"Low Tar" Cigarette Claim Up In Smoke

(CBS)  A government agency did a sharp about face Tuesday, and admitted the test it used to show those cigarettes are low in tar is meaningless. The FTC had endorsed the test for four decades, and during that time, the number of Americans smoking low-tar cigarettes grew from about one and 500,000 to more than 49 million. Now, as CBS News transportation and consumer safety correspondent Nancy Cordes reports, it looks like the low-tar claim has gone up in smoke.

---

Ever since the 1960s, cigarette makers have tried to seduce smokers worried about their health with products labeled "light," "mild" or "low-tar." They've been basing such claims on mechanical tests that measure tar and nicotine levels.

Today, 42 years after it endorsed those tests, the federal government essentially called them … bogus.

It said the tests "do not provide meaningful information on the amounts of tar and nicotine smokers receive from cigarettes." It's a conclusion scientists reached seven years ago when they found the tests were easily and frequently manipulated.

Now the Federal Trade Commission wants tobacco companies to remove its stamp of approval for those tests from their ads and packaging.

The proposal could open the door for the FTC to sue companies that call their products "light" or "low tar," implying they're somehow safer, Cordes reports.

Matt Myers with the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids says studies show more than half of all smokers still mistakenly believe that switching to cigarettes with slogans like "light and luscious," will reduce their risk of getting sick.

"The FTC hasn't banned the term 'light' and 'low tar.' But it has put tobacco companies on notice. If they use those terms or the tar and nicotine numbers they risk lawsuit by the federal government," Myers said.

There is a bill working its way through Congress that would ban the terms "light" and "low-tar" outright. We asked the tobacco companies what they thought about this new proposal.

Their response? "We're studying it."

[joeybergas]

mysticstone...... this article was talking about smokers.....if it was talking about diabetics or fat people i would have addressed them....i have a problem with any and all self destructive behavior... and all these idiots that say you have to die of something...go watch somebody die of lung cancer.....wanna ban etoh? fine with me....ban all that ***.... i dont care... but my MAIN concern in all honesty is other people having to pay for your self destructive behavior.... if i didnt have to pay for it then i wouldnt care that you smoked.....honestly i rarely have a problem avoiding smokers, even in restaurants... i dont think that is the issue... purely the fact that they DO BECOME A BURDEN on the society..which is already burdened enough..

[mysticstone]

Posted by joeybergas: "you should not be allowed to be stupid......obviously the country was founded on the idea of freedom......obviously freedom only goes so far when people begin to believe they are free to be worthless.... then....everyone else has to pay for them to live...."

Well with thinking, we should ban alcohol, and high fat foods, high caloric foods, high sugar content foods, high sodium foods. All of these lead to some sort of ailment or diease that the taxpayers eventual have to pay for. So all the Obese(whether highly or slightly), over weight people, people who are diabetic you fall into the same category as smokers, whether you smoke or not according to joeybergas-ology.

[o2brich]

Man, I''m just glad they''re not coming after fat people like they been hounding smokers.

[edisenberg-2009]

I thought the reporter missed the real point to the story. According to her report, "a conclusion scientists reached seven years ago when they found the tests were easily and frequently manipulated." The obvious question is, why did it take 7 years for the government to do something?

[edisenberg-2009]

I thought the reporter missed the real point to the story. According to her report, "a conclusion scientists reached seven years ago when they found the tests were easily and frequently manipulated." The obvious question is, why did it take 7 years for the government to do something?

[choiceshaveconsequences]

You all should worry more about what comes out of your mouths than what goes in it.
Posted by piercetheval
------------
Are you referring to second hand smoke?

[barbaram99]

I will say this,smokers are a small part of it. The bad air is from carbon dioxide,yep. I was out doing things that Vince asked when He was in hospital,it was so bad I was coughing so bad krap out the tail pipes. It gets so bloody thick. Bangor ME did pass the no smoking in car when kids are in there. They were the first to do so. Also in Maine, Maine care makes smokers pay some of their bills,StepMum smokes and so she was telling me the change. I an a Maniner in Seattle and mum don''t have computer. We don''t allow smoking in our apt. Why people smoke today with all the info out there and the price only they know. I did talk to uncle when I was young about his smoking. He said *Barbara,Uncle don''t want ye to smoke.* I was under 9. I ''member cig ads on TV. Years ago a 3 year old grabbed a ceger out of the ash tray. That boy was fast and sick.

[rushman71]

but hey idiot smokers, u need to remember that once your smoking finally begins to kill you, and you get hospitalized over and over and over and over..eventually taxpayers are paying your medical bills and you are becoming a burden on the country....and it should be every americans goal to not be a burden to society.... the time for accepting mediocrity in this counttry must stop.... you should not be allowed to be stupid......obviously the country was founded on the idea of freedom......obviously freedom only goes so far when people begin to believe they are free to be worthless.... then....everyone else has to pay for them to live....
Posted by joeybergas

Words spoken by a true idiot. Concentrating on a smoke free environment? Look at the health nazis out in California. They are trying to put out the cigarettes, and now they got smoke billowing everywhere from fires. Is that any healthier? I don''t think so. Your going to die anyway, so shut up and live life to the fullest.

[starleo146]

Remember the neocons have outright said one of their goals is to get the people of the US to view the government as ineffective and a waste of money, and they have taken steps to ensure that the government works as poorly as possible. Of course their agenda is that when they suggest eliminating government oversight of business, people will welcome them as liberators and heroes. Lets show them otherwise and insist the government regulatory structure be rebuilt, staffed with top-notch people, and made an advocate for the people and a formidable adversary for big business.

Posted by andor3 at 03:48 AM : Jul 09, 2008
+ report abu

yea I second that and fast before Bush and friends with his corporations do us all in.

[starleo146]

When I last smoked 15 years ago. I smoked low tar
cigs as I believed they had less tar. Two years after I quit I had a spontaneous pneumo thorax, which is a
collapsed lung and almost died. I believe if I never
smoked that would not have happened. My lungs are clean now and luckily I never developed cancer.

Posted by laura552 at 02:02 AM : Jul 09, 2008

In 1987 I quit smoking and in1992 I developed lung cancer, my oncologist said it takes 15 yrs to rid your lungs of nicotine of a long term smoker, and I was lucky I survived lung cancer, and have never put a cigarette back in mouth and never will again. These cigarette companies know what they are doing in low tar and all these adds what they are doing is putting more addictive ingredients in to get you, and they make money off killing you slowly.