E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
WASHINGTON -- A federal judge on Tuesday ordered tobacco companies to publish corrective statements that say they lied about the dangers of smoking and that disclose smoking's health effects, including the death on average of 1,200 people a day.
U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler previously had said she wanted the industry to pay for corrective statements in various types of advertisements. But Tuesday's ruling is the first time she's laid out what the statements will say.
Each corrective ad is to be prefaced by a statement that a federal court has concluded that the defendant tobacco companies "deliberately deceived the American public about the health effects of smoking."
Among the required statements are that smoking kills more people than murder, AIDS, suicide, drugs, car crashes and alcohol combined, and that "secondhand smoke kills over 3,000 Americans a year."
The corrective statements are part of a case the government brought in 1999 under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations. Kessler ruled in that case in 2006 that the nation's largest cigarette makers concealed the dangers of smoking for decades, and said she wanted the industry to pay for "corrective statements" in various types of ads, both broadcast and print. The Justice Department proposed corrective statements, which Kessler used as the basis for some of the ones she ordered Tuesday.
Tobacco companies had urged Kessler to reject the government's proposed industry-financed corrective statements; the companies called them "forced public confessions." They also said the statements were designed to "shame and humiliate" them. They had argued for statements that include the health effects and addictive qualities of smoking.
Kessler wrote that all of the corrective statements are based on specific findings of fact made by the court.
"This court made a number of explicit findings that the tobacco companies perpetuated fraud and deceived the public regarding the addictiveness of cigarettes and nicotine," she said.
A spokesman for Altria Group Inc., owner of the nation's biggest tobacco company, Philip Morris USA, said the company was studying the court's decision and did not provide any further comment. A spokesman for Reynolds American Inc., parent company of No. 2 cigarette maker, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., said the company was reviewing the ruling and considering its next steps.
The statements Kessler chose included five categories: adverse health effects of smoking; addictiveness of smoking and nicotine; lack of significant health benefit from smoking cigarettes marked as "low tar," "light," etc.; manipulation of cigarette design and composition to ensure optimum nicotine delivery; and adverse health effects of exposure to secondhand smoke.
Among the statements within those categories:
- "Smoking kills, on average, 1,200 Americans. Every day."
- "Defendant tobacco companies intentionally designed cigarettes to make them more addictive."
- "When you smoke, the nicotine actually changes the brain — that's why quitting is so hard."
- "All cigarettes cause cancer, lung disease, heart attacks and premature death — lights, low tar, ultra lights and naturals. There is no safe cigarette."
- "Secondhand smoke causes lung cancer and coronary heart disease in adults who do not smoke." "Children exposed to secondhand smoke are at an increased risk for sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), acute respiratory infections, ear problems, severe asthma and reduced lung function."
- "There is no safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke."
Justice Department spokesman Charles Miller said the department was pleased with the order.
Matt Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, called it an important ruling.
"The most critical part of the ruling is that it requires the tobacco companies to state clearly that the court found that they deceived the American public and that they are telling the truth now only because the court is ordering them to do so," Myers said in an interview. "This isn't the last word, but this is a vitally important step because this should resolve exactly what the tobacco companies are required to say."
In July, a federal appeals court rejected efforts by the tobacco companies to overrule Kessler's ruling requiring corrective statements. The companies had argued that a 2009 law that gave the Food and Drug Administration authority over the industry eliminated "any reasonable likelihood" that they would commit future RICO violations.
In her ruling Tuesday, Kessler ordered the tobacco companies and Justice Department to meet beginning next month to address how to implement the corrective statements, including whether they will be put in inserts with cigarette packs and on websites, TV and newspaper ads. Those discussions are to conclude by March.
Related stories:
- Secondhand smoke laws may cut heart attack, study finds
- 1 in 5 smokers lights up while in the hospital
Leave a Comment:
You know, I've yet to hear a murderer, wife/child abusuer/rapist stand in front of a Judge and plead that they would not have committed the crime(s) if they hadn't smoked all those cigarettes. Apparently that line only works for ALCOHOL. Let's take a good hard look at the personal and sociatal costs of this one.
