Hey, Black Menthol Smokers, the Senate wants you dead

[boutons_]

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/misc/logoprinter.gif (http://www.nytimes.com/)
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/ads/spacer.gifhttp://graphics8.nytimes.com/ads/fox/printerfriendly.gifhttp://graphics8.nytimes.com/ads/fox/2008/biggie_88x31_8k.gif (http://www.nytimes.com/adx/bin/adx_click.html?type=goto&page=www.nytimes.com/printer-friendly&pos=Position1&sn2=336c557e/4f3dd5d2&sn1=4aa7fdae/a5c90f7e&camp=foxsearch2008_emailtools_810903d-nyt5&ad=biggie_88x31_8k.gif&goto=http://my.foxsearchlight.com/profile/WayneBarrow)

May 13, 2008

Cigarette Bill Treats Menthol With Leniency

By STEPHANIE SAUL (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/stephanie_saul/index.html?inline=nyt-per)

Some public health experts are questioning why menthol, the most widely used cigarette flavoring and the most popular cigarette choice of African-American smokers, is receiving special protection as Congress tries to regulate tobacco for the first time.

The legislation, which would give the Food and Drug Administration (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/f/food_and_drug_administration/index.html?inline=nyt-org) the power to oversee tobacco products, would try to reduce smoking (http://health.nytimes.com/health/guides/specialtopic/smoking-and-smokeless-tobacco/overview.html?inline=nyt-classifier)’s allure to young people by banning most flavored cigarettes (http://health.nytimes.com/health/guides/specialtopic/smoking-tips-on-how-to-quit/overview.html?inline=nyt-classifier), including clove and cinnamon.

( hmm, are these 2 flavors primarily popular with WHITE kids?)

But those new strictures would exempt menthol — even though menthol masks the harsh taste of cigarettes for beginners and may make it harder for the addicted to kick the smoking habit. For years, public health authorities have worried that menthol might be a factor in high cancer (http://health.nytimes.com/health/guides/disease/cancer/overview.html?inline=nyt-classifier) rates in African-Americans.

The reason menthol is seen as politically off limits, despite those concerns, is that mentholated brands are so crucial to the American cigarette industry. They make up more than one-fourth of the $70 billion American cigarette market and are becoming increasingly important to the industry leader, Philip Morris USA, without whose lobbying support the legislation might have no chance of passage.
“I would have been in favor of banning menthol,” said Senator Judd Gregg (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/g/judd_gregg/index.html?inline=nyt-per), Republican of New Hampshire, who supports the bill. “But as a practical matter that simply wasn’t doable.”

Even the head of the National African American Tobacco Prevention Network, a nonprofit group that has been adamantly against menthol, acknowledges that the ingredient needed to be off the bargaining table — for now — because he does not want to imperil the bill’s chances.
“The bottom line is we want the legislation,” said William S. Robinson, the group’s executive director. “But we want to reserve the right to address this issue at some critical point because of the percentage of people of African descent who use mentholated products.”

( WTF? Robinson on the take from BigTobacco? )

Supporters of the tobacco legislation, including the Senate bill’s sponsor, Edward M. Kennedy (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/k/edward_m_kennedy/index.html?inline=nyt-per), the Massachusetts Democrat, say the bill addresses the potential health risks of menthol by giving the F.D.A. the authority to remove cigarette additives, including menthol, if they are proved harmful.

( not the dubya pro-businesss FDA. And guess pays for nearly all product testing? the corps )

Menthol is particularly controversial because public health authorities have worried about its health effects on African-Americans. Nearly 75 percent of black smokers use menthol brands, compared with only about one in four white smokers.

That is why one former public health official says the legislation’s menthol exemption is a “cave-in to the industry,” an opinion shared by some other public health advocates.

“I think we can say definitively that menthol induces smoking in the African-American community and subsequently serves as a direct link to African-American death and disease,” said the former official, Robert G. Robinson, who retired two years ago as an associate director in the office of smoking and health at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/c/centers_for_disease_control_and_prevention/index.html?inline=nyt-org).

The current lead scientist on tobacco related issues for the C.D.C, Terry F. Pechacek, said the legislation’s exemption for menthol was an issue being discussed in the scientific community. "I would just say this is an area of clear scientific interest and it merits very careful attention."

( Pechacek fucking luke-warm PC wimp! :lol probably on the take from the corps, and/or appointed by the Repugs )
The legislation could soon be up for vote in both chambers of Congress, where it has broad support. It is by no means a sure bet — though not because of the menthol exemption.
Despite the support of Mr. Kennedy and 56 co-sponsors in the Senate, the legislation faces some determined opposition from tobacco-state lawmakers who resist industry regulation. And the White House has said it opposes the legislation, arguing that F.D.A. regulation could create the false impression that tobacco is safe.

( GMAFB Since when have the Repugs and WH given a flying fuck about product safety or consumer safety??)

The legislation is largely a result of negotiations during sessions in 2003 and 2004 between lawmakers, antismoking groups and Philip Morris — the only major American cigarette company that supports the effort to regulate the industry.
“My recollection is that we were able to eliminate the use of flavored cigarettes, strawberry, mocha, and all this stuff that is clearly targeted at young kids and to start them smoking tobacco,” Mike DeWine (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/d/mike_dewine/index.html?inline=nyt-per), the former Ohio senator who helped arrange a series of negotiations between Philip Morris and an influential antismoking group, the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, said in a recent telephone interview. “Where the compromise was made as I recall was on menthol,” Mr. DeWine said.

While Philip Morris and other tobacco companies acknowledge the health hazards of smoking, they contend that menthol does nothing to worsen those risks. One of the government’s current top public health scientists on tobacco, however, says there are few definitive answers about the health impact of menthol cigarettes. Still, he points to several studies that suggest menthol smokers may be exposed to higher levels of dangerous compounds than nonmenthol smokers.

“There are multiple lines of evidence, generally consistent, suggesting that there’s reason for concern,” said Dr. Pechacek, the associate science director of the office on smoking for the C.D.C.

Of 45 million smokers in this country, the American Lung Association identifies about 33 million as non-Hispanic whites and 5 million as African-American. Historically, statistics showed that a somewhat higher percentage of African-Americans smoked than whites. Recent figures, though, indicate about the same rate of smoking for both groups — in the 21 to 22 percent range.

But the use of menthol cigarettes is disproportionately an African-American phenomenon, which critics say has been reinforced by decades of advertising aimed at black consumers. Concerns about menthol have circulated since at least 1998, when the C.D.C. reported that menthol “may increase the absorption of harmful smoking constituents.”

Four years later the C.D.C., along with the National Cancer Institute (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/n/national_cancer_institute/index.html?inline=nyt-org), sponsored a meeting in Atlanta on menthol cigarettes and disease rates in African-Americans. The official report from that meeting (http://dccps.nci.nih.gov/tcrb/MentholExecSumRprt4_10-16.pdf) said the research up to that point had been inconclusive, but it called for further studies.
In five large studies of menthol to date, only one has found higher rates of cancer among menthol smokers than nonmenthol smokers, and only in men. But a growing body of evidence suggests that menthol makes it harder to kick the smoking habit — a view shared even by many scientists who say that menthol in cigarettes is not itself dangerous.
A tobacco company spokesman, Brendan J. McCormick, said menthol was “an ingredient and a flavor preference that is widely preferred by more than a quarter of adult smokers out there, and it’s got a long history of use.”


( "So?"

lung cancer as leading cancer death and lying, predatory cig mgs ALSO have long histories )

Mr. McCormick works for the Altria Group (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/altria_group_inc/index.html?inline=nyt-org), the parent company of Philip Morris USA, whose Marlboro Menthol is the second-largest menthol brand in this country and also the fastest growing.

