FDA moves to lower nicotine in cigarettes
Source: NBC
The Food and Drug Administration plans to try to lower the amount of nicotine in cigarettes to make them less addictive an unprecedented move by the agency.
FDA Commissioner Dr. Scott Gottlieb said Thursday the agency would propose the rule, opening a long bureaucratic process.
Its the boldest move yet against cigarette makers by the FDA, which only got permission to regulate tobacco products in 2009.
As part of our comprehensive plan on tobacco and nicotine regulation announced last summer, were issuing an advance notice of proposed rulemaking to explore a product standard to lower nicotine in cigarettes to minimally or non-addictive levels, Gottlieb said in a statement.
Read more: https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/fda-moves-lower-nicotine-cigarettes-n856876
Press Announcement:
Despite years of aggressive efforts to tackle the leading cause of preventable disease and death in the United States, tobacco use largely cigarette smoking still kills more than 480,000 Americans every single year. Tobacco use also costs nearly $300 billion a year in direct health care and lost productivity. In fact, cigarettes are the only legal consumer product that, when used as intended, will kill half of all long-term users. Given their combination of toxicity, addictiveness, prevalence and effect on non-users, its clear that to maximize the possible public health benefits of our regulation, we must focus our efforts on the death and disease caused by addiction to combustible cigarettes.
The ANPRM being issued today provides a wide-ranging review of the current scientific understanding about the role nicotine plays in creating or sustaining addiction to cigarettes and seeks comments on key areas, as well as additional research and data for public review, as we continue our consideration of developing a nicotine product standard. Were interested in public input on critical questions such as: what potential maximum nicotine level would be appropriate for the protection of public health? Should a product standard be implemented all at once or gradually? What unintended consequences such as the potential for illicit trade or for addicted smokers to compensate for lower nicotine by smoking more might occur as a result? As we explore this novel approach to reducing the death and disease from combustible cigarettes, its critical that our policies reflect the latest science and is informed by the input we receive from our meetings with stakeholders, comments to the open public docket and future opportunities for comment.
We believe the public health benefits and the potential to save millions of lives, both in the near and long term, support this effort. Notably, new estimates included in the ANPRM that are being published in the New England Journal of Medicine evaluate one possible policy scenario for a nicotine product standard. If this scenario were implemented, this analysis suggests that approximately 5 million additional adult smokers could quit smoking within one year of implementation. And with this scenario, an even greater impact could be felt over time: by the year 2100, the analysis estimates that more than 33 million people mostly youth and young adults would have avoided becoming regular smokers. And smoking rates could drop from the current 15 percent to as low as 1.4 percent. All told, this framework could result in more than 8 million fewer tobacco-caused deaths through the end of the century an undeniable public health benefit.
...
https://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm601039.htm
groundloop
(11,513 posts)TexasBushwhacker
(20,139 posts)So I doubt they will get any cooperation from Big Tobacco.
Bayard
(22,005 posts)Five years in quality assurance. I started out in the department where the raw tobacco comes in. One of my best buddies was the guy who mixed up the liquid formulas in tanks for different brands. It was Top Secret. I did get out of him that one of the ingredients was chocolate.
When the industry started getting more regulated, I remember one xmas where we were basically held hostage as members of management. They shut the whole factory down over the holidays. Then we were stuck in training. The last day, we were told we could go home early if we wrote letters to our congressman saying cigarettes were not harmful to your health, and all the naysayers were bogus. What can I say? I caved when almost everyone else had left.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)I have no clue what it is and what it does.
Mosby
(16,258 posts)I read as much as 13 percent of the weight. It makes the smoke smoother so the user can inhale more smoke. They also add licorice and vanilla. There are also additives that keep the cig burning, you can see the stuff they spray on the paper by using a blacklight.
Then there is the ammonia, which is added to freebase the nicotine as the cig burns, it's what makes cigs so addictive, liquid and solid nicotine are not nearly as "spikey" in the bloodstream.
