Judge orders tobacco companies to admit deception, page 1


Pages: <<  1    2    3  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 1 times


reply posted on 27-11-2012 @ 09:37 PM by newcovenant
reply to post by Daedal


I don't think it will change much of anything now but still good that they do at least admit guilt. People who get duped into smoking and then get hooked are warned through ads and negative ads but nothing compares to the strength of persuasion when both or one of their parents smoked. No amount of negative ads or people living in iron lungs are going to stop that. Years ago cigarette companies got scientists to go along with their science that cigarettes were harmless. People say that is where we are with climatology now. When they apologize and accept guilt down the road it will be too late. Its already too late. Same with cigarettes. Too late for some who did not have all the information until it was too late.


reply posted on 27-11-2012 @ 09:53 PM by JohnPhoenix
reply to post by Daedal


That's all they get.. a slap on the wrist for killing people? That's Insane.

To those who don't think it's been proven smoking kills your deluded. Smoke is in itself a carcinogen, a cancer causing agent. This has been proven and it's been proven that long term exposure to carcinogens - gives you cancer and there fore kills you.

I smoked for 22 years then switch to the better tasting non harmful electronic cigarette two years ago. It was my life saver because nothing else I tried could get me to quit smoking. I still get my nicotine in a harmless form and still get to blow out big clouds of thick white vapor that resembles smoke. It's fun, high tech, trendy and can save your life. If you can't quit any other way, I urge you to check them out.


reply posted on 27-11-2012 @ 09:57 PM by deessell
Originally posted by JohnPhoenix
reply to post by Daedal


That's all they get.. a slap on the wrist for killing people? That's Insane.

To those who don't think it's been proven smoking kills your deluded. Smoke is in itself a carcinogen, a cancer causing agent. This has been proven and it's been proven that long term exposure to carcinogens - gives you cancer and there fore kills you.

I smoked for 22 years then switch to the better tasting non harmful electronic cigarette two years ago. It was my life saver because nothing else I tried could get me to quit smoking. I still get my nicotine in a harmless form and still get to blow out big clouds of thick white vapor that resembles smoke. It's fun, high tech, trendy and can save your life. If you can't quit any other way, I urge you to check them out.


So, John you smoked for 22 years? Did you die, no? You are living proof that smoking does not kill -- you smoked for 22 years and did not die. Are you unusual, no? Many people smoke all their lives and do not die, therefore we can conclude that smoking does not kill. If it did, then you would be dead.



reply posted on 27-11-2012 @ 10:17 PM by deessell
Originally posted by BlueAjah
Tobacco absolutely DOES KILL.

It killed my husband. He was a smoker for many years. He tried to quit and was never able to. The products are designed to be addictive, making it very hard to stop.

There is a special box right on death certificates to be checked when the death is cause by tobacco. That is how deadly it is - it has its very own checkbox on death certificates. There is another checkbox for cancer. If something is so deadly that it has earned its very own checkbox on death certificates as a contributing cause of death, then it is not something that anyone should be doing voluntarily.

And yes, that checkbox was checked on my husband's.

Tobacco companies are murderers. They are greedy and evil.

Still doubt it? Check out the facts: www.thetruth.com...


You are understandably too close to fully comprehend the situation. Those boxes on death certificates are checked when the person has admitted to smoking at some point in their lives. If they have, then their death is recorded as a smoking related illness. This directive comes from the guidelines supplied by the American Cancer Society. This does not imply that it is a smoking related death, only that the deceased smoked at some point in their life. Do you see the problem here?

I am obviously not privy to your husband's medical records however, I am sure that there are other factors that have not been taken into consideration.


The willingness of the medical profession to blindly observe "guidelines", issued by the Cancer Society generates a continuous stream of death certificates, validating the official line that cigarette smoking causes everything from heart disease to uterine cancer; yet, there is no shred of scientific evidence to validate any of the certificates; they are based on nothing more than official instructions to put down smoking as the cause of death!


www.lcolby.com...