Last year, to counter concerns about menthol, a mint extract that can also be made synthetically, Philip Morris scientists published a 26-page paper in Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, a peer-reviewed scientific journal. After examining dozens of studies on menthol, the company’s scientists said they found little evidence that menthol cigarettes were any more harmful or addictive than other types or that they encouraged people to start smoking at younger ages.

Its support of the tobacco legislation has put Philip Morris at odds with other cigarette companies, which generally oppose regulation. As the American industry’s biggest player, Philip Morris says it is willing to let the F.D.A. oversee tobacco because as the company tries to develop products that are less harmful, it wants a regulatory agency to evaluate and approve those products. The company also says it would prefer national tobacco regulations rather than a hodgepodge of state and local rules. But the company’s rivals complain that the legislation could help Philip Morris, with its best-selling Marlboro franchise, further entrench itself as the industry’s dominant player by placing new restrictions on cigarette marketing, making it difficult for rivals to use advertising to catch up. Besides banning the marketing of cigarettes on the basis of most flavorings — other than menthol — the new rules would also place additional limits on the types and placement of signs and magazine advertising for tobacco products.

Even with the menthol exemption, the legislation is opposed by Reynolds American (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/reynolds_american_inc/index.html?inline=nyt-org), whose R. J. Reynolds unit sells menthol brands that include Kool and Salem. Another opponent is Lorillard, which makes Newport, the best-selling brand among African-Americans and the menthol market leader over all.

“Bottom line, the scientific publications to date have not concluded that menthol cigarettes are more hazardous or addictive than nonmenthol cigarettes,” a Lorillard spokesman, Michael W. Robinson, said in a written response to questions. Lorillard is a subsidiary of the Loews Corporation (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/loews_corporation/index.html?inline=nyt-org).

Scientists who study smoking have identified various disparities in the health of black and white smokers. National Cancer Institute data shows that African-American men get lung cancer at a rate 50 percent higher than white men — a gap that most scientists say cannot be fully explained by historically higher rates of smoking by black men.

One theory suggests that menthol in cigarettes, by providing an additional pleasurable sensory cue to smokers, reinforces addiction.

“There is evidence from different studies that it’s harder to quit menthol cigarettes,” said Dr. Neal L. Benowitz, a pharmacologist and professor at the University of California, San Francisco and one of the nation’s leading tobacco researchers. He calls menthol a “public health risk.”
In work published in 2006, Dr. Mark J. Pletcher and colleagues at that same university analyzed smoking behavior for 1,535 people over 15 years. Their findings suggested that menthol smokers were 30 percent less likely to quit smoking and 89 percent more likely to relapse than other smokers.

One African-American woman, Joya Robinson of North Brunswick, N.J., said she began smoking Newport in 1988 and developed a pack-a-day habit. After several unsuccessful attempts to quit, she is now enrolled in a tobacco dependence program. “It’s the hardest thing I’ve ever done,” Ms. Robinson, 46, said.

Dr. Pechacek, the C.D.C. official, said a combination of menthol and genetic factors that predispose African-Americans to certain cancers may be in play for black smokers.

“There is sufficient reason to maintain a strong public health interest in it,” he said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/13/business/13menthol.html?scp=1&sq=+Cigarette+Bill+Treats+Menthol+With+Leniency&st=nyt

================

Brought to by the "free market" cigarette traffickers (untouched by socialist regulators, works about as well as unregulated mortgages and investment banking) :


"Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in the United States.

Lung cancer causes 30% of all cancer deaths.

Lung cancer is the leading cancer killer among Caucasians, African-Americans, Asians and Hispanic males.

Lung cancer will kill more people this year than:
breast cancer
prostate cancer
colon cancer
liver cancer
kidney cancer
melanoma...combinedLung cancer will kill three times as many men as prostate cancer this year.

Lung cancer will kill nearly twice as many women as breast cancer this year.

Over 50% of new lung cancer cases will be diagnosed at a very late stage—Stage IIIb or IV— and only 5% of them will live for 5 years."

http://www.lungcanceralliance.org/facing/facts.html

So now we have two Pres candidates: one as cancer survivor (who has lied about releasing his medical records) and one at risk from cancer.

[Spurminator]

That's some reach there.

[boutons_]

reach?

what's a reach is the long arm of the corps into the Congress' underwear.

[Spurminator]

Well, duh... The reach is making this a race issue. If cinnamon flavored cigs were 25% of cigarette revenue and smoked almost exclusively by white people, it wouldn't be banned.

[boutons_]

"making this a race issue"

the cig mfrs know EXACTLY their victims, which race smokes the most methol cigs, and is buying Congress to keep that race smoking menthol cigs.

There's currently only one black Senator.

Exempting menthol cigs now probably means exempting menthol cigs for many years, because cig mfrs get pretty much what they want in all 3 Fed branches.

[Clandestino]

If Menthols were not exempted, the boutons would be complaining that the gov was trying to screw over the blacks! hahaha. fucking retard.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

"making this a race issue"

the cig mfrs know EXACTLY their victims, which race smokes the most methol cigs, and is buying Congress to keep that race smoking menthol cigs.

There's currently only one black Senator.

Exempting menthol cigs now probably means exempting menthol cigs for many years, because cig mfrs get pretty much what they want in all 3 Fed branches.

The Marlboro Man hates black people[/kanye west]

[SnakeBoy]

This is what happens when democrats are in power. Keepin the black man down so they can keep getting their votes.

[boutons_]

putting words in my mouth, Clanny? on your knees, I got something to put in your mouth.

Anybody want to give an innocent explanation why menthol cigs are being exempted?

didn't think so.

has nothing to do with Dems or Repugs. it's just Congress doing what business pays them to do.

[jochhejaam]

To the Senate's credit, they have forced cigarette manufacturers to abandon their planned production of hog maw flavored cigarettes.

Puts a bit of a damper on the menthol conspiracy.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

putting words in my mouth, Clanny? on your knees, I got something to put in your mouth.

Anybody want to give an innocent explanation why menthol cigs are being exempted?

didn't think so.

has nothing to do with Dems or Repugs. it's just Congress doing what business pays them to do.

Just a guess, their internal numbers show menthol cigarette purchases make up the highest percentage of their sales. What am I thinking though, that sounds like a business decision...

[Wild Cobra]

reach?

what's a reach is the long arm of the corps into the Congress' underwear.
It's a reach because clove and cinnamon are not just flavors. A clove cigarette I think has no tobacco, and does cause more serious health problems if smoked as frequently. I don't know so much about cinnamon, but I assume it's the same think. Menthol cigarettes are still tobacco, just flavored.

[Wild Cobra]

Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:SN02461:@@@D&summ2=m&)



S.2461 (http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=108_cong_bills&docid=f:s2461is.txt.pdf)
Title: A bill to protect the public health by providing the Food and Drug Administration with certain authority to regulate tobacco products.
Sponsor: Sen DeWine, Mike [OH] (introduced 5/20/2004) Cosponsors (16)
Related Bills: H.R.4433 (http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=108_cong_bills&docid=f:h4433ih.txt.pdf), S.2974 (http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=108_cong_bills&docid=f:s2974cps.txt.pdf)
Latest Major Action: 5/20/2004 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.SUMMARY AS OF:
5/20/2004--Introduced.

Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act - Amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to provide for the regulation of tobacco products by the Secretary of Health and Human Services through the Food and Drug Administration, including through disclosure, annual registration, inspection, recordkeeping, and user fee requirements.

