You mean "drug addict"? That is neither new, nor insulting. It is simply a descriptive phrase, and a medically accurate one, by and large. The tobacco company execs made no bones about it in their internal documents--even during the last few decades of the time they were using public scoffing at the notion to help them foster the pandemic level of addiction that makes their industry not only possible but extremely profitable.Thanks for the new petty and insulting moniker.
Addiction is what they were marketing, and there is documentation that they KNEW and accepted that smoking caused so many problems that it was on the way out--meaning they needed to find some other addictive substance to market (probably containing nicotine). Strange how many new nicotine delivery systems have appeared in the last decade or two, isn't it? Sticks, lozenges, even the e-cigarette. And then there is Reynolds's acquisition of NicoNovum--a European counterpart for Nicorette. They are trying to get that line of products through FDA approval. If they succeed, they will be able to profit from both sides when they apply the leverage they gained through decades of fraud and criminal marketing activities plus the slick public-opinion-shapers they've cultivated to keep public perception of "smoking cessation" focused on NRTs. After all, the longer they can stall what is clearly coming, the more billions they can pull out of the pockets of their customers--because those customers are compliant DRUG ADDICTS.
Sorry if your need for denial makes you see that perfectly applicable term as "insulting".