'Light' cigarette suit certified as c...

'Light' cigarette suit certified as class action

There are 220 comments on the Reuters story from Sep 25, 2006, titled 'Light' cigarette suit certified as class action. In it, Reuters reports that:

By Brad DorfmanCHICAGO - A lawsuit accusing tobacco companies of defrauding smokers into thinking "light" cigarettes were safer than regular brands can proceed as a class action, a federal judge in New York ...

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Reuters.

First Prev
of 11
Next Last
Buffed Herstory

Greensboro, NC

#203 Apr 14, 2007
Mr No Compassion wrote:
I know I am crazy in this thought process but did the side of the pack of light cigarettes have a different warning label than the regular ones?
Kind of seems like 10,000 volts vs 50,000 volts. One is definitely lighter. If they were truly less tar & nicotine they were in fact "light" A milder flavor may also be considered "light". Did the tobacco companies ever say that the light cigarettes were safer?
As a matter of fact, they did say the light cigarettes were safer. They were marketed specifically to keep worried smokers smoking for longer. They also manipulated nicotine and other chemicals in cigarettes to make smoking more addictive. They manipulated advertising to get young people to smoke. They knew that cigarettes and second hand smoke were dangerous.
http://tobaccodocuments.org/
These documents have been released in open court and are there for the public to see. There is a lot of damning evidence in those papers. Once you get deep enough in those papers you will begin to think that the tobacco companies have engaged in criminal activities too and that they are liable for damages. Why do you think jury after jury has found for the smoker? Why do you think the tobacco companies are paying out billions to the states?
SAY WHAT

Louisville, KY

#204 Apr 15, 2007
Buffed Herstory wrote:
<quoted text>
As a matter of fact, they did say the light cigarettes were safer. They were marketed specifically to keep worried smokers smoking for longer. They also manipulated nicotine and other chemicals in cigarettes to make smoking more addictive. They manipulated advertising to get young people to smoke. They knew that cigarettes and second hand smoke were dangerous.
http://tobaccodocuments.org/
These documents have been released in open court and are there for the public to see. There is a lot of damning evidence in those papers. Once you get deep enough in those papers you will begin to think that the tobacco companies have engaged in criminal activities too and that they are liable for damages. Why do you think jury after jury has found for the smoker? Why do you think the tobacco companies are paying out billions to the states?
But were the warning labels any different.
Ed Grondahl

Greenville, TX

#205 Apr 24, 2007
30 years of smoking and now diagnosed with COPD, light apparently meant nothing. Thank God I quit, hope I have hope.

Since: Feb 07

Myerstown, PA

#206 Apr 24, 2007
Buffed Herstory wrote:
<quoted text>
As a matter of fact, they did say the light cigarettes were safer. They were marketed specifically to keep worried smokers smoking for longer. They also manipulated nicotine and other chemicals in cigarettes to make smoking more addictive. They manipulated advertising to get young people to smoke. They knew that cigarettes and second hand smoke were dangerous.
http://tobaccodocuments.org/
These documents have been released in open court and are there for the public to see. There is a lot of damning evidence in those papers. Once you get deep enough in those papers you will begin to think that the tobacco companies have engaged in criminal activities too and that they are liable for damages. Why do you think jury after jury has found for the smoker? Why do you think the tobacco companies are paying out billions to the states?
Show me where BT said that lights were safer. I always thought that lights just meant a lighter taste, not harsh like Camels.
The additives is why a lot of smokers are going to RYO with natural tobacco, no additives, and a lot less taxes too.

“Customblends.com”

Since: Apr 07

York, PA

#207 May 4, 2007
True, bdjunker. Many ryo customers we have tell us stories about being on vacation and having to buy a brand name prepack, and having to either suffer through it, or throw it out.