Just asking everyone to be fair about their evils.
I dunnoe Erika. How about thousands of death due to cigarette smoking, billions in health care costs that would not otherwise be needed, lost productitivity at work from when thousands of smokers take "smoke breaks"? What of the emotional cost of family grief when a loved one dies early? How about the thousands of dollars spent on cigarettes that could be spent on food or clothing for folks who cannot afford both, but are addicted to cigarettes? What of the effects and costs of second hand smoke on those who are simply around smokers too much? How about the fires started when people fall asleep while smoking in bed, or when the pigs throw their lit cigarettes out the window of their car?
Is that enough personal and societal cost for you? Do people use acohol as an excuse for things - sure. But that is irrelevant and does not justify the evils that result from the tobacco industry's products
And by the statistics 300,000 Americans per year die from obesity. So why don't we address that on an equal level???? Oh yeah, I know, because it's not "politically correct" right? Their just "weight challenged".
jim pnw - the fact that there are obese people has nothing to do with the lies coming from cigarette makers. Basically cigarette makers unnecessarily lace their product with nicotine in order to make it addictive. Then, over time smokers have a hard, almost impossible time quitting, and as a result die from any number of cigarette related diseases. Yes, there are obese people, but that fact has nothing to do with the lies told by cigarette makers, and has nothing to do with the fact that cigarettes are laced with nicotine in order to make them more addictive. Nicotine has no other value to the cigarette. It is only put there for its ability to make the cigarette more addictive. Then smokers die.
What does this have to do with obesity? Nothing.
Also, you last sentence should read "They're just weight challenged." They're is the proper contraction of they are. Their is a possessive pronoun. Learn how to spell.
while I agree that they lied, they manipulated the make up of their product to increase its addictive qualities, and god knows what else, I cant get around the fact that they have already settled this during the clinton admin with a substantial cash settlement and extortion pricing of an addicted populace`s product. to revisit the issue is double indemnity and if you cant see the danger there I grieve for the country. I find this ruling tantamount to suing the auto makers for a couple thousand per unit sold to promote a global warming agenda.
Why not just have our government stop subsidizing farmers to grow tobacco and let them grow marijuana instead? While we're at it, let's also have our government stop subsidizing Caribbean rum distilleries? If our own government just lowered import taxes and alcohol taxes on those distilleries, they'd be able to sell enough product to support themselves, and our government wouldn't NEED to tax them so heavily to get back the subsidy in the first place.
This is unbelievable. Stupid people want tobacco banned but marijuana legalized. That can also cause cancer. All we need is a lot more dope heads driving around. This country is getting more fuc*ed up every day. Tax the hell out of alcohol and double the fines for DUI's.
There's no valid research to show that marijuana causes cancer. It's illegal to do research to see if marijuana causes cancer.
Go figure.
(And no, I don't smoke either cigarettes or marijuana.)
all tobacco companys should just close the doors. lets see how that hits the tax base. plus unemployment.
They should close. Should have long ago. Then the resources of cigarette making could be put to other (and better) uses. The fields used for tobacco could grow FOOD. The factories used for cigarette making could be used for manufacturing different products. Maybe even products that don't CAUSE HARM to society. Cigarette manufacturing does not occur in a vacuum. If there were no cigarettes, then other TAXABLE activities would occur in their place. I believe you have omitted this very important point.
Yeah, the bottom line should always come before human lives.
By tobacco companies admitting that they lied is not going to stop people from smoking.How about he make the U.S. government divulge how much tax dollars were used to subsidize tobacco farmers? I'm a smoker by the way and could care less one way or the other.
When are we going to order Obama to admit that he has lied, actually numerous times. Actually, every time he opens his mouth.
I can agree with that, to bad the judge wasn't telling Obama to fess up!
And this relates to this story exactly how?
It just gets more ridiculous with every so-called "study".
This is a farce. People have known for decades that tobacco products were deadly, in spite of any statements by tobacco companies to the contrary.
I was a kid in the 1940s. Smokers, and non-smokers alike referred to cigarettes as cancer sticks and coffin nails.
