BOSTON - The level of nicotine found in U.S. cigarettes 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 found the three most popular cigarette brands with young smokers — Marlboro, Newport and Camel — delivered significantly more nicotine than they did years ago. Nicotine in Kool, a popular menthol brand, rose 20 percent. More than two-thirds of black smokers use menthol brands.

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.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060829/ap_on_he_me/increasing_nicotine

Good Grief...............do these people not have anything better to do with taxpayer dollars than come up with something that anyone with even an elementary school science education can come up with?

I have a book on the shelf that tells me how to raise or lower nicotine levels while drying/curing tobacco leaves.

And folks like Dr. siegel are only know just figuring out there is a problem with the credibility of the anti-smoker movement? Those people have zip, zilch, noda, none, no credibility amongst people with even a modicum of intelligence - which of course leaves out the entire anti-smoker industry.....

Tt sounds to me like the nicotine levels didn't go up, they just measured it differently:

"The study tried to measure nicotine levels based on the way smokers actually use cigarettes, health officials said, in part by partially covering ventilation holes as they smoke and taking longer puffs. Traditional testing methods which do not take real-life smoking habits into account, typically report lower nicotine contents, officials said."

They didn't quote the tobacco industry literature which would have confirmed their "findings" if BT was adding nicotine.

What bullsh*t! Indeed, if nicotine in cigarettes were higher - wouldn't one not need to smoke as much to get the same amount of nicotine? These people are so full of crap it makes me sick, whats worse are the media lackeys who faithfully report their garbage...

This message has been edited. Last edited by: NickM_71,

I'm glad that they raised the nicotine level.
I smoke less in order to get my fix and it saves me money

Seems like the folks complaining about "more" nicotine are the same people who consider nicotine safe and effective when packaged and sold by Big Pharma but not when nicotine is in tobacco (a more natural form)!

quote:

Originally posted by gnatyo:
Seems like the folks complaining about "more" nicotine are the same people who consider nicotine safe and effective when packaged and sold by Big Pharma but not when nicotine is in tobacco (a more natural form)!

Sorry to disagree with with you gnatyo, but nicotine in tobacco is not a MORE natural form than the PHARMA stuff, it is A natural form.

Philip Morris disputes nicotine study


BOSTON - The nation's largest cigarette maker is disputing a study by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health that found nicotine in cigarettes has risen about 10 percent in the past six years.

Donna Rheaume, a spokeswoman for the Department of Public Health, defended the report, which concluded that the higher nicotine levels made it easier to get hooked on cigarettes and harder to quit.

"We stand by our study which was based on data supplied by the tobacco companies," Rheaume said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060911/ap_on_he_me/increasing_nicotine

Wow, what in-depth reporting.

Philip Morris "said its review of nine years of data that it provided to the state found fluctuations in nicotine levels, but no steady increase."

"[T]here is no general trend up or down."

"The study...found...Marlboro...delivered significantly more nicotine than they did years ago."

"Donna Rheaume, a spokeswoman for the Department of Public Health, defended the report..."

Whatever happened to investigative reporting? I thought journalists loved getting to the bottom of things.

Michael Siegel on his blog website seemed to have no trouble finding out who was right in this debate:

"In summary, it seems pretty clear from the Philip Morris reports submitted to MDPH that between 1997 and 2005, the average nicotine yields of Marlboro cigarettes and all Philip Morris cigarettes decreased."

I never did believe that crap about tobacco companies "spiking" cigarettes with more nicotine to hook new consumers, nor do I believe that light cigarettes are just as bad as full-flavor versions, as the Anti's claim. I don't know if they are still made , but back in the 1970's, there was a brand called Now, that had only 1 mg of tar and something like .1 mg of nicotine. They had no taste, but it is reasonable to assume that you could smoke about 18 of those to equal one Marlboro.

I really don't care. I do not smoke cigarettes manufactured by companies who sign the MSA.

