

Fine, they lied before, they've since been sued for lots of money. The issue is settled.

There is nobody in the US who is smoking right now who doesn't know it's both addictive and bad for them.


I guess one could say the same about crackheads and Heroin addicts, eh?
 
2012-11-29 09:20:35 AM  

jjorsett: "Smoking kills, on average, 1,200 Americans. Every day."

... and yet, rather than ban this deadly substance, state and federal governments are content to let it continue to kill people as long as the taxes keep coming in.


And they refuse to re-legalize harmless marijuana.

Or re-legalize (less)harmful cocaine.

Or re-legalize (less)harmful morphine and heroin.
 
2012-11-29 09:21:38 AM  

you have pee hands: poisonedpawn78: And yet they are still legal, heavily taxed and the companies are allowed to stay in business while admitting they kill people and take their money while they do it.

jjorsett: ... and yet, rather than ban this deadly substance, state and federal governments are content to let it continue to kill people as long as the taxes keep coming in.

Y'all remember how well Prohibition worked, right? We're better off with tobacco legalized, taxed, and publicly stigmatized than with it illegal.

Lots of shiat is bad for you but that doesn't mean it's any benefit to make it illegal.

/don't smoke, never have


We're still operating under Prohibition. Loads of formerly-legal substances that are less-harmful (and more fun) than tobacco are illegal today.
 
2012-11-29 09:38:43 AM  

Kuroshin: And they refuse to re-legalize harmless marijuana.

Or re-legalize (less)harmful cocaine.

Or re-legalize (less)harmful morphine and heroin.


Yeah, and the results are a total disaster. This is a point in favor of banning tobacco. . . how?
 
2012-11-29 09:51:47 AM  

js34603: Personally, I have no problems with companies selling me things that are bad for me. I like to eat steak, I like to drink, I'm glad I can buy those things and consume them even though they are bad for me. If they were intentionally making steak and alcohol more addictive while telling me they weren't addictive? Then I'd be pissed, and they should be punished.


Very well-put. I also have habits of consumption that I know are bad for me. This is my responsibility, and I bear the consequences. But to find out that Johnnie Walker manipulated it's product to make it more addictive, while denying it for decades? That's not cool.
 
2012-11-29 09:53:05 AM  
Oooops, looks like I tipped off the apostrophe police.
 
2012-11-29 10:15:27 AM  
I guess one could say the same about crackheads and Heroin addicts, eh?

sure could
 
2012-11-29 02:41:36 PM  

Kuroshin: We're still operating under Prohibition. Loads of formerly-legal substances that are less-harmful (and more fun) than tobacco are illegal today.


I agree with your general point but there's no way in hell heroin is less harmful than tobacco.
 
2012-11-29 04:54:43 PM  
Funny thing is seeing people in their teens and 20s smoking. All these years we know how bad they are and yet they light up. Kids today!
 
2012-11-29 05:37:47 PM  
And yet it will STILL Take cannabis - a plant that even detractors usually fail to find non-anecdotal evidence against - at least 5 to 10 more years to be legalized again after nearly 100 years of being illegal because a cotton magnate decided it was cheaper to mount a campaign against it using racism than re-tool his factories to use it.
 
2012-11-29 10:34:51 PM  
The problem with punishing the tobacco companies with secretly more addictive is that there is no law that I know of that makes it illegal to get someone addicted to an otherwise legal substance. Denying having done so is another matter.

Personally I would like to see a law forbidding this practice. Maximizing addiction to consumables should be an automatic death sentence for a business, and jail time for those responsible for the policy. But afaik it's totally legal to do that today as long as they come clean when it is alleged against them.

Of course I think that a lot of things that businesses do should result in the business being chopped up and sold off at a total loss for investors.
 
2012-11-30 12:16:43 AM  

Eddie Ate Dynamite: The latest thing is a fire-retardant so little old ladies don't burn themselves up when they fall asleep in their bathrobe with a lit cig. So now about 3/4 of the way through the cig it tries to go out on its own,


About 30 years ago I was trapped working in a room with a guy who would light a cigarette, take one puff, and let it sit in the ashtray polluting the air. When it burned out he'd light another one and repeat the process. I spent two years wishing they would make cigarettes that would go out when they weren't actually being smoked.
 
