5150sick
Under Ground Hustler
Staff member
VU Administrator
Senior Moderator
VU Donator
Diamond Contributor
Press Corps
Member For 5 Years
Mod Team Leader
https://rodutobaccotruth.blogspot.com/2016/08/low-tar-cigarettes-had-merit-said.html
This line – that safer cigarettes are a deception perpetrated by the tobacco industry -- has been repeated so often that it is considered gospel by the American public. In fact, the scientific literature supports the relative safety claim and debunks the popular myth.
Research published in the 1970s documented that low-tar low-nicotine cigarettes were less hazardous than others. Articles from the American Cancer Society in respected medical journals played a prominent role in shaping consumers’ positive perception of these products.
In 1976 the Cancer Society published research (here) showing that light cigarettes were safer. In 1959-60, over a million people were enrolled by the Cancer Society in a prospective epidemiological study of cancer risk factors. Smokers were classified according to nicotine-tar content, high (2.0-2.7 milligrams nicotine and 26-36 mg tar) or low (less than 1.2 mg nicotine and less than 18 mg tar); detailed records were obtained for death rates and dates.
The study revealed that the death rate from all causes was 16% lower among smokers of low nicotine-tar cigarettes than among smokers of high nicotine-tar cigarettes. Similarly, low nicotine-tar smokers had a 14% lower death rate from heart attacks and a 26% lower rate from lung cancer. The authors concluded that “total death rates, death rates from coronary heart disease, and death rates from lung cancer were somewhat lower for those who smoked ‘low’ tar-nicotine cigarettes than for those who smoked ‘high’ tar-nicotine cigarettes.”
The research findings were extensively reported on by the media (example here).
Cancer Society researchers concluded: “The evidence from this study is consistent with evidence from epidemiologic studies indicating that death rates from lung cancer are lower among men who smoke low tar/nicotine cigarettes than among men who smoke the same number of high tar/nicotine cigarettes per day…”
Again, the results were widely reported by the national media, including the Wall Street Journal (here). Cancer Society president LaSalle D. Leffall, Jr., issued a harm reduction message, saying that “findings of the new study suggest a way for smokers to reduce their lung cancer risk by switching to low tar-nicotine cigarettes if they find it impossible to quit entirely.” Leffall noted that “the best way to escape the risk of lung cancer ‘is not to smoke at all…There is no safe cigarette.’”
By the 1980s, public health experts and cigarette manufacturers alike were optimistic about the prospects of a safer cigarette. Manufacturers introduced products with even lower levels of tar, which they called ultra-lights.
In 2004, Cancer Society researchers confirmed that smoking ultra-lights resulted in lower lung cancer rates than the full-tar cigarettes, but the rates for ultra-lights were the same as those for low-tar cigarettes (here).
The health advantages of light cigarettes over full-flavor brands were documented and promoted by the American Cancer Society in 1976 and 1979. Optimism about low-tar brands was later reversed by another Cancer Society report, which did not acknowledge or cite the earlier studies.
One fact is not debatable: The public health community conducted research that led to the promotion of light cigarettes as safer alternatives. Therefore, there is no industry conspiracy template for anyone to employ against e-cigarettes.
I had been looking for links to this info for a while now.
How many of you knew that it was actually the American Cancer Society along with "Public Health" that promoted "light" and "low tar" cigarettes?
The American Cancer Society has also been saying that safer cigarettes are a deception perpetrated by the tobacco industry over, and over, and over but just because you say it over and over doesn't make it true.
Tobacco control obviously hasn't figured this out yet.
They have also made Big Tobacco our enemy while hiding their financial interests with Big Pharma this whole time.
Big Tobacco would honestly rather NOT kill off half of their customers because like Pharma all they care about is money.
Full money is always better than half money which is why they are lining themselves up to take over the entire vaping industry as I type this - 5150
This line – that safer cigarettes are a deception perpetrated by the tobacco industry -- has been repeated so often that it is considered gospel by the American public. In fact, the scientific literature supports the relative safety claim and debunks the popular myth.
Research published in the 1970s documented that low-tar low-nicotine cigarettes were less hazardous than others. Articles from the American Cancer Society in respected medical journals played a prominent role in shaping consumers’ positive perception of these products.
In 1976 the Cancer Society published research (here) showing that light cigarettes were safer. In 1959-60, over a million people were enrolled by the Cancer Society in a prospective epidemiological study of cancer risk factors. Smokers were classified according to nicotine-tar content, high (2.0-2.7 milligrams nicotine and 26-36 mg tar) or low (less than 1.2 mg nicotine and less than 18 mg tar); detailed records were obtained for death rates and dates.
The study revealed that the death rate from all causes was 16% lower among smokers of low nicotine-tar cigarettes than among smokers of high nicotine-tar cigarettes. Similarly, low nicotine-tar smokers had a 14% lower death rate from heart attacks and a 26% lower rate from lung cancer. The authors concluded that “total death rates, death rates from coronary heart disease, and death rates from lung cancer were somewhat lower for those who smoked ‘low’ tar-nicotine cigarettes than for those who smoked ‘high’ tar-nicotine cigarettes.”
The research findings were extensively reported on by the media (example here).
Cancer Society researchers concluded: “The evidence from this study is consistent with evidence from epidemiologic studies indicating that death rates from lung cancer are lower among men who smoke low tar/nicotine cigarettes than among men who smoke the same number of high tar/nicotine cigarettes per day…”
Again, the results were widely reported by the national media, including the Wall Street Journal (here). Cancer Society president LaSalle D. Leffall, Jr., issued a harm reduction message, saying that “findings of the new study suggest a way for smokers to reduce their lung cancer risk by switching to low tar-nicotine cigarettes if they find it impossible to quit entirely.” Leffall noted that “the best way to escape the risk of lung cancer ‘is not to smoke at all…There is no safe cigarette.’”
By the 1980s, public health experts and cigarette manufacturers alike were optimistic about the prospects of a safer cigarette. Manufacturers introduced products with even lower levels of tar, which they called ultra-lights.
In 2004, Cancer Society researchers confirmed that smoking ultra-lights resulted in lower lung cancer rates than the full-tar cigarettes, but the rates for ultra-lights were the same as those for low-tar cigarettes (here).
The health advantages of light cigarettes over full-flavor brands were documented and promoted by the American Cancer Society in 1976 and 1979. Optimism about low-tar brands was later reversed by another Cancer Society report, which did not acknowledge or cite the earlier studies.
One fact is not debatable: The public health community conducted research that led to the promotion of light cigarettes as safer alternatives. Therefore, there is no industry conspiracy template for anyone to employ against e-cigarettes.
I had been looking for links to this info for a while now.
How many of you knew that it was actually the American Cancer Society along with "Public Health" that promoted "light" and "low tar" cigarettes?
The American Cancer Society has also been saying that safer cigarettes are a deception perpetrated by the tobacco industry over, and over, and over but just because you say it over and over doesn't make it true.
Tobacco control obviously hasn't figured this out yet.
They have also made Big Tobacco our enemy while hiding their financial interests with Big Pharma this whole time.
Big Tobacco would honestly rather NOT kill off half of their customers because like Pharma all they care about is money.
Full money is always better than half money which is why they are lining themselves up to take over the entire vaping industry as I type this - 5150