If my body craves nicotine I will smoke until the craving ceases, if that is one cigarette or an entire pack I will smoke until satisfied. If it took an entire pack to relieve the craving then I would review future purchases of that brand. This is what my opinion of the low tar and nicotine cigarettes were when introduced. No taste, no satisfaction, equals trash bin.

quote:

Originally posted by Pat:
I don't know if they are still made , but back in the 1970's, there was a brand called Now...They had no taste, but it is reasonable to assume that you could smoke about 18 of those to equal one Marlboro.

I remember someone giving me a Carlton once. It was like smoking air. I gave it 2 drags to give it a fair chance and put it out.

Yeah, I remember those. They were awful. A straw gave about as much satisfaction.

Guess I'm weird then, cuz I really like my Carlton Menthol and I resent these ninnies...I mean nannies, tryin' to take 'em from me....although this last carton doesn't taste quite the same. I sure hope they aren't changing them...I used to like the Now Menthol, but they have a more menthol taste. I've also tried stuffing my own, but they are too strong for me. If I could find a way of stuffing my own so they taste like Carlton, I'd be sooooo happy

My Aunt smoked Carlton, my mother said she smoked them because no one would ever bum a second one from her.

quote:

Originally posted by AbbyL:
Guess I'm weird then, cuz I really like my Carlton Menthol

Yes, you're weird.

Maybe the menthol would make a difference. I just remember that Carlton was like smoking a cigarette with a rip in it: Too much air, not enough smoke (taste).

But you're probably still weird.
(I'm kidding)

So does everybody here think that is wrong for teachers to discourage thier students (your kids) from smoking or using chewing tobacco?

If so, don't you think this is wrong? Doesn't everyone want a better life for their kids? Or do you want to bury your kids before they bury you?

quote:

Originally posted by tmonie:
So does everybody here think that is wrong for teachers to discourage thier students (your kids) from smoking or using chewing tobacco?

If so, don't you think this is wrong? Doesn't everyone want a better life for their kids? Or do you want to bury your kids before they bury you?

Aren't you capable of teaching your children about your own preferred lifestyle choices? Why do you need someone else to teach your children how you would prefer them to live?

"tmonie" is awful close to "dmoney", another anti who posted here a while back. I guess all you antis are rolling in the money/monies you've stolen from smokers all these decades in extortion taxes. I can't wait for the day when you're all taken to court, shown up for the deceitful, fraudulent stooges you are, and have to pay it back.

quote:

Posted Sat September 16 2006 01:24 PM
So does everybody here think that is wrong for teachers to discourage thier students (your kids) from smoking or using chewing tobacco?

If so, don't you think this is wrong? Doesn't everyone want a better life for their kids? Or do you want to bury your kids before they bury you?

first off its not the teachers job to discourage students it up to the parents gardians. the job of the teacher is to teach acidemics to the students that what they are paid to do. so I would say its wrong. teachers are over stepping the bounds of authity government and special intrest groups are over stepping their bounds also...

would you want some one comming into your home telling you how you should conduct your beliefs, how you should run your house hold, what car you should drive, when you should shower, use the bathroom, how much toliet paper to use, regulate the amount of toothpaste you put on your tooth brush..

quote:

Originally posted by tmonie:
So does everybody here think that is wrong for teachers to discourage thier students (your kids) from smoking or using chewing tobacco?

PETA would like teachers to discourage students from eating meat.

The temperance movement...alcohol.

We could go into things like discouraging loud music because it leads to hearing impairment in very short order. Etc. etc.

But your question is too general. Are you talking about math class or health class teachers? I have no problem with health teachers teaching about the risks from smoking. In fact, I expect it. To dwell on it is another matter.

quote:

If so, don't you think this is wrong? Doesn't everyone want a better life for their kids? Or do you want to bury your kids before they bury you?

Sorry, but you can't have it both ways. You can't say today that kids will die before their parents when tomorrow you'll try to get some smoker to quit by saying "Do you want to die before your kids grow up?"

Tell your side to pick one and stick with it.

Unless Mommy squirted out little Johnny when she was 13 it's highly unlikely even nonsmokers would end up burying their future smoking children. And that's using the ridiculously inflated numbers from CDC that smokers die 13-14 years prematurely.