Sets forth criteria by which tobacco products are deemed adulterated or misbranded.

Allows the Secretary to require prior approval of all label statements.

Allows the Secretary to restrict the sale or distribution of tobacco products, including advertising and promotion, if the Secretary determines that such regulation would be appropriate for the protection of the public health. Prohibits such regulations from: (1) limiting product sales or distribution to authorization of a practitioner licensed to prescribe medical products; (2) prohibiting product sales in face-to-face transactions by a specific category of retail outlets; or (3) establishing a minimum age greater than 18 years of age for product purchases.

Prohibits cigarettes from containing any artificial or natural flavor (other than tobacco or menthol) or an herb or spice, including strawberry, cinnamon, or coffee.

Requires the Secretary to establish tobacco product standards to protect the public health, but reserves to Congress the power to ban any tobacco products or reduce the nicotine level to zero.

Allows the Secretary to take specified actions, including public notification and recall, against unreasonably harmful products.

Requires premarket approval of all new tobacco products.

Sets forth standards for the sale of modified risk tobacco products.

Sets forth provisions regarding: (1) judicial review; (2) coordination with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC); (3) congressional review of regulations; and (4) state and local authority.

Requires the Secretary to establish a Tobacco Products Scientific Advisory Committee.

Amends the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act to change cigarette warning label and advertising requirements.

Amends the Comprehensive Smokeless Tobacco Health Education Act of 1986 to change smokeless tobacco warning label and advertising requirements.


Was there action on the bill today that's not updated? According to Library of Congress site, the last action on the bill was 10/10/2004!

Is the New York Slime trying to create more of a racial issue this election season?

[ChumpDumper]

Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:SN02461:@@@D&summ2=m&)



Was there action on the bill today that's not updated? According to Library of Congress site, the last action on the bill was 10/10/2004!

Is the New York Slime trying to create more of a racial issue this election season?Is Wild Cobra looking at the wrong Senate bill from the wrong Congress?

[Wild Cobra]

Is Wild Cobra looking at the wrong Senate bill from the wrong Congress?

I don't think so. I didn't find anything newer. Have you?

About 1/3 the way down spoutons copy/paste:

The legislation is largely a result of negotiations during sessions in 2003 and 2004 between lawmakers, antismoking groups and Philip Morris — the only major American cigarette company that supports the effort to regulate the industry.

The article was three days ago. I should have been able to find something. It is possible I missed it, but I think unlikely. The text of the legislation I found matches the gist of the article.

[ChumpDumper]

It's basically the same bill. It just died or expired a few times before.

For the 110th Congress it's S.625/H.R.1108

[boutons_]

'sounds like a business decision"

meaning? business sacred? untouchable? unqestionable? amoral? immoral? As long as money is made, all is right with the world?

The cigarette "business" is selling proven poison, high toxicity and disease-causing at typical dosage, unregulated except a label that says "It's Bad For Ya".

But it's just business, and business can do no wrong, except to lose money.

Why exempt menthol cigarettes while not objecting the majority on non-menthol cigarettes going under regulation?

I suggest: the cig mfgs could see they couldn't avoid regulation, so rather than fight the whole deal, they gave in, claiming an exemption for menthol.

The decline of smoking in US and western Europe has chased the cig mfrs into the poor continents they hook billions on their oison.

http://www.cancer.org/docroot/AA/content/AA_2_5_5x_Global_Tobacco_Epidemic.asp?sitearea=AA

[Wild Cobra]

It's basically the same bill. It just died or expired a few times before.

For the 110th Congress it's S.625/H.R.1108

Thank-You

The part I quoted still has the same meaning. Just added more specific flavors:


A cigarette or any of its component parts (including the tobacco, filter, or paper) shall not contain, as a constituent (including a smoke constituent) or additive, an artificial or natural flavor (other than tobacco or menthol) or an herb or spice, including strawberry, grape, orange, clove, cinnamon, pineapple, vanilla, coconut, licorice, cocoa, chocolate, cherry, or coffee, that is a characterizing flavor of the tobacco product or tobacco smoke.

For anyone wanting to read them:

HR 1108 (http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_bills&docid=f:h1108ih.txt.pdf)

S 625 (http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_bills&docid=f:s625is.txt.pdf)

I just hate it when people continually quote a story without seeing and posting the source material themselves. I would say the article and legislation do not match.

Bouton's goes on to add remarks as if it's racist. I would not conclude that as there are other possibilities for the flavoring ban. Besides, maybe they wanted to ban menthol also, but didn't want to hear the cries of banning the 2nd most popular type of cigarette?

[Wild Cobra]

Why exempt menthol cigarettes while not objecting the majority on non-menthol cigarettes going under regulation?

They exempt both menthol and non-menthol cigarettes from the flavoring ban, i.e. menthol is the only allowable flavor additive. It's still a cigarette.

[ChumpDumper]

But why keep menthol?

They're all cigarettes.

[boutons_]

Banning menthol additive could prevent black kids from getting started, could make it easier black smokers to stop.

The cig mfrs are primarily run by conservative/Repug mgmt, imo, so they don't care about pissing off blacks in an election year.

Any menthol-excepted bill has bi-partisan support, so it's not really a partisan issue, although the Dems have more to lose than the Repugs by banning menthol, perhaps causing pissed-off blacks to stay away from the polls.

The cig mfrs care ONLY about revenu, not any smoker's health.

Of course it's racist when menthol cigs are so popular with blacks, who are often poor, uneducated, and guided by example of menthol-smoking blacks than any anti-smoking campaign. Same reason the US/Euro cig mfrs are moving into other continents where they can hook poor, ignorant people on their poison.

It's about $$$ being more important than black health.

[jochhejaam]

It's about $$$ being more important than black health.



You are delusional

[BonnerDynasty]

boutons, should marijuana be legalized?

[Wild Cobra]

But why keep menthol?

They're all cigarettes.
Probably not to piss off the high quantity of smokers that like menthol cigarettes. I don't know about cigarettes other than the regular, clove, and menthol. Clove is mostly clove. Little if any tobacco. Both regular and menthol are primarily tobacco. Where other flavors fit in, I can only guess. I do know that smoking clove cigarettes is far more harmful than smoking tobacco cigarettes.

Another reason to ban the others, and not menthol could be that most other flavored cigarettes are imported. Maybe someone is greasing the hands of politicians to ban the competition?

I don't really know and I don't really care. I'm not going to waste time researching the issue. I do think they should be banned by merit of health risk over any other concern if they are to be regulated farther. Still, I don't care if others wish to shorten their life. Shouldn't they be free to do as they please?

[Wild Cobra]

Banning menthol additive could prevent black kids from getting start, could make it easier black smokers to stop.
Yes, are you delusional?

They will still smoke. They will simply buy regular cigarettes if menthol cigarettes were banned.

[ChumpDumper]

Probably not to piss off the high quantity of smokers that like menthol cigarettes.Isn't that the point? Piss them off so they quit?
I don't really know and I don't really care. I'm not going to waste time researching the issue. You mean, no more time than you have already wasted.
Still, I don't care if others wish to shorten their life. Shouldn't they be free to do as they please?So you're for the use of currently illegal recreational drugs too?

[ChumpDumper]

Yes, are you delusional?

They will still smoke. They will simply buy regular cigarettes if menthol cigarettes were banned.So would the smokers of other flavors.

[Wild Cobra]

So would the smokers of other flavors.
Maybe, but not necessarily. Other cigarettes are not necessarily tobacco. There really isn't much difference between regular cigarettes and menthol flavored ones. All the same thing except the added menthol. If people do smoke the others for the nicotine, then yes. They will switch to regular tobacco cigarettes.

