SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
U.S. to Crack Down on Tobacco, Electronic Cigarettes
NBC News and the Providence Journal report that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has published a rule which will classify cigars, chewing tobacco and nicotine-containing fluid for electronic cigarettes as tobacco products. Under the rule, sale of those items to people under 18 years of age is to be prohibited. The electronic parts of electronic cigarettes are not covered by the rule. According to NBC News, the rule "will be open for public comment before it becomes final." The FDA regulates cigarettes and loose tobacco for smoking.
[Continues...]
Courts in EU, India Uphold Anti-tobacco Laws
On 4 May the European Court of Justice turned down challenges to the 2014 revision of the Tobacco Products Directive. The law entails enlargement of warnings, prohibition of menthol cigarettes, prohibition of packages holding fewer than 20 cigarettes, restrictions on advertising of electronic cigarettes, and limits on the nicotine content of fluid for electronic cigarettes. It enables EU countries to require plain packaging. The court said the regulations were necessary to comply with the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control.
Also on 4 May, India's Supreme Court declined to further delay the implementation of a requirement for larger warning messages on cigarette packages. Several cigarette manufacturers including ITC Ltd. have shut down their factories. The chairman of ITC decried the requirement, saying:
Behind this is vested interests... where money is given into the hands of so-called NGOs, who are being influenced to kill local brands knowing fully well that smuggled cigarettes of some other industry are going to be used here.
Golden Tobacco in Gujarat has been following the rule, which had originally been intended to take effect 1 April 2016, "from April 2015 [sic]."
coverage:
- Irish Times (EU)
- Belfast Telegraph (EU)
- Live Mint (statement from ITC chairman)
- Voice of America (government-sponsored; covers India)
- Nikkei Asian Review (shut-downs in India)
- Reuters (India)
- Christian Science Monitor (both EU and India)
- The Wall Street Journal (paywalled; about shut-downs in India; predates ruling)
- Reuters (about shut-downs in India; predates ruling)
- The Wall Street Journal (paywalled; about EU)
- Quartz India (India, Golden Tobacco)
- The New York Times (EU, India)
further information:
- 2014 Tobacco Products Directive (PDF)
- press release from cigarette manufacturer JTI regarding EU ruling
(Score: 2) by Gravis on Saturday May 07 2016, @06:51AM
the global population does not need more addictions than it's already dealing with. now we need a UN treaty that bans the import and export of tobacco products.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Saturday May 07 2016, @08:51AM
Interestingly, nicotine without the MAOIs contained in cigarettes is far less addictive.
(Score: 2) by devlux on Saturday May 07 2016, @09:46AM
Interestingly most people I know who smoke, do so to control low grade mental illness whether they are aware of it or not.
Vaping doesn't help these people because it's not the nicotine they're "addicted" to. It's the anti-depressants and the ritual of smoking.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by sjames on Sunday May 08 2016, @02:46AM
That's not too surprising since MAOIs were a go-to for depression before the SSRIs came out.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by turgid on Saturday May 07 2016, @09:59AM
A few years ago Mrs Turgid and I were at a pop music festival (Download, Donnington) and there were young orange women dressed up in Marlboro clothes handing out free packets of cigarettes to everyone they could. So we took a packet each in order to sell to get more money for alcohol :-).
Despite all the information, young people still take up smoking. The number of times I've heard them say, "But I'll give up after a while." And then after a few months they're completely addicted and spend the next 10 years fighting it...
What's really infuriating is the way that the tobacco companies target really poor countries with poor public health protection laws and flood them with cheap cigarettes. Tobacco addiction is one of the worst. They say it's easier to come off heroin than nicotine.
But let's not get started on the Establishment's dishonesty in their claims about the dangers of drugs [theguardian.com]. If I had know 20 years ago what I know now about alcohol [theguardian.com] I might not have been quite so enthusiastic and nonchalant about the whole thing and life might have been very different.
Prohibition, in general, is bad, but lack of reliable information is even worse.
You live and learn, so it goes.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Saturday May 07 2016, @12:38PM
i quit cigarettes 20 years ago. maybe it's safe to try heroin...
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by devlux on Saturday May 07 2016, @12:54PM
I realize that was sarcasm but it's actually true.
People don't understand addiction. They think it's addiction to "a thing", but it's not.
Addiction is dependence upon a thing for part of your identity.
If people smoke it becomes part of their identity "I am a smoker", not simply "I smoke".
"I am a drinker", instead of simply "I drink", etc and so forth.
Addictive personalities will tend to become addicted to anything you put in front of them that gives them a positive sensation, especially if you can make a group activity of it.
Whereas those without the addictive personality traits can pick up and put down harmful addictive substances at will and without effort.