I really think it's the additives commercial prepack manuf's rely on. customblends.com

Since: Feb 07

Myerstown, PA

#208 May 4, 2007
Custom Blends wrote:
True, bdjunker. Many ryo customers we have tell us stories about being on vacation and having to buy a brand name prepack, and having to either suffer through it, or throw it out.
I really think it's the additives commercial prepack manuf's rely on. customblends.com
Before someone accuses me of being a shrill for you, I must state that I just started RYO after receiving a RYO machine for Christmas. I do not live in York, PA although that is what shows at times, and other times it's a place called Benzett (or something like that). I just wanted to head off any and all that might assume I'm working for you. Not that I wouldn't mind that, but I don't.
BTW, my 82 year old Mom smokes non-filters, and has always done so. I tried to get her to RYO, but she says "I'm 82, and I don't work unless I absolutely have to." LOL
Tis

United States

#209 May 4, 2007
I got this from a Illinois newspaper, but it fits a lot of states. My advice though is do it, and keep doing, every time you have a chance. Fill your car, call all your friends. Tell strangers you see that smoke. DO IT NOW.
The governor & our big politians. They are out for themselves. Have any of you smoking ban advocates figured it out yet? It isn't about your health, is about who is paying to get a bill passed.
As I said several times, I'm not a smoker and I've been dead set against any ban.
I have my doubts this will be around long before it's edited out, but go to any major store in your area and fill those carts and then leave it sit and walk out. Leave a note voicing your opinion about the bans. I bet it isn't long before they back off any ban since it would affect the revenue.
Do it now because soon government will ban transfat which is worse for you than smoking, or finally put an end to gun ownership. Or it won't be long before you have to weigh in before getting served a hit fat meal.
Copy this and email it to your friends. It's time to get involved and stop government control.
keep it real

Prescott Valley, AZ

#210 May 9, 2007
cigarette are bad for you however you want to put it where it has light on it or not it is still bad for your health so cut the bullshit but they still lied and they should be punished but however when you pick up that cigarette you know what kind of risk you taking so down get piss off!!!!!!!!!!
Tired

Kingstree, SC

#211 May 9, 2007
keep it real wrote:
cigarette are bad for you however you want to put it where it has light on it or not it is still bad for your health so cut the bullshit but they still lied and they should be punished but however when you pick up that cigarette you know what kind of risk you taking so down get piss off!!!!!!!!!!
You are correct. Search through the tobacco companies OWN documents and see their criminal acts.
http://tobaccodocuments.org/

“Customblends.com”

Since: Apr 07

York, PA

#213 Jun 4, 2007
bdjunker wrote:
<quoted text>...Not that I wouldn't mind that, but I don't.
This could work... We're actually undergoing an expansion. You would be working for yourself.

Our Camp Hill guys have a TV/Stereo/Broadband system in their store, they just sell and chill. Interested?
bdjunker wrote:
<quoted text>I tried to get her to RYO, but she says "I'm 82, and I don't work unless I absolutely have to." LOL
Yep, we hear that... sometimes we can convert 'em with a sample of a blend and machine for them. They often see it's a better smoke, FAR less expensive, and a much easier process than they thought.

And yes,(for the forum) he does not work for us. He just happens to have his head on straight.

http://7valleys.franbest.com/

“Customblends.com”

Since: Apr 07

York, PA

#214 Jun 4, 2007
Tis wrote:
...soon government will ban transfat which is worse for you than smoking, or finally put an end to gun ownership. Or it won't be long before you have to weigh in before getting served a hit fat meal.
You're right, Tis - Government can't seem to stop when offered an opportunity to expand authority.

You probably remember those states that started with seat belt laws - first, the law is passed stating they can't pull you for not wearing one. This lets them slip the law in with less resistance.

But pretty soon, the law is expanded because authorities aren't happy with the voluntary compliance rate.

Next, we are brow-beaten with taxpayer funded "CLICK IT OR TICKET" radio campaigns with an officer assuming everyone's a criminal, and threatening us in stereo.

And now, quite literally, we are stopped for "compliance checks" by the Police, in clear violation of the 4th Amendment.

The people, all of 'em, non-smokers/smokers/fatty food aficionados/etc - we'd all better start fighting back, or get fitted for our Mao jackets.

http://7valleys.franbest.com/
wait minute

Fishers, IN

#218 Sep 15, 2009
smoking is bad...wonder y they ever invented it

Since: Sep 09

Fishers, IN

#219 Sep 15, 2009
yeah smoking is very bad
mazed

Campbellsville, KY

#220 Oct 4, 2009
SAY WHAT wrote:
<quoted text>
But were the warning labels any different.
This URL leads to a page showing how much more seriously the rest of the world takes warning labels.

http://www.tobaccolabels.ca/labelima
mazed

Campbellsville, KY

#221 Oct 4, 2009
SAY WHAT wrote:
<quoted text>
But were the warning labels any different.
There are, to my knowledge, two main reasons why society--through laws and through community efforts--tries to prevent children from smoking. Each is also a reason the tobacco industry targets children.