Clove cigarettes are a bit different.... I know a girl that would smoke part of one before sex. The cloves would numb her throat, and helped her reduce the gag reflex for oral sex! That's the only time she smoked cigarettes. She smoked Mary-Jane rather often though.

That's it... It's a conspiracy against "deep throat" Boutons, there's your next conspiracy theory... You like to point out how the republicans like to do you-know-what... The democrats found a way to stop them... right?

[ChumpDumper]

Maybe, but not necessarily. Other cigarettes are not necessarily tobacco. There really isn't much difference between regular cigarettes and menthol flavored ones. All the same thing except the added menthol. If people do smoke the others for the nicotine, then yes. They will switch to regular tobacco cigarettes.So if those other cigarettes don't even have tobacco, what is the problem with them?

[Wild Cobra]

So if those other cigarettes don't even have tobacco, what is the problem with them?
The clove is more damaging to the lungs than tobacco is. Like I said, I really don't know much about the others. I think clove cigarettes are only about 25% tobacco, and I have no idea of the content of others, how much tobacco, is any.

[ChumpDumper]

The American Cancer Society says clove cigarettes are 60-70% tobacco, and the American Lung Association says it's often shitty tobacco.

http://www.cancer.org/docroot/PED/content/PED_10_2x_Questions_About_Smoking_Tobacco_and_Heal th.asp

http://www.californialung.org/spotlight/naturaltobacco.html

[Wild Cobra]

The American Cancer Society says clove cigarettes are 60-70% tobacco, and the American Lung Association says it's often shitty tobacco.

http://www.cancer.org/docroot/PED/content/PED_10_2x_Questions_About_Smoking_Tobacco_and_Heal th.asp

http://www.californialung.org/spotlight/naturaltobacco.html
Maybe so. I hope you at least acknowledge I try not to say things as fact if I don't know.

[boutons_]

"should marijuana be legalized"

of course, possession of small amounts completely legal, too much is a ticket, not incarceration. Funny question, it was answered long ago.

[ChumpDumper]

Maybe so. I hope you at least acknowledge I try not to say things as fact if I don't know.

Clove is mostly clove. Little if any tobacco. Both regular and menthol are primarily tobacco. Where other flavors fit in, I can only guess. I do know that smoking clove cigarettes is far more harmful than smoking tobacco cigarettes.Seemed pretty definitive. I check either way.

[Wild Cobra]

Seemed pretty definitive. I check either way.

So I was wrong. I didn't claim to be an expert about cigarettes. I do make mistakes. Don't you?

[ChumpDumper]

No need to get defensive.

[jochhejaam]

"should marijuana be legalized"

of course, possession of small amounts completely legal, too much is a ticket, not incarceration.

Great idea! With some of the effects of mj use being; distorted perception, loss of coordination, trouble with thinking, anxiety, and fear, I'd just love to be on the road, or at work with a bunch of people high on mj.

There are already plenty of people using it a work and while driving, no need to have those numbers skyrocket, which is what would happen if it were legalized (if you disagree with this, prove it to be wrong).



Let's look at the health risks of marijuana use:

The short-term effects of marijuana include:

1. Distorted perception (sights, sounds, time, touch)
2. Problems with memory and learning
3. Loss of coordination
4. Trouble with thinking and problem-solving
5. Increased heart rate, reduced blood pressure
6. Sometimes marijuana use can also produce anxiety, fear, distrust, or panic.




Effects on the Brain

The active ingredient in marijuana, delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol or THC, acts on cannabinoid receptors on nerve cells and influences the activity of those cells. Some brain areas have many cannabinoid receptors, but other areas of the brain have few or none at all. Many cannabinoid receptors are found in the parts of the brain that influence pleasure, memory, thought, concentration, sensory and time perception, and coordinated movement.
When high doses of marijuana are used, usually when eaten in food rather than smoked, users can experience the following symptoms:

1. Hallucinations
2. Delusions
3. Impaired memory
4. Disorientation




Effects on the Heart

-Within a few minutes after smoking marijuana, the heart begins beating more rapidly and the blood pressure drops. Marijuana can cause the heart beat to increase by 20 to 50 beats per minute, and can increase even more if other drugs are used at the same time.
-Because of the lower blood pressure and higher heart rate, researchers found that users' risk for a heart attack is four times higher within the first hour after smoking marijuana.




Effects on the Lungs

Smoking marijuana, even infrequently, can cause burning and stinging of the mouth and throat, and cause heavy coughing. Scientists have found that regular marijuana smokers can experience the same respiratory problems as tobacco smokers do, including:

Daily cough and phlegm production
More frequent acute chest illnesses
Increased risk of lung infections
Obstructed airways
Marijuana contains more carcinogenic hydrocarbons than tobacco smoke and because marijuana smokers usually inhale deeper and hold the smoke in their lungs longer than tobacco smokers, their lungs are exposed to those carcinogenic properties longer.
One study found that marijuana smokers were three times more likely to develop cancer of the head or neck than non-smokers. Many researchers believe than smoking marijuana is overall more harmful to the lungs than smoking tobacco.




Other Health Effects

Research indicates that THC impairs the body's immune system from fighting disease, which can cause a wide variety of health problems. One study found that marijuana actually inhibited the disease-preventing actions of key immune cells. Another study found that THC increased the risk of developing bacterial infections and tumors.




Effects of Exposure During Pregnancy

Several studies have found that children born to mothers who used marijuana during pregnancy exhibit some problems with neurological development. According to those studies, prenatal marijuana exposure can cause:

1. Altered responses to visual stimuli
2. Increased tremulousness
3. Problems with sustained attention and memory
4. Poor problem-solving skills

http://alcoholism.about.com/od/pot/a/effects.htm

[Clandestino]

only losers/slackers think marijuana should be legalized...

[boutons_]

Only dickless bubbas think, even prefer, that marijuana possession should land you in prison.

If marijuana is illegal and imprisonable, then tobacco should be also. and vice versa. Can't have it both ways.

[jochhejaam]

If marijuana is illegal and imprisonable, then tobacco should be also. and vice versa. Can't have it both ways.

We can, and we do, pothead.


Tobacco is not a hallucinogen, marijuana (THC) is.

'nuff said.

[ChumpDumper]

Great idea! With some of the effects of alcohol use being; distorted perception, loss of coordination, trouble with thinking, I'd just love to be on the road, or at work with a bunch of people drunk on alcohol.

[Wild Cobra]

Only dickless bubbas think, even prefer, that marijuana possession should land you in prison.

If marijuana is illegal and imprisonable, then tobacco should be also. and vice versa. Can't have it both ways.

Well, most of us who respect president Bush (is that who you mean?) disagree with many of his policies.

My personal viewpoint is that cigarettes are the most harmful of the three for the individual, i.e. lung cancer. Alcohol is the most harmful for the second-had effect, by driving drunk and killing people. Marijuana is the least dangerous of the three, yet it is the one illegal. Go figure. Now I know some of you will say the conservatives want to keep marijuana illegal, but you know what. That is not a party thing. Only some do. I think it should be legalized. So do many others. Of course, they want to tax it like cigarettes.

If tobacco is to be illegal, I mean, if people want the government to protect us from ourselves that much, then we are doomed! Do our freedoms mean anything? I find it ironic that the same general group of people (liberals) who want to enforce their morals of substances upon us are the same ones who endorse anal sex, the primary ,means of HIV transmission.

Alcohol is the first of the three that should be regulated, and it probably has sufficient enforcement of law behind it.

Proud to know Mary Jane.

[ClingingMars]

This is what happens when democrats are in power. Keepin the black man down so they can keep getting their votes.

