FDA Takes Issue With 'Onserts'

FDA Takes Issue With 'Onserts'

There are 4 comments on the CSP story from Jun 21, 2010, titled FDA Takes Issue With 'Onserts'. In it, CSP reports that:

As new U.S. Food & Drug Administration regulations kick in this week, the FDA is already questioning one supplier's tactics after redesigning its packaging.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at CSP.

jon

Eatontown, NJ

#1 Jun 21, 2010
what a bunch of bull. i recieved that onset and thought exactly what it said. ultra lights will be in a silver pack. totally the same as before when they were called ultra lights.
amused

Nashville, TN

#3 Jun 22, 2010
jon wrote:
what a bunch of bull. i recieved that onset and thought exactly what it said. ultra lights will be in a silver pack. totally the same as before when they were called ultra lights.
So, what is it that is a "bunch of bull"? Your response is precisely what the FDA is saying would be the predicted--and regulation-circumnavigating--r esponse.

Providing the onserts essentially extends the FORBIDDEN-AS-FALSE claims made for the cigarettes inside.
James Walker

Kent, WA

#4 Jul 23, 2010
What's the big deal PM stopped marking there cigarettes as light and complied, the cigarettes are the same ones which they told their customers. They have warning labels that light doesn't mean a safer cigarette on the tape you rip. If they wanted to ban cigarettes as a product or not allow companies to distinguish products then they should have made a law about that. As long as the products are distinguishable people who don't know what each pack is would just buy a couple packs and figure it out. If you made them hard to distinguish people will just get mad at store clerks when they get a different style of cigs.
Hugh Jass

Nashville, TN

#5 Aug 19, 2010
Here is a quote from a Philip Morris International document relating to another use of "onserts" they planned years ago.(BATES #: 2023268329/8337)

Please note the assurance that, despite the fact that only ~5% of smokers are expected to actually support the industry, addiction will ensure that nearly all will act as if they support the industry.

"There are some 50 million smokers today in the U .S . I realize that research tells us that the majority of smokers wished they did not smoke and are, therefore, unlikely to be of much help to the industry . There are probably 5% or so of smokers who are ready to stand up for their habit and this would give us a body of some 2 .5 million people . This is a large block of voters, even in a country as large as the U .S .

'On taxation I believe that a greater proportion of our smokers would side with the industry . My guess is that a large number of our smokers must take the view that, though they may try to quit, they will probably not be successful . Having faced up to the fact that they will probably continue to smoke, I cannot believe that they will willingly accept higher taxes on cigarettes . On the tax issue, therefore, we can probably mobilize a fairly large proportion of the 50 million smokers in the U .S . and this is a formidable number of voters .

"Other groups such as the National Rifle Association have been highly successful at protecting a seemingly impossible cause . They have found a way to motivate and use their members and the politicians have responded .

"It seems to me that homosexuals have made enormous progress in changing their image in this country in~the last couple of decades . A few years back they were considered damaging, bad and immoral, but today they have become acceptable members of society . There must be a considerable body of social science in existence which could telll us how a group such as the homosexual movement has been able to~chang,e its public image so dramatically . We should research this material and perhaps learn from it .

"One of the most obvious areas where we could use our large smoker base in on the taxation issue ; as I said earlier, I firmly believe many smokers would support us here . We could, for example, use pack inserts prior to a tax change . We would advise smokers of the likelihood of a tax increase, point out the unfairness of the action contemplated and request that they write to their elected representatives in government protesting the increase . Similar action could be taken on proposed legislation to restrict public smoking or smoking in the workplace."

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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.

Altria Group Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News California raises smoking age to 21, tightens v... (May '16) Feb '17 Say What 56
News Supreme Court: Altria can be sued for 'light' c... (Dec '08) Feb '17 Martin garey 7
News EU Supports Joint Operation of Illicit Cigarett... Dec '16 Well 2
News Philip Morris seen getting serious about Altria... Dec '16 Mugs mahone 1
News Is this Large Market Cap Stock target price rea... Dec '16 Mugs mahone 1
Market sentiment (Feb '14) Oct '16 Mugs mahone 7
News Altria Group: An Attractive Investment (Apr '14) Jul '16 Mugs mahone 2
More from around the web