I speak as someone who has been there and done that. Some people just don't need anything external to feel whole and complete and if you're like that then you're not likely to become addicted to anything.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by frojack on Saturday May 07 2016, @06:37PM
And then there are others, like me, who see the damage smoking or drinking or drugs have done to the lives of others and make (and mostly keep) a silent vow to never get involved in the first place. Parents and siblings have fallen prey to smoking, and one to alcohol, and that only stiffened my resolve.
I suffer from a case of deliberate cowardice of these things.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 07 2016, @07:22PM
Hear, hear.
Both of my parents drink (at times heavily, at times lightly) and smoke. My granddad was a chain smoker so bad even my mom (a smoker herself) had to open the windows after his visit.
Anyway, I never touched neither tobacco, alcohol nor (by transitive property) drugs. I'm very okay with being a coward in this respect. I also have to hold my breath near tobacco smoke... it now causes an almost allergic reaction.
(Score: 2) by turgid on Saturday May 07 2016, @01:35PM
There's no such thing as "safe" just degrees of more or less safe. But people like to work in absolutes. Heroin isn't "safe" by any means as a recreational drug.
Being addicted to nicotine doesn't usually lead to serious antisocial behaviour, high risk of accidental death, theft and other crimes to pay for the drug, death by overdose etc. It just ruins your health and kills you slowly over a period of decades. People don't choke on their own vomit from smoking cigarettes.
When I had my wisdom teeth out they gave me Fentanyl [wikipedia.org]. It felt absolutely wonderful until I was almost sick and they filled me with something else (presumably adrenaline). It was like being very drunk but without the fear and uncertainty that comes with it. It felt far too good, I was totally relaxed and peaceful.
The way I see it, there's more reason for nicotine to be illegal than cannabis, but then I don't think making drugs illegal is the way to go. It just causes crime and suffering.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 1, Troll) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday May 07 2016, @10:34AM
There you go, pushing your fascist idealism again. Lung-nazi.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by Tork on Saturday May 07 2016, @09:59PM
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈 - Give us ribbiti or make us croak! 🐸
(Score: 2) by devlux on Saturday May 07 2016, @01:42PM
We need far less laws and far more personal responsibility.
When you advocate "banning" something, the only thing you're actually advocating is the creation of a black market for that item and all the joy that brings with it.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by frojack on Saturday May 07 2016, @07:10PM
the only thing you're actually advocating is the creation of a black market
Too simplistic.
Nobody is advocating for a black market.
Perhaps your implication is that a black market is the ONLY effect of banning. That also is untrue.
Banned substances are indeed in shorter supply and harder to get and more expensive.
Some things probably need banning. (I suppose that is debatable, if only we could find a quicker way to teach responsibility). The problem is we waste our time and effort banning the wrong things without any science to back up the bans.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Gravis on Saturday May 07 2016, @07:27PM
wisdom and youth are generally exclusive. however, corporations are using disinformation and buying off both politicians and scientists, so getting good information about what is bad for you is extremely difficult. it's nearly impossible to buy any foods that aren't engineered to be more addictive. the only real option is to grow and make your own food which is impossible for most people in first world countries.
agreed. the question is whether or not the black market is more harmful than the open distribution of the product. poor nations are not well educated and have problems with corruption, so should we just allow companies to victimize a nation's entire population?
(Score: 2) by devlux on Saturday May 07 2016, @08:09PM
Well the USA is hardly a 3rd world country... yet.
My opinion is that we need to do is get rid of this "everyone is a victim" narrative. When the hell did that even take hold?
Are you a victim? My guess is no. So there is no reason to believe that "they" are either. Being a victim is not a choice you get to make, it's a thing that happens to you without your consent and with someone else's ill intent. You can stop being a victim by choice though, but that takes courage enough to move on with life and way too many people like milking their victimhood for life or longer.
People have been smoking for 500 years now. There is no excuse for anyone to play the victim card on that one at this point.
Same with booze but we've been doing that for 10,000 years. No one can claim they didn't know the effects of drinking to excess.
I figure if you're old enough to make babies and work for a living, you're old enough to make your own choices without getting a "victim card" for every bad thing that happens in your life. This is what I mean by owning your own choices and the fallout from them.
Not owning yourself is just slipping on a collar and adding links to that chain of ignorance I keep going on about.
(Score: 2) by Gravis on Wednesday May 11 2016, @03:48PM
your view is callus and myopic. you have completely ignored the fact that there is active psychological warfare by corporations to get people to use their product regardless of the cost. you obviously don't comprehend what addiction is likely because you have no experience with it. when corporations stop trying to making people do things they know will harm them, then we can address your issue with people.