[ClingingMars]

If marijuana is illegal and imprisonable, then tobacco should be also. and vice versa. Can't have it both ways.

i agree.

- Mars

[J.T.]

Last summer I smoked marijuana almost daily, and I never hallucinated on it. I have had hallucinations on other drugs, psychedelic or otherwise, but I've never seen or heard anything that wasn't there while high on marijuana. Yeah, if you get really high, you get lazy and do eat out the whole refrigerator, but it doesn't make you trip out. Maybe weed is different in other states or other parts of the world. None of the types I've ever smoked have made me trip. Usually just get really high, watch a movie and pass out.

Tim Meadows Marijuana Warning
57DdviStOFo

[Clandestino]

Last summer I smoked marijuana almost daily, and I never hallucinated on it. I have had hallucinations on other drugs, psychedelic or otherwise, but I've never seen or heard anything that wasn't there while high on marijuana. Yeah, if you get really high, you get lazy and do eat out the whole refrigerator, but it doesn't make you trip out. Maybe weed is different in other states or other parts of the world. None of the types I've ever smoked have made me trip. Usually just get really high, watch a movie and pass out.
Tim Meadows Marijuana Warning
57DdviStOFo

Prime fucking example of potheads!

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Pot... legalize it and tax the crap out of it, and put in appropriate DUI/DWI laws applicable to it.

* it's less harmful than tobacco to a person

* we spend entirely too much time and money on it from a law enforcement perspective

[boutons_]

marijuana is a HUGE PRIVATE INDUSTRY.

BigPrison, esp http://www.correctionscorp.com/, a lawyer of which dubya has proposed as Federal judge, has taken over prisons at a MUCH higher cost to taxpayers (like ALL privatization does).

For possession of personal quantity, go to prison and enrich the likes CCA and others with 10 of $1000 of tax dollars per prisoner, and get to mix with true criminals and their criminalizing influence.

As always in America, business always figure out ways, legally/not, ethically/not to fuck over individuals, with neo-cunts, Repugs, conservatives as their enablers. And all of us are being fucked over, every fucking day by businesses and the top 2%.

[jochhejaam]

* we spend entirely too much time and money on it from a law enforcement perspective
How much time and money are spent on running down marijuana users? Do you really think there are very many people calling the police and saying, "hey, get the cops out here, I think my neighbor might be smoking a joint"? And if they did, do you think they would send a Unit out to investigate?

Not sure where you're from AH, but I don't think the law enforcement agencies in NW Ohio spend much, if any, time going after MJ users.
I've worked in a low-income housing developement for many years, and rarely a day goes by where a someone isn't using it in an apartment I'm servicing.
You can walk around the developement and smell it wafting out of the apartments. Not once, in my years have I seen a resident busted for smoking pot (not that they haven't, but it's rare).
So, for practical intents and purposes it's no more than a misdemeanor, not worthy of Law Enforcement Agencies time in light of the many more serious crimes being committed.

I don't see any benefit to legalizing a hallucinogen. Society doesn't need to encourage drug abuse.

How would legalizing it be beneficial to people, and society as a whole?


(Stay out of this boutons)

[ChumpDumper]

How does legal alcohol benefit people and society as a whole?

[BradLohaus]

Those private prisons have to be occupied by somebody...

Marijuana laws aren't made to be followed; they are made to be broken.

[ClingingMars]

How does legal alcohol benefit people and society as a whole?

it doesn't. but we're not talking about banning alcohol here, I would like it, but it will never happen.

- Mars

[ChumpDumper]

it doesn't. but we're not talking about banning alcohol here, I would like it, but it will never happen.

- MarsBut why not?

It has been done before.

[xrayzebra]

But why not?

It has been done before.

Taxes! That's why not. The politicians love that money
and the votes it can buy.

[ChumpDumper]

So why not tax marijuana?

[xrayzebra]

So why not tax marijuana?

Hey stupid, there is a tax on marijuana.

http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=6670

[ChumpDumper]

Great! How much revenue has that generated?

[ClingingMars]

But why not?

It has been done before.

and it got repealed. so the likelihood of repealing a repeal of an amendment is slim to none.

- Mars

[ChumpDumper]

Why not?

[ClingingMars]

Why not?

beer companies have too much money, if it was tried they would lobby so hard it wouldn't pass

- Mars

[ChumpDumper]

So the only thing keeping alcohol legal is beer companies.

[boutons_]

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/misc/logoprinter.gif (http://www.nytimes.com/)
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/ads/spacer.gifhttp://graphics8.nytimes.com/ads/fox/printerfriendly.gifhttp://graphics8.nytimes.com/ads/fox/2008/biggie_88x31_8k.gif (http://www.nytimes.com/adx/bin/adx_click.html?type=goto&page=www.nytimes.com/printer-friendly&pos=Position1&sn2=336c557e/4f3dd5d2&sn1=497e6934/364a7f85&camp=foxsearch2008_emailtools_810904d-nyt5&ad=biggie_88x31_8k.gif&goto=http://my.foxsearchlight.com/profile/WayneBarrow)

June 5, 2008
Former Health Officials Oppose Menthol

By STEPHANIE SAUL (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/stephanie_saul/index.html?inline=nyt-per)


Seven former federal health secretaries joined on Wednesday to protest menthol’s special treatment in a tobacco bill pending in Congress.
The seven, from Democratic and Republican administrations, faxed a letter to members of the Senate and House of Representatives demanding that menthol-flavored cigarettes be banned just like various other cigarette flavorings the legislation would outlaw.


One of the former secretaries, Joseph A. Califano Jr. (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/c/joseph_a_califano_jr/index.html?inline=nyt-per), said the legislation was “clearly putting black children in the back of the bus.” He was referring to menthol cigarettes as being the choice of three out of four black smokers and being frequently preferred by young smokers.


An estimated 80 percent of African-American teenage smokers pick menthol brands, the letter said.


The letter reflects a growing controversy over the bill’s current exemption of menthol from a list of banned flavorings — an exemption some lawmakers said was intended to garner support from Philip Morris. The maker of Marlboro Menthol, the second-leading menthol brand after Lorillard’s Newport, Philip Morris has endorsed the bill, although most other cigarette companies oppose it.


The bill would for the first time give the Food and Drug Administration (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/f/food_and_drug_administration/index.html?inline=nyt-org) the power to regulate tobacco. While several groups have said the bill does not go far enough to regulate the tobacco industry and fails to promote safer tobacco products, most major public health advocacy groups have endorsed it.


Some antismoking advocates have said they see the menthol exemption as a necessary compromise toward getting the legislation passed, and they have said that the bill as currently drafted would give the F.D.A. the authority to limit or eliminate additives, including menthol, if they are proved to be harmful.


As now written the legislation would ban cigarettes flavored with strawberry, chocolate and a number of other fruit, candy and spice flavorings. Those flavorings have occasionally been added to cigarettes in what critics say are a lure to children. But the bill specifically protects menthol from the ban, even though menthol is the most widely used flavoring. Menthol brands account for 28 percent of the $70 billion American cigarette market.


The bill has cleared key committees in both the Senate and the House but it is not yet scheduled for floor votes.


Responding to the letter from the former secretaries, the bill’s House sponsor, Henry A. Waxman (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/w/henry_a_waxman/index.html?inline=nyt-per), Democrat of California, said Wednesday that he believes an outright ban on menthol is not the best way to address it.
“I’m determined to see tobacco legislation pass Congress that protects all our children,” Mr. Waxman said. “Leading public health experts have told us that giving F.D.A. the authority to ban menthol is the best way to balance both public health considerations with the reality that many adults only smoke menthol cigarettes. I’ll continue our ongoing review to make sure we are dealing with this issue in the most effective way possible."


