Now on ScienceBlogs: Rhodes Secretary: Wall Street Megabonuses Draining Our Young Talent
Mad rantings about politics, evolution, and microbiology
Mad rantings about politics, evolution, and microbiology. Comment policy: say what you want, but back it up with an email address. I don't like anonymous trolls.
These links do not indicate support of this blog's statements by these groups
« Some Friday Links | Main | The Question Raised by the Defense of George Will: What's the Business Model? »
Category: Public Health • WhatEVAH!
Posted on: March 14, 2009 5:39 PM, by Mike
Isn't this kinda missing the point? Here's an ad I saw in the Weekly Dig:
Yes, an organic cigarette would probably be less harmful than one...laced with dioxin. But it's still a cigarette. It's not good for you. In fact, it's bad for you.
I think the label organic has jumped the shark....
Find more posts in: 
Medicine & Health
Share this: Facebook Twitter Stumbleupon Reddit Email + More
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/102000
Neurophilosophy 11.19.2009
The Island of Doubt 11.20.2009
Greg Laden's Blog 11.20.2009
The World's Fair 11.19.2009
Laelaps 11.20.2009
Comments
These are actually pretty good cigarettes. For cigarettes.
But of course, you shouldn't smoke.
Posted by: Greg Laden | March 14, 2009 6:10 PM
Environmental health is another good reason to choose organic
Posted by: Brad Pitcher | March 14, 2009 6:14 PM
Actually, the nicest thing about them is that they were much easier to quit than marlboro or camel.
I'm guessing the lack of extra additives. but that's purely anecdotal...
Posted by: peter | March 14, 2009 6:16 PM
Fair enough point on cigs and the overreaching on the organic label. But, there is always a but (butt), I have noticed that most cigarettes I get downwind of cause my sinuses to freak out. These and a few clove bases ones don't.
A friend, who knows something about such things, claims the difference is the crap; glycerin, used to slow and even out burning; nitrates, used to keep cigs burning even when not smoked; etc.
I don't know but the effect on my sinuses is consistent even when I'm unaware of which cigs are being smoked. I really don't know or care how these addicts chose to poison themselves but I do object to being backed up with slime.
Posted by: Art | March 14, 2009 7:32 PM
They've been advertising these in the Baltimore Shitty Paper for years. They're not only organic, but also natural--and anything natural is good for you, isn't it?
Posted by: mark | March 15, 2009 8:40 AM
C'mon, you're a scientist. Can you really not wrap your mind around words having more than one meaning? Or advertisers lying through implication?
Posted by: The Ridger | March 15, 2009 10:15 AM
These things have irked me forever -- the very embodiment of hipster-oriented greenwashing, with a heavy dose of Cherohonkee thrown in. Whoop-de-doo, organic cigarettes... don't forget, Penn and Teller pointed out the existence of "All Natural Ricin" in one of their books. (I wonder if the irony would be lost on them...)
Posted by: Brian X | March 15, 2009 6:07 PM
I agree with Brad. There are other reasons to support "organic" agriculture. It reminds me of the debate about hormones in dairy production focusing on whether the milk itself is healthy and not on the long term side effects of production. I think organic tobacco is a great idea!
Posted by: Oran | March 16, 2009 2:08 PM
I sat on a plane next to a woman who smoked these, and then lectured me for an hour about why I shouldn't drink orange juice because of the chemicals used to grow the oranges. [groan]
Posted by: Ryan | March 17, 2009 8:53 AM
What Peter said is very true. It's much easier to quit smoking these than Marlboros or Camels or what have you brands which are chemically treated evidently to make them extra addictive. So it's a reasonable approach to step down to Organic American Spirit and then quit those. I also found it helpful to smoke pot instead when I craved a cigarette. Much healthier than tobacco.
Posted by: Mahakal | March 19, 2009 12:09 AM
göğüs büyütücü krem
Posted by: göğüs büyütücü krem | March 19, 2009 7:19 AM
erotik shop
Posted by: erotik shop | March 19, 2009 7:22 AM
porno dvd
Posted by: porno dvd | March 19, 2009 7:24 AM
You guys have it all wrong. Organically grown tobacco is much safer than commercial tobacco. US Surgeon General C Everett Koop stated on national television in 1990 that tobacco radiation is probably responsible for 90% of tobacco-related cancer. Radiation comes from commercial tobacco because it is grown with radioactive fertilizers that leave Polonium 210 and Lead 210 concentrated in the tobacco. This is the major cause of cancer. Organic tobacco lacks these radioactive carcinogens, (yes it contains dozens of other carcinogens so it is not safe) but those dozens of other carcinogens only cause 10% of tobacco's cancerous effects.
