More Nicotine in Cigarettes

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by MacNut, Aug 31, 2006.

  1. MacNut macrumors Core


    Jan 4, 2002
    BOSTON (AP) - The level of nicotine that smokers typically consume per cigarette has risen about 10 percent in the past six years, making it harder to quit and easier to get hooked, according to a new report released Tuesday by the Massachusetts Department of Health.

    The study shows a steady climb in the amount of nicotine delivered to the lungs of smokers regardless of brand, with overall nicotine yields increasing by about 10 percent.

    Massachusetts is one of three states to require tobacco companies to submit information about nicotine testing according to its specifications and the only state with data going back to 1998.

    Public Health Commissioner Paul Cote Jr. called the findings "significant."

    The study found the three most popular cigarette brands with young smokers - Marlboro, Newport and Camel - delivered significantly more nicotine than they did six years ago. Nicotine consumed in Kool, a popular menthol brand, rose 20 percent, for example.

    Jennifer Golisch, a spokeswoman for Altria Group Inc.'s Phillip Morris USA, the nation's largest cigarette maker and manufacturer of Marlboro cigarettes, declined to comment. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., manufacturer of Kool and Camel cigarettes, also declined. Reynolds is part of Reynolds American Inc.

    The study has always measured nicotine levels based on the way smokers actually use cigarettes, health officials said, for example by partially covering ventilation holes as they smoke and taking longer puffs. Traditional testing methods, which don't take real-life smoking habits into account, typically report lower nicotine contents, researchers said.

    "The amount of nicotine in a cigarette has increased steadily over the past six years," the department said, indicating in its reports that the smoking habits simulated had not changed in that period.

    Smokers who choose "light" brands hoping to reduce their nicotine intake are out of luck, according to the report that found for all brands tested in 1998 and 2004, there was no significant difference in the total nicotine content between "full flavor," "medium," "light," or "ultra-light" cigarettes.

    The finding means that health care providers trying to help smokers quit may have to adjust the strength of nicotine replacement therapies like nicotine patches and gums, according to Department of Public Health Associate Commissioner Sally Fogerty.

    Rep. Peter J. Koutoujian, D-Waltham, said the report shows tobacco manufacturers are trying to make keep smokers hooked.

    "As more and more people become aware of the dangers of smoking and the importance of quitting, we see products that are more addictive," said Koutoujian, who is backing bills banning the sale of flavored cigarettes and requiring tobacco manufacturers to provide scientific evidence that light cigarettes pose a lower health risk.

    Matthew Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids, said the report "documents that the tobacco industry dramatically increased nicotine in secret ... even as Americans try to cut back on smoking."

    Smoking-related causes are blamed in the deaths of more than 9,000 Massachusetts residents each year and tobacco-related illnesses kill more people in the state than AIDS, car accidents, homicides, suicides and poisonings combined.
  2. zimv20 macrumors 601


    Jul 18, 2002
  3. maxterpiece macrumors 6502a


    Mar 5, 2003
    wonder why the article refuses to assign a doer to this change... it's all passive voice. Clearly the cigarette companies altered their tobacco/design of their cigarettes so that smokers would get more nicotine. Why can't the article state the obvious?
  4. MacNut thread starter macrumors Core


    Jan 4, 2002
  5. Dagless macrumors Core


    Jan 18, 2005
    Fighting to stay in the EU
    I think its great that the UK government is banning smoking in many public places, I think the aim is for a total public ban. I recall there being parliament debates about it last year but cannot remember the outcome for the life of me :eek: but judging by all the public places being smoke-free zones I can only guess.

    Looks as though the cigarette companies are trying to keep you smoking whilst the government are trying to stop you doing it in public. Either way I, as a non-smoker, win.
  6. Chundles macrumors G4


    Jul 4, 2005
    Jyust got bavk fro ma big nightout and i dommn't stnk of ciggarteer. hatethat smell and haviong sore throat.

    no smokinbg in puibs is awesome!!!!!!!
  7. trebblekicked macrumors 6502a


    Dec 30, 2002
    Chicago, IL, USA
    sweet! more nicotine for the same low, low price! wonder if they put more arsenic in, too.
  8. Black&Tan macrumors 6502a


    Mar 4, 2004
    ...and I cynically wonder if they started increasing the nicotine content when the US Federal Government forced them to start anti-smoking ads and limit the exposure around schools and children.
  9. beatsme macrumors 65816


    Oct 6, 2005
    those of you trying to quit

    if you're thinking about the patch, don't. That transdermal thing doesn't have the slowest release in the world, so when I used it I wound up feeling dizzy and nauseas. It wasn't worth it.

    The easiest thing I've found (and I've had other smokers tell me this too) is to skip that first one you have in the morning, and then don't smoke at all while at work. I went from a pack a day to about 2 or 3 cigarettes a day in no time. I did manage to quit completely for about 18 months, though I've since had a relapse. Stress will do it to you...

    Does anybody know, btw, the health effects of having the occasional smoke, as opposed to having a daily habit?
  10. KingYaba macrumors 68040


    Aug 7, 2005
    Up the irons
    Those facts will be as biased as the people who are funding them. You will recieve so many different explenations your head will spin.
  11. scem0 macrumors 604


    Jul 16, 2002
    back in NYC!
    I saw New York's Bodyworlds Exhibit yesterday and the most alarming thing there, to me, was a smoker's lungs next to a non-smoker's lungs. It was just plain nasty. I had seen plenty of pictures like this:


    but those pictures don't have near the same effect on me as seeing the actual lungs in front of me. Very humbling even for a non-smoker.

  12. MOFS macrumors 65816


    Feb 27, 2003
    Durham, UK
    Most non-smokers lungs don't look like that bottom one. From all the ones I've seen from kadavars, most non-smokers lungs are a greyey black colour due to everyday pollution.

Share This Page