'Tobacco Lollipops' (3:44) and the Republican (NC) response from the US Senate

[underpants]

Run time: 03:45 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Js1cTwJujcw   Posted on YouTube: May 27, 2009 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: June 06, 2009 By DU Member: underpants Views on DU: 497

 
http://rawstory.com/rawreplay/?p=3489).In
RJ Reynolds is test marketing new smokeless tobacco products in Ohio, Oregon and Indiana that are drawing fire from critics. The product comes in a dissolvable form that resembles candy. The product comes in the form of minty tobacco strips that resemble breath strips and dissolvable tablets that look and taste like candy. Just one dissolvable tablet could deliver 300% more nicotine than a single cigarette, reported CNN’s Carol Costello.

This video is from CNN’s American Morning, broadcast May 27, 2009.


Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC) attacks CNN for comparing mint-flavored dissolvable tobacco to candy
5:10
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9BJgous2Ig

Burr Defends Mint-Flavored Suckable ‘Tobacco Lollipops,’ Claims They’re Not Being Marketed To Children
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/06/05/burr-tobacco-candy/

On the Senate floor yesterday, Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC) came to the tobacco company’s defense, claiming that it wasn’t trying to deceive anyone; it’s CNN’s fault for labeling Camel Orbs as candy. Burr charged that CNN “mischaracterized the product” because “it’s not candy flavored”:

BURR: But when CNN did their story. Take a guess on the angle that they took. They labeled it as candy. Candy! Even though it’s not candy flavored. They said it was candy. … No, they said it was candy. That’s where they labeled it. … They portrayed Reynolds America as being deceptive and luring children. No candy. It’s not going in the candy section. It’s in the tobacco section where smokeless and stick products is.

While Burr might claim that the Orbs aren’t “candy-flavored,” the fact is that they come in “mint and cinnamon flavors” known as “fresh” and “mellow.” Additionally, the tobacco industry has a well-documented history of using flavored tobacco to market their products to children:

Documents from the tobacco industry also contradict these claims. A report from R.J. Reynolds in 1985 stated: “Sweetness can impart a different delivery taste dimension, which younger adult smokers may be receptive to, as evidenced by their taste wants in other product areas.” A Brown & Williamson report from 1972 suggested consideration of developing cola-flavored and apple-flavored cigarettes. The report also suggested a sweet-flavored cigarette and stated: “It’s a well-known fact that teenagers like sweet products. Honey might be considered.” If flavored products were appealing to youth then, what has changed to make them less appealing to youth now?

[tomm2thumbs]

1. how is it different than nicotine gum - is it regulated differently?

seems to me they aren't quite marketing it as a way of quitting, but as a way of continuing an addiction to nicotine. While smokeless may be better than smoke for health, it might be they market it in a way that makes viagra ads blush - we all know how they marketed that product.

Will nicotine lube be far behind?

[underpants]

2. This isn't even close to nicotine gum

this is a tobacco/nicotine usage method basically the same as cigarettes only without the smoke and WITH kid-friendly flavoring

[mmonk]

3. Or that tobacco without flavoring doesn't taste good to taste buds.