Menthol is derived from mint and is also available synthetically. Smoking menthol-flavored cigarettes gives the mouth a cool feeling, similar to sucking on a peppermint, and can help mask the harsh taste of tobacco.


The bill’s treatment of menthol “caves to the financial interests of tobacco companies and discriminates against African-Americans — the segment of our population at greatest risk for the killing and crippling smoking-related diseases,” the letter from the former secretaries said. “It sends a message that African American youngsters are valued less than white youngsters.”

Mr. Califano said that even though the bill gives the F.D.A. the authority to remove additives it would require a lengthy process that “could go on and on and on, and you’re talking about years before you get through the administrative process and the courts.”

Mr. Califano, who served as health secretary under President Jimmy Carter (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/c/jimmy_carter/index.html?inline=nyt-per), said the idea to send the letter began when Dr. Louis W. Sullivan, the health secretary during the administration of President George H. W. Bush (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/b/george_bush/index.html?inline=nyt-per), called him to complain about the bill’s treatment of menthol.

“We both got our blood boiling,” Mr. Califano said in a telephone interview. They also decided to contact other past health secretaries. Five of them were reached and all agreed to sign onto the letter, according to Mr. Califano, who now runs the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/c/columbia_university/index.html?inline=nyt-org).


They are Tommy G. Thompson (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/t/tommy_g_thompson/index.html?inline=nyt-per), who was a health secretary under the current President Bush;


Donna E. Shalala (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/donna_e_shalala/index.html?inline=nyt-per), from the Clinton administration;



Richard S. Schweicker and Dr. Otis R. Bowen, from the Reagan administration;



and F. David Matthews from the Ford administration.


In a telephone interview, Dr. Sullivan, the president emeritus of Morehouse School of Medicine in Atlanta, said, “My issue is that menthol should not be added because it’s added as an inducement, an enabler, to induce young people to smoke.”


In 1990, Dr. Sullivan was instrumental in pressuring R. J. Reynolds not to market its Uptown cigarette, a menthol brand intended to appeal to black smokers.

In addition to the former secretaries, two other people signed the letter. They were Dr. Julius B. Richmond, who served as surgeon general in the Carter administration, and William S. Robinson, the executive director of the National African American Tobacco Prevention Network, a nonprofit organization in Durham, N.C.

Mr. Robinson’s organization said last week that it was withdrawing its support from the bill because of the menthol exemption.

============

My bet is that the bill goes through with the menthol exception, or the bill is voted down.

Either way, blacks lose.

[ChumpDumper]

Does Obama smoke menthols?

[Hook Dem]

Does Obama smoke menthols?

:lol:lol:lol:lol:lol:lol:lol

[Wild Cobra]

Does Obama smoke menthols?

Who knows. He did sign the bill as a cosponsor on 2/15/08.

[RobinsontoDuncan]

I smoke menthol cigarettes, and this article is telling the truth, banning these would be akin to banning 1/4th of all cigarettes.


Look, I'm all for letting the public know about the health effects of smoking, but the government doesn't have a right to regulate my daily activities. This is just another example of moral paternalism, this time it's from the left, but to me legislation against smoking is similar to the war on drugs--stupid!

Tax it, inform the public, do whatever, but government does not belong in my personal life if it doesn't involve making me safe from outside harm

[boutons_]

"moral paternalism"

If you and all smokers paid for ALL of your self-inflicted lung cancer costs out of your pocket, then smoke away, but that's never the case.

The problem is all the poor blacks, w/o any "free market" health insurance, who get hooked as youngsters on cigs and end up with lung cancer and all kinds of other diseases where smoking is "strongly associated".

The "paternalistic" govt will still pay for the menthol-puffers' 5 years of extremely expensive lung cancer care before death (5 year mortality rate is 90%+), typically $300K - $500K, using R2D's tax dollars, rather than let the blacks die without care.

The cig mfrs's profits are, with this menthol exception, being protected. They don't chip anything of their exorbitant profits to pay for the lung cancer treatment of their "clients". The fascists corps profit, the taxpayers pay the costs.

WC will now come in and prove that smoking doesn't cause lung cancer or any other disease, and actually causes a drop in global temperatures. :lol

[Wild Cobra]

WC will now come in and prove that smoking doesn't cause lung cancer or any other disease, and actually causes a drop in global temperatures. :lol


I would never try to prove such a point. That would be insane.

Smoking, like most anything, is OK in moderation. Thing is, the addiction keeps nearly all smokers above what a safe level of smoking might be. Several other factors apply also. Primarily, different peoples bodies tolerate such poisons differently.

Don't ask me to say what a safe level of smoking is. I would only guess that less than 1/2 pack a day is a small enough quantity for most people to tolerate and that above 2 packs a day or more will likely result in cancer in most people.

All smokers I know smoke at least a pack a day.

[Ginobilly]

who says weed makes you lazy?? Out of my experience while working labor intense (i used to lay brick) jobs Mexicans and black folks would take smoking breaks during lunch and they claimed it wakes them up and makes them more efficiently. :lmao Maybe only white people get lazy with it?

[boutons_]

July 1, 2008
Black Caucus Takes Aim at Menthol

By STEPHANIE SAUL (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/stephanie_saul/index.html?inline=nyt-per)


The Congressional Black Caucus (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/c/congressional_black_caucus/index.html?inline=nyt-org) is calling for changes to a House tobacco-regulation bill, demanding that the legislation place restrictions on menthol cigarettes (http://health.nytimes.com/health/guides/specialtopic/smoking-tips-on-how-to-quit/overview.html?inline=nyt-classifier), the type heavily favored by African-American smokers.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/01/business/01menthol.html?pagewanted=print

==============

The cigarette makers just need to throw a few 1000 Benjamins at these guys. After all, they're just for-sale Congressman. :)

[smeagol]

I smoke menthol cigarettes,

You do? Are you stupid? That shit can kill you . . .

[Extra Stout]

I smoke menthol cigarettes, and this article is telling the truth, banning these would be akin to banning 1/4th of all cigarettes.


Look, I'm all for letting the public know about the health effects of smoking, but the government doesn't have a right to regulate my daily activities. This is just another example of moral paternalism, this time it's from the left, but to me legislation against smoking is similar to the war on drugs--stupid!

Tax it, inform the public, do whatever, but government does not belong in my personal life if it doesn't involve making me safe from outside harm
So I take it you must now be against universal healthcare, right?

[td4mvp21]

I smoke menthol cigarettes, and this article is telling the truth, banning these would be akin to banning 1/4th of all cigarettes.


Look, I'm all for letting the public know about the health effects of smoking, but the government doesn't have a right to regulate my daily activities. This is just another example of moral paternalism, this time it's from the left, but to me legislation against smoking is similar to the war on drugs--stupid!

Tax it, inform the public, do whatever, but government does not belong in my personal life if it doesn't involve making me safe from outside harm

Agreed.

[boutons_]

"Menthol cigarette brands have been rising in popularity with adolescents, and the highest use has been among younger, newer smokers. Researchers at Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH) explored tobacco industry manipulation of menthol levels in specific brands and found a deliberate strategy to recruit and addict young smokers by adjusting menthol to create a milder experience for the first time smoker."

"For decades, the tobacco industry has carefully manipulated menthol content not only to lure youth but also to lock in lifelong adult customers,"

"This is another example of the cynical behavior of the tobacco industry to hook teens and African Americans to a deadly addiction. This is after the industry told the American public it had changed its marketing practices."