One reason is lack of reason. That is, during developmental stages the capacity for sound judgment is often either not developed or, as in adolescence, overwhelmed by extreme social and hormonal changes. This leaves them particularly vulnerable to false arguments and slick marketing techniques.

The second reason is physiological vulnerability to the addictive nature of nicotine--especially nicotine in conjunction with other chemicals added or bred into tobacco specifically to boost that effect.

There is ample evidence that the industry has targeted children, and that they recognize the futility of trying to maintain the number of customers needed without addicting children.

Of course, there are those in this forum who refuse to acknowledge that. Here is how your masters have behaved regarding this:

[QUOTE who="James Morgan
Former president & CEO of Philip Morris"]<quoted text>
"We did not look at the underage market even though I am holding a document in my hand that says we did."[/QUOTE]
(Videotaped testimony in the Minnesota lawsuit.)

Addiction makes the presence of warnings on the labels irrelevant to those already smoking, and the two vulnerabilities cited above make those warnings irrelevant to the main source of recruitment.
mazed

Campbellsville, KY

#222 Oct 4, 2009
Well, that bit of code didn't work.
mazed

Campbellsville, KY

#223 Oct 4, 2009
Let's try it this way:
James Morgan wrote:
yeah smoking is very bad
"We did not look at the underage market even though I am holding a document in my hand that says we did."
(Former president & CEO of Philip Morris, from videotaped testimony in the Minnesota lawsuit.)
mazed

Campbellsville, KY

#224 Oct 4, 2009
I give up.

Point is, they lied and they continued lying even when the lies were so blatantly exposed. There was no reason not to, since slavering, bootlicking addicts would gobble up any excuse for believing it was okay to continue feeding the monkey and adolescents would eat it up as evidence of an adult conspiracy they were clever (and adult) enough to debunk.
KA(ntinuing)--CHIINGG!
Time to quit

AOL

#225 Oct 4, 2009
Tis wrote:
I got this from a Illinois newspaper, but it fits a lot of states. My advice though is do it, and keep doing, every time you have a chance. Fill your car, call all your friends. Tell strangers you see that smoke. DO IT NOW.
The governor & our big politians. They are out for themselves. Have any of you smoking ban advocates figured it out yet? It isn't about your health, is about who is paying to get a bill passed.
As I said several times, I'm not a smoker and I've been dead set against any ban.
I have my doubts this will be around long before it's edited out, but go to any major store in your area and fill those carts and then leave it sit and walk out. Leave a note voicing your opinion about the bans. I bet it isn't long before they back off any ban since it would affect the revenue.
Do it now because soon government will ban transfat which is worse for you than smoking, or finally put an end to gun ownership. Or it won't be long before you have to weigh in before getting served a hit fat meal.
Copy this and email it to your friends. It's time to get involved and stop government control.
Talk about being a MORON. Ya think they might videotape you when you are filling that cart? Ya think at all? What do you actually think that will accomplish, besides you going home laughing yourself silly because you left a shopping cart full of groceries in the middle of the store. Do you think all of the employees will write and tell their lawmakers that there is some idiot out there who fills up shopping carts to protest the ban?
mazed

Campbellsville, KY

#226 Oct 5, 2009
Somewhere I ran into the idea of making reservations for a group of people, showing up, and leaving after explaining to the manager that the level of SHS was unacceptable.

It seems a likely way to get proprietors to enforce bans.

Helps to have a backup plan for the evening, and a good time if the smoking IS under control.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 11
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

McComb Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
New Gym Nov 16 Heather 1
Lake Walthall murder in the 1980's (Aug '11) Sep '17 Interested 43
Deanna Allen Roberts sis adultry Aug '17 smh-n-lmao 1
Felon: Paul Hawley Aug '17 RustyDykesJr 1
News Jamie Lynn Spears blazes own trail (May '06) Feb '17 Showers save lives 1,150
Justyna Jordan (Feb '17) Feb '17 Secx2 1
News Veteran Supreme Court Justice Randolph challeng... (Oct '12) Jan '17 He is a POS 4

McComb Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

McComb Mortgages