Posted by: Tim | March 23, 2009 11:18 AM
I don't understand why you'd pan these so cynically.
Absolutely, they should be (and ARE) legally required to make it clear that these are still bad for you in all of their advertising.
But even if the health harm is equally bad (and possibly it isn't? dunno; I don't smoke anyway), if the tobacco is organic, that has various positive ramifications for the entire growing process -- fewer nasty chemicals in the runoff water, fewer nasty chemicals used in processing, and so on. All of that is a good thing for us NON-smokers.
And if there can be something shown about them being not quite as bad for your health, well, good. You can't just say "stop smoking" and ignore all other info... that smacks of abstinence-only sex ed kind of logic. If people switch and they're healthier (vs. trying to quit, failing, and being no better off than before), it's a net win.
Posted by: Rob W | March 23, 2009 8:24 PM
I think it went over the shark in about 1995.
For what it's worth, 'American Spirit' is not the only or the first 'organic' tobacco. (Although I've not previously seen 'organic' tobacco in a machine-rolled cigarette - in my experience it has always been pipe tobacco or roll-your-own tobacco.) I've been seeing 'organic' tobacco since sometime in the late 1990s. (This in Salt Lake City, no less.) Speaking of roll-your-owns, I suspect (but have no data) that switching to roll-your-owns would reduce health risks far more than any changes to the sort of tobacco. Roll-your-owns take time to roll, and require both hands (for most people anyway). (Obviously actually quitting is best of all.)
Also - although I think the 'organic' label has mostly failed in its goals (in the sense that 'organic' products are only marginally more likely to be environmentally more sound, and no more likely to be healthy), one of its goals was the health of the people who produced the good - not just the health of the people using it. And when it comes to the production of tobacco, there is certainly a great deal of room for improvement in that area, although I've no idea whether 'organic' tobacco achieves any of those improvements.
Posted by: llewelly | March 23, 2009 10:45 PM
thanks for you
Posted by: şişme bebek | March 25, 2009 2:35 PM
thanks for all
Posted by: sex shop | March 27, 2009 6:52 AM
ALL tobacco plants in order to protect themselves from small predators (bugs) employ at least two major "natural" chemical defenses. These are nicotine and polonium. ALL healthily grown tobacco plants will have these two substances in abundance. The tobacco which "Natural American Spirits" contain actually have much MORE nicotine AND polonium per breath than do most other cigarettes brands. Polonium is really NOT an additive that is added or allowed to be left with the tobacco but rather it is simply a substance contained within the nicotine leaf (plant) itself.
Posted by: Devere | May 5, 2009 9:02 PM
Mike wrote:
Dioxin is organic! So being organic does NOT mean no dioxins!
Posted by: Tobias Schmidbauer | May 20, 2009 8:59 AM
meksika biber hapı
Posted by: biber hapı | August 27, 2009 4:19 AM
biber hapi
Posted by: biber hapi | September 8, 2009 9:18 AM
Don't blow off the polonium thing...just because it naturally occurs on tobacco leaves doesn't exonerate the use of phosphate fertilizers which increase the amount by a lot. Not using these fertilizers means a lot less radiation for smokers.
Posted by: Dave | September 9, 2009 9:33 AM
penis büyütücü
Posted by: penis büyütücü | September 12, 2009 4:31 AM
seks shop
Posted by: seks shop | September 12, 2009 4:35 AM
Why would so many non-smokers bother to weigh in on something that has little if any effect on them? Boredom? Pharmaceuticals have marketed products for years off-label. Viagra for women, fantasy stuff likely.
What on earth would cigarette companies do to increase market share and profit, anything they can get away with. A natural or organic cigarette has to be better than commercial brands. I will try anything but commercially marketed products given a choice..
Posted by: Kurt Battles | September 14, 2009 10:04 PM
vakum pompası
Posted by: vakum pompası | November 2, 2009 10:59 AM