TexasBushwhacker
(20,139 posts)they're more appealing to new smokers, generally teenagers. As far as I'm concerned Big Tobacco is no different than a heroin dealer.
jmowreader
(50,528 posts)Its in there, but all tobacco is fermented and ammonia is one of the products created therein. Cigarette makers pull the leaf from the bales and immediately use it, so all the ammonia is still there.
On the other hand, cigar leaf is fermented in a way that drives the ammonia away.
Mosby
(16,258 posts)By the early 1960s, however, Philip Morris had also begun using ammonia to freebase the nicotine in cigarette smoke, creating low-yield (reduced-tar or -nicotine) cigarettes that still had the nicotine kick necessary to keep customers satisfied (i.e., addicted).
We show that Philip Morris discovered the virtues of freebasing while analyzing the impact of the ammoniated recon used in Marlboro cigarettes.
We also show how Marlboros commercial success catalyzed efforts by the rest of the tobacco industry to discover its secret, eventually identified as ammonia technology, and how Philip Morris later exploited the myriad uses of ammonia (e.g., for flavoring and expanding tobacco volume) to defend itself against charges of manipulating the nicotine deliveries of its cigarettes.
This freebased version of Marlboro cigarettes was one of the greatest triumphs in the history of modern drug design and one reason the brand became the worlds most popular cigarette. Yet to this day, Philip Morris denies it has ever deliberately freebased tobacco to boost nicotine yields. The company recalls only the many innocuous uses of ammoniaas a flavorant or binder required for the manufacture of recon, for example. The industry reminds us that ammonia is naturally found in foods, fertilizers, and the very air we breathe.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2424107/
I should have explained better. Should have said the liquid flavoring formulas. There is a canister of flavoring infused into each brand "run" per shift.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)I quit for good 20 years ago. I'd been working up to it for some time, and then the news was announced that Phillip Morris
admitted to increasing the nicotine content of their cigarettes.
Got so mad I quit then and there.
Anger is a good motivator. Now then I see the price of cigs, I am really happy they are not getting my money.
Clarity2
(1,009 posts)in order to get the prerequisite amt of nicotine they crave. Its sort of a gimme to the tobacco companies.
PoindexterOglethorpe
(25,812 posts)The cigarette companies will make a whole lot more money.
azureblue
(2,145 posts)and vaping delivers a whole lot more nicotine...
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)It's also different because it's not on a) on fire and b) mixed with all kinds of other chemicals that synergize it's effect, like the guy says above, ammonia.
I've seen studies of real time observation of blood nicotine levels while people smoked and while people vaped and cigarettes *much* more dramatically raise the level over a short period of time.
That's why people who smoke generally do so every 45-60 mins because when you smoke the spike is massive and it 'holds you' for a good amount of time. With vaping, that doesn't happen, which causes a lot of vapers to just take a couple puffs every 5 minutes or so. That's why the usage pattern is different.
Also ... it's much less harmful if they vape *instead*, entirely. I believe because nicotine's the only active ingredient, if you vape only, and then decide you want to quit, you should have an easier time on a 'patch' or 'lozenges' or whatnot because you're not addicted to the other extra crap in 'analogs' ... believe me there's other addictive chems in real cigs not just nicotine.
Maxheader
(4,370 posts)that started way back...Been home with viral bronchitis over
the last month, been watching a lot of tv. The air channels
that I watch have lots of old black and white shows and
most of the scenes where a group of people are discussing
whatever..everyone has a butt in their mouths, so much
smoke you can barely see the actors...same with old
westerns...I've heard that during ww2 the military made
sure that the troops had plenty to smoke. Just about all
my family and relatives that have passed on, had complications
due to smoking..
jmowreader
(50,528 posts)One of my roommates from training went to Fort Riley for his first assignment. He reports the Army sent all the K rations from 1945 to Riley and still issued them to the troops. There were little packs of for cigarettes in each one. No one he knew was brave enough to smoke them.