2012-11-30 12:32:57 AM  

Hector Remarkable: That smoking makes you look cool?


Not as cool as this guy.

s11.postimage.org

/Blu sucks, get a T-Rex
 
2012-11-30 12:44:52 AM  

Dokushin: Eddie Ate Dynamite: Objectively, tobacco smoke can be quite pleasant. That's kinda how the whole fad came about to start with.

"Objectively, this subjective experience is pleasant"?


Unsure of what you're driving at here.

Sum Guye: About 30 years ago I was trapped working in a room with a guy who would light a cigarette, take one puff, and let it sit in the ashtray polluting the air. When it burned out he'd light another one and repeat the process. I spent two years wishing they would make cigarettes that would go out when they weren't actually being smoked.


So it's all YOUR fault! *shakes fist* I'm sure all the people around when I have to puff on a cig like it's a cigar to get it burning properly again thank you. As reparations for ruining my cigs and forcing me to annoy those around me when I smoke, you should spend the next 2 years wishing just as hard for me to win the lottery. I'll split the winnings with you. Although it took roughly 28 years for it to work the first time. I'll probably get skin cancer from the sun by then.
 
2012-11-30 05:06:59 AM  

cig-mkr: Warning labels first appeared on U.S. cigarette packs in 1965 and before that people called them coffin nails, as in drive another nail in your coffin when you lit one up. Anyone that says they didn't know they would kill you is full of crap.
Did the companies lie, probably, but not any more then any other company in the world.
Surprised that the article came on Fark so late, I read this in the morning paper. East Coast


This * 1000.

Anyone alive today knows - and has known for decades - that smoking is bad for your health. There's no farking excuse. I knew it was bad when I lit my first cigarette. I liked it so I kept smoking. Is that my fault of Philip Morris's fault? When I switched from Marlboro to Camel did it suddenly become RJ Reynold's fault?

No, I have no one but myself to blame for years of smoking. When I started smoking, cigs were a dollar a pack. When I quit they were $7 a pack. There is nothing else which has risen that much in price in my lifetime and yet I kept shelling out money for them.

And it isn't all tax either. Don't delude yourselves. My state taxes is $0.84 a pack and the federal tax is $1.01. That doesn't come close to explaining how cigarettes have gone from $1 per pack to the $7 the last time I bought a carton.

But still, fark you Obama because one of your first moves once in office was to push for an increase in cigarette taxes. And anyone who smoked in 2008 knows the prices went up a couple of months before the taxes took effect.

/finally quit
//still feels weird not to have a lighter on me at all times - whether opening a beer or lighting a joint I still am surprised that I don't have a lighter in my pocket.
 
2012-11-30 06:34:03 PM  

jjorsett: "Smoking kills, on average, 1,200 Americans. Every day."

... and yet, rather than ban this deadly substance, state and federal governments are content to let it continue to kill people as long as the taxes keep coming in.


Pot bad. Pot...KILL! Pot kills so many, so many....so....uh, few....so...Can anyone document a pot-related death..at all?
 
2012-11-30 06:41:02 PM  
fark health risks...when you smoke, you STINK! You smell and are unpleasant to be around. You all smell like dirty cigarettes pooled up against the curb.

Your breath, your clothes, your unsellable car, your unsellable house...they farking REEK. And your mouth looks awful.

Whenever I see attractive women...then see the cig get pulled out? Might as well have seen you in a garbage bin.

I've been in houses where the occupants smoked (looking for a home)...smoke smell? Me and the realtor right out the door.
 
2012-11-30 08:43:30 PM  

DaCaptain19: fark health risks...when you smoke, you STINK! You smell and are unpleasant to be around. You all smell like dirty cigarettes pooled up against the curb.

Your breath, your clothes, your unsellable car, your unsellable house...they farking REEK. And your mouth looks awful.

Whenever I see attractive women...then see the cig get pulled out? Might as well have seen you in a garbage bin.

I've been in houses where the occupants smoked (looking for a home)...smoke smell? Me and the realtor right out the door.


Just go kill yourself. You'll be doing us all a favor.

/nonsmoker
 
Displayed 49 of 49 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report