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-07/hsop-tim071408.php

[peewee's lovechild]

Banning menthol additive could prevent black kids from getting started, could make it easier black smokers to stop.


Parents of those black kids could do a better job of keeping thier kids from smoking.

[peewee's lovechild]

As a Mexican-American, I want legislation to ban jalapeno flavored cigarettes. I would also like the ban to extend to the chipotle flavored cigarettes.

[Spurminator]

Kids don't start smoking because they like the friggin taste. Damn people are stupid.

[boutons_]

Menthol makes the initial repulsion less repulsive, easing the way for more puffing, more nicotine intake, until addiction.

The cigarette mfrs wouldn't be fighting so hard to keep menthol unregulated if it didn't work.

Damn people are stupid.

[peewee's lovechild]

Menthol makes the initial repulsion less repulsive, easing the way for more puffing, more nicotine intake, until addiction.

The cigarette mfrs wouldn't be fighting so hard to keep menthol unregulated if it didn't work.

Damn people are stupid.

Are you kidding me?

I've been smoking since I was about 15 years old and I still can't stand Menthols.

I can't hold it in as long with Menthols as I can with regular ciggs.

However, I can smoke clove flavored ones like "Black" like there's no tomorrow.

[boutons_]

Here's how teen nicotine addiction happens, as the cig mfrs know so well. They are doing it all over the world as smoking in USA and Western Europe decreases:

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-07/uom-tss071608.php

"I still can't stand Menthols."

Therefore, the whole menthol tactic is bullshit. glad we got that cleared up.

[peewee's lovechild]

Therefore, the whole menthol tactic is bullshit. glad we got that cleared up.

No, it means you're generalizing.
And, arguments hold so much water when doing that.

Glad we got that cleared up.

[boutons_]

where am I generalizing?

Menthol works, that's why the cig mfr use it and want to keep using it, no matter what your idiosyncratic view is.

[peewee's lovechild]

All young blacks smoke menthols.

All young whites smoke clove and cinnamon cigs.

The Senate wants black people dead.

That close enough?

Because, if you weren't trying for a racist angle, why title your thread "Hey, Black Menthold Smokers, the Senate wants you dead"?

[peewee's lovechild]

"making this a race issue"

the cig mfrs know EXACTLY their victims, which race smokes the most methol cigs, and is buying Congress to keep that race smoking menthol cigs.

There's currently only one black Senator.

Exempting menthol cigs now probably means exempting menthol cigs for many years, because cig mfrs get pretty much what they want in all 3 Fed branches.

[Kaotik]

Great idea! With some of the effects of mj use being; distorted perception, loss of coordination, trouble with thinking, anxiety, and fear, I'd just love to be on the road, or at work with a bunch of people high on mj.

There are already plenty of people using it a work and while driving, no need to have those numbers skyrocket, which is what would happen if it were legalized (if you disagree with this, prove it to be wrong).



Let's look at the health risks of marijuana use:

The short-term effects of marijuana include:

1. Distorted perception (sights, sounds, time, touch)
2. Problems with memory and learning
3. Loss of coordination
4. Trouble with thinking and problem-solving
5. Increased heart rate, reduced blood pressure
6. Sometimes marijuana use can also produce anxiety, fear, distrust, or panic.




Effects on the Brain

The active ingredient in marijuana, delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol or THC, acts on cannabinoid receptors on nerve cells and influences the activity of those cells. Some brain areas have many cannabinoid receptors, but other areas of the brain have few or none at all. Many cannabinoid receptors are found in the parts of the brain that influence pleasure, memory, thought, concentration, sensory and time perception, and coordinated movement.
When high doses of marijuana are used, usually when eaten in food rather than smoked, users can experience the following symptoms:

1. Hallucinations
2. Delusions
3. Impaired memory
4. Disorientation




Effects on the Heart

-Within a few minutes after smoking marijuana, the heart begins beating more rapidly and the blood pressure drops. Marijuana can cause the heart beat to increase by 20 to 50 beats per minute, and can increase even more if other drugs are used at the same time.
-Because of the lower blood pressure and higher heart rate, researchers found that users' risk for a heart attack is four times higher within the first hour after smoking marijuana.




Effects on the Lungs

Smoking marijuana, even infrequently, can cause burning and stinging of the mouth and throat, and cause heavy coughing. Scientists have found that regular marijuana smokers can experience the same respiratory problems as tobacco smokers do, including:

Daily cough and phlegm production
More frequent acute chest illnesses
Increased risk of lung infections
Obstructed airways
Marijuana contains more carcinogenic hydrocarbons than tobacco smoke and because marijuana smokers usually inhale deeper and hold the smoke in their lungs longer than tobacco smokers, their lungs are exposed to those carcinogenic properties longer.
One study found that marijuana smokers were three times more likely to develop cancer of the head or neck than non-smokers. Many researchers believe than smoking marijuana is overall more harmful to the lungs than smoking tobacco.




Other Health Effects

Research indicates that THC impairs the body's immune system from fighting disease, which can cause a wide variety of health problems. One study found that marijuana actually inhibited the disease-preventing actions of key immune cells. Another study found that THC increased the risk of developing bacterial infections and tumors.




Effects of Exposure During Pregnancy

Several studies have found that children born to mothers who used marijuana during pregnancy exhibit some problems with neurological development. According to those studies, prenatal marijuana exposure can cause:

1. Altered responses to visual stimuli
2. Increased tremulousness
3. Problems with sustained attention and memory
4. Poor problem-solving skills

http://alcoholism.about.com/od/pot/a/effects.htm

And there still has NEVER been a death solely related to the smoking of marijuana. Notice how the symptoms listed under "short-term effects" and "effects of exposure during pregnancy" are practically the same only re-worded slightly.

"One study found that marijuana actually inhibited the disease-preventing actions of key immune cells. Another study found that THC increased the risk of developing bacterial infections and tumors." Really? Haven't seen any cases proving this yet.

"One study found that marijuana smokers were three times more likely to develop cancer of the head or neck than non-smokers. Many researchers believe than smoking marijuana is overall more harmful to the lungs than smoking tobacco." HAHA show me one case that proves this. Too bad there aren't any cigarette additives like Arsenic, Ammonia, Benzene, and Cadmium added to marijuana. Possibly then this "study" could be somewhat accurate.

I read most of the sources that were involved in the creation of this article. Not nearly enough studies to remotely prove that marijuana could possibly be more harmful than cigarettes. Overall a horrible argument that marijuana shouldn't be legalized.

[boutons_]

"All young blacks smoke menthols.'

who said that?

"All young whites smoke clove and cinnamon cigs."

who said that?

"The Senate wants black people dead."

obviously, they want the $$$ from the cig mfgs more than they want to regulate menthol additive and perhaps reduce black smokers. There was no mention of non-black menthol smokers. What's the reason?

"That close enough?"

of course not, pure invented strawman bullshit.

"Because, if you weren't trying for a racist angle, why title your thread "Hey, Black Menthold Smokers, the Senate wants you dead" "

That's a legit topic, as menthol-smoking young blacks was what the article was about.

If menthol cigs have similary impact on non-blacks, why aren't non-blacks, or even blacks at all, mentioned. There appears to be social factor in why young blacks start/prefer menthol cigs. The cig mfrs know exactly who their victims are.

[boutons_]

Apparently BigPharma is aggressively preparing their own "medical marijuana" cannabinoid products, knowing that the CA experience wil not be shut down by duyba's DoJ and the positive results will be desired in other states.

[DarrinS]

You never see black dudes smoking Kools or Newports.