First they came for the smokers...


reply posted on 27-11-2012 @ 10:29 PM by jiggerj
Originally posted by BlueAjah
Tobacco absolutely DOES KILL.

It killed my husband. He was a smoker for many years. He tried to quit and was never able to. The products are designed to be addictive, making it very hard to stop.

There is a special box right on death certificates to be checked when the death is cause by tobacco. That is how deadly it is - it has its very own checkbox on death certificates. There is another checkbox for cancer. If something is so deadly that it has earned its very own checkbox on death certificates as a contributing cause of death, then it is not something that anyone should be doing voluntarily.

And yes, that checkbox was checked on my husband's.

Tobacco companies are murderers. They are greedy and evil.

Still doubt it? Check out the facts: www.thetruth.com...


Sorry for your loss, Blue. I lost a sister and my brother to cancer. I believe this allows me to say this:

These people smoked anywhere from 1 to three packs a day. That's every day for over forty years. One pack a day times 40 years equals 292,000 cigarettes. Do you think people would be unharmed if they ate 292,000 cupcakes, or drank 292,000 shots of whiskey?

The awful truth is that it's not the substance, but the addictive personality. If my sister and brother didn't smoke, they would have found something else to be addicted to.

Same with me. Without smoking, gambling, or caffeine I would have found this life to be intolerably boring. Probably would have turned to illegal drugs, greasy foods, and lots of dangerous ESS - E - EX!


reply posted on 27-11-2012 @ 10:33 PM by BlueAjah
reply to post by deessell


No. The specific cause was directly caused by tobacco use, according to the coroner. It was the tobacco use that directly caused the condition that resulted in his death - at a very young age. He would not have had the condition if he had not smoked.

I don't mind talking about this. I would never refuse the chance to spread the truth and inform others. Some people I know personally have quit, or are trying to quit, as a direct result of knowing what it did to my husband. If knowing the truth can save even one person, then it is worth speaking out.


reply posted on 27-11-2012 @ 10:41 PM by BlueAjah
reply to post by jiggerj


I'm sorry for the losses in your family.

It is true that many addictions can be dangerous.

The problem with tobacco is that the tobacco companies intentionally put substances in their product to make it more addictive. They WANT people to get hooked. This is why they targeted young people in their ads, back when they were allowed to do so. Get them hooked when they are young and vulnerable - and have customers for life. (as long as their life lasts, that is). There is a reason why it is so very hard for people to quit smoking. Tobacco companies intentionally use nicotine to make it addictive. What other purpose would they have for putting such things in tobacco? The plant itself would likely not be nearly as deadly if tobacco companies did not add things.

Yes, it is also hard for an alcoholic to stop drinking, but the fact is that most people can drink and not get hooked on drinking to the point of alcoholism. The same with caffeine.


reply posted on 27-11-2012 @ 10:48 PM by deessell
Originally posted by BlueAjah
reply to post by jiggerj


I'm sorry for the losses in your family.

It is true that many addictions can be dangerous.

The problem with tobacco is that the tobacco companies intentionally put substances in their product to make it more addictive. They WANT people to get hooked. This is why they targeted young people in their ads, back when they were allowed to do so. Get them hooked when they are young and vulnerable - and have customers for life. (as long as their life lasts, that is). There is a reason why it is so very hard for people to quit smoking. Tobacco companies intentionally use nicotine to make it addictive. What other purpose would they have for putting such things in tobacco? The plant itself would likely not be nearly as deadly if tobacco companies did not add things.

Yes, it is also hard for an alcoholic to stop drinking, but the fact is that most people can drink and not get hooked on drinking to the point of alcoholism. The same with caffeine.


Blue, if you were to remove the words tobacco companies and nicotine and replaced them with pharmaceutical companies and medication, it would reveal that you are repeating the meme that is enabling social engineering.

As I wrote earlier, this is part of the war between the tobacco industry and the pharmaceutical industry. This is BIG!
Pages: <<  1    2    3  >>    ^^TOP^^