[boutons_deux]

Big Tobacco’s big race play: Philip Morris, the NAACP and the future of menthol cigarettes


The FDA is slow to ban the flavored smokes, despite their myriad health risks, and black groups refuse to speak up

Lorillard Tobacco donated nearly four times as much to Republican candidates as to Democrats in the 2014 congressional elections. No surprise there — most businesses count on Republicans to hold the line on regulations and taxes.

But Lorillard made a striking exception for one set of Democrats: African Americans. It gave campaign cash to half of all black members of Congress, as opposed to just one in 38 non-black Democrats, according to an analysis by FairWarning of records from the Center for Responsive Politics (https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/recips.php?cycle=2014&id=D000019376).

To put it another way, black lawmakers, all but one of whom are Democrats, were 19 times as likely as their Democratic peers to get a donation.




It’s not hard to see why. The election campaign overlapped a debate crucial to Lorillard: Whether to add menthol, the minty, throat-numbing additive, to a list of flavorings banned from use in cigarettes in 2009 on public health grounds. Lorillard’s Newport cigarettes have been the top-selling menthol brand, accounting for billions of dollars in annual sales. And who most favors menthols? Black smokers, by a wide margin.

For decades, the tobacco industry has maintained what amounts to an informal mutual aid pact with some black organizations.

Over the years, cigarette makers have donated generously to

members of the Congressional Black Caucus, and

to its affiliate, the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation;

to major groups like the National Urban League,

the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and

the United Negro College Fund; and

to a host of smaller African American organizations.

In return, some of the groups have helped the industry fight anti-smoking measures. Other times, critics say, they have simply turned a blind eye to the harmful impact of tobacco on the black community.

Menthol cigarettes, once a niche product, now account for about 30 percent of U.S. cigarette sales. But a study (http://www.fairwarning.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Giovino-et-al-Menthol-Trends-TobaccoControl-2013-051159-1.pdf) cited by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/disparities/african-americans/index.htm#health-effects)found that menthols were the choice of 88 percent of black smokers and 57 percent of smokers under 18.

Reynolds American Inc., which includes R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., completed a merger with Lorillard (http://s2.q4cdn.com/129460998/files/doc_news/PDF%20-%20Press%20release/2014/2014-13_RA_July-15-Second-one_v001_c751zn.pdf), paying more than $27 billion for a company that depended on menthols for about 85 percent of sales.

African American politicians and organizations have been largely silent.

http://www.salon.com/2015/11/26/big_tobaccos_unsavory_racial_politics_philip_morri s_the_naacp_and_the_future_of_menthol_cigarettes_p artner/

BigTobacco makes public health policy to maintain their murderous profits, keep giving blacks fatal lung cancer, and pay black whores to STFU. and of course BigTobacco OWNS the FDA.

[ElNono]

^ stop bumping threads that have nothing to do with your bullshit... GTFO

[ElNono]

https://youtu.be/Cn41RM-x4wA


https://youtu.be/LYLwKqPn-YU

Cosmoron has a whole series of evasion tactics :-

1. For images or video: "Nothing that's fakable can be used as proof as it might be fake."

He will never apply this moronic circular logic to his own images and videos. He will never actually prove it is faked or offer the number of people involved in such.

2. For websites: "It's possible that your sites are genuine and it's possible that some public-relations agency created them to help fool the public. Something that may or may not be bogus can't be used as proof."

Or

"That's a disinfo site."

He will never apply this moronic circular logic to his own appallingly inept websites. He will never address any website that solidly refutes his claims. He never offers any proof that any website is "disinfo" or "public-relations".

3. For Expert Testimony: "Only a person with a high background in photography would be able to deal with it "

For "photography" insert anything. He is a layman on everything associated with space travel so uses this evasion tactic frequently. Basically if he doesn't understand it, it is ignored and of course the person providing the information must automatically be in on the moronic hoax.

4. For Rebuttal: "...so we already know what you posted is sophistry. "

Or

"I can't say I'm one hundred percent sure he's a paid disinfo agent but his behavior fits the profile perfectly."

This enables him to completely ignore any response, which he routinely does anyway, but throws this in for effect. Needless to say, he will never offer anything to backup his ad hominem statement.

5. Miscellaneous: ".anyone who sees it will see that he's just a paid sophist."

This is probably the worst one of all. For this enormous diversionary statement, he gets to ignore every single thing written by an expert in almost every aspect of the Apollo Missions. He gets to ignore a concise website detailing debunks for almost all his total crap. He gets to ignore every post made where he always get his ass handed to him. The basis for this is his "credibility test".

6. Credibility Test: "This calls for a credibility test. XXXXXXX maintains that the Chinese spacewalk was real and not faked in a water tank. Do you agree with him?

This is where the spammer uses one of his pre-determined idiotic conspiracies or erroneous claims as the yardstick for a credibility test. He is the arbitrator of its provenance therefore anyone who disagrees with it can now be referred to as "discredited" and all their rebuttal can be ignored.

7. When all else fails: "I think the rest are moot now that you`ve been discredited and there are a lot of clear anomalies that prove the footage ...."

So when he routinely gets his claim debunked, it is "moot" because of "all the others". It never occurs to him that all the other evidence has been debunked and was also "moot" when it was addressed. When pushed to provide a list of items to address, at all costs he will not do this because it can be seen where they have all been debunked.

8. Just deny everything: "I've never seen it debunked. I've seen people try to obfuscate it and then consider it to have been debunked." or "I can't see what you're referring to."

He's never seen ANYTHING debunked? An utterly ludicrous statement that he uses based on his own inept layman understanding. His ignorance apart, he seeks to pigeon hole every single debunk into responses that he says are diversion, because he says so. Or, he simply denies seeing something that is completely irrefutably obvious.

9. Idiotic Closes: "You'd get laughed out of the debating hall ..."

or

"you're about as impressive as the Black Knight in this video"

The sheer irony of this is always lost on him. If ever there was somebody who behaved like the Black Knight - as his arm gets chopped off it's a "moot point" it would be this serial forum spammer. There is not a debating environment on this planet where this person would show up to. He knows more than anyone that he would get the floor wiped with his drivel.

10. Divert/Obfuscate/Re-spam: This is where he avoids the item completely and gish-gallops away with repeated spam. Almost certainly he will keep avoiding the original claim.

11. Never mind that - look over here: When this hopeless individual has exhausted his inept repertoire of responses comes his most used spam. He resorts to spamming his wall of crap and ignoring the main issue!
"Anyway, there's a ton of proof that the missions were faked and zero proof that they were real."


What a sad, sad liar this person is. They have been humiliated completely on dozens of subjects, thousands of times on Apollo, yet they spew this cut and paste hogwash almost every time.


12. Credibility Referbacks: When this hopeless individual has no answers he often resorts to just one liners concerning previous bullshit "Credibility Tests".

"You've already said some pretty lame things so your judgement is obviously flawed."

"....said the Man who tried to obfuscate the clear evidence of the Chinese Spacewalk"


13. Moronic Translations: This is the ridiculous post where he interprets his crazy viewpoint on something regardless of how many times it has already been addressed. It usually has some bearing on his equally moronic "Credibility Tests".

"Translation: The proof that the Chinese spacewalk is so clear that I'll just look silly if I try to obfuscate it so I'd better avoid addressing it."



This person has been doing all of the above across 100's of forums for (best guess) coming up to 17 years. He cuts and pastes duplicate posts, responses, key phrases and dismissal videos. He determines any one or more of the above and posts them out, then slams a huge post with repeated and debunked bullshit. There is simply no level of response that can get through to somebody who has terminal Dunning and Kruger syndrome.

that's what I heard moron... go astroturf somewhere else