From a song in 1947 that became the number one single of the year.
Smoke, Smoke, Smoke That Cigarette 1947
Smoke smoke smoke that cigarette
puff puff puff and if you smoke yourself to death
Tell St Peter at the Golden Gate that you hate to make him wait.
But you just gotta have another cigarette
The question is this. Why does the government allow tobacco products to be sold? There have been several judgements against "big tobacco" because their products are defective. Yet they are still sold with the same "defects". Now tobacco, according to the judge, must admit they lied about the dangers of tobacco.
Nope, they do not take them off the market. They do not order tobacco to recall or fix their defective product. What does our government, whose Constitutional obligation is to promote the general welfare do? They milk the cash cow, demanding tribute money from big tobacco so that they can continue peddling their toxic wares.
It is indeed a farce.
You think the people dying from smoking didn't know it was bad for you? The adverse health effects of smoking have been known for many decades people just didn't care. But of course we'll fine this company that provides a service and employs tens of thousands of people right out of business.
Basically everything is bad for you, your beer and big macs are next, then maybe anything not organic, then maybe you'll be fined for not doing yoga 3 times a week as big brother prescribes?
That is what the liberals in the federal government are good at - especially under the Obama administration.
Do you think that heroin addicts or meth users don't know heroin is bad for their health? So why don't they just stop shooting up or snorting?
Should be easy, right?
If the tobacco companies had any hair on their....... they should do this:
Dear consumer,
We the tobacco companies of the US lied to you.
Tobacco is bad for you.
Our products kill on average equal to 36.5 percent of the number of children killed by their mothers daily.
That's 36.5 percent and they have a chance to say "No."
We feel tewwible bad.
Thank you and have a nice day.
US tobacco companies
Cig proponents can spin this any way they like but the the long and short is this - there are no redeming qualities in the product. They make you an addict and eventually kill you - period. Make your case for the judge's unfair representation of the cig companies to the spouse, children, grandchildren and friends that you will leave behind when you die an early death - I'm sure they'll be onboard. I am 48 and have had 4 heart attacks, my first when I was 42. "Faithful" smoker for 30+ years.
The real shameful point to make about this subject is the fact that our government has probably been aware of the lies (Public Relations efforts) told by cig companies all along - turning a blind eye to it in the name of tax revenue. The irony here is that the illness and subsequent costs associated with tobacco use negates any gain made by tax revenue generated. In the end, we all pay higher insurance costs and the government remains the enabler for a healthcare travesty to the population is serves.
This is really more a case of the pot calling the kettle black don't you think?
How about the biggest lie of all about cigarettes? Nicotine is not needed to make a cigarette. The ONLY reason that cigarettes are laced with Nicotine is to make them addictive. If cigarettes did not have Nicotine, the addiction would be basically non-existent, and quitting would be much easier.
The unnecessary and deadly addition of nicotine is what causes cigarette addiction, and due to this, millions of people die due to the effects of smoking every year.
Can cigarette makers come up with any good reason that cigarettes have nicotine? No they can not as there is absolutely no reason to lace cigarettes with nicotine. When tobacco companies lace cigarettes with nicotine, they cause more illness and death than ANY illegal drug dealer ever has.
So smoking KILLS ~1200 people PER DAY...not to mention the astronomical cost of treatment, second hand smoke complications, etc., but the govt. tells me I can't smoke a joint (or eat it, vaporize it, which eliminates any dangers of smoking it completely) in the privacy of my own home???????
Talk about hippocritical.
What a novel idea.
Let's do the same for corporations, politicians and Wall Street criminals. No more fines without admission of guilt.
I also don't buy the death numbers, just because a smoker dies of a heart attack you can't claim smoking was 100% responsible, most smokers also have terrible eating habits, overweight, lazy and all around a ticking time bomb anyway. Whose to say that smoker dying of a heart attack died due to smoking? It could've been the extra 125 lbs they're carrying around and 30 lbs of bacon fat encasing their heart.
Someone happens to die and was a smoker they include it in the "tally" regardless of the cause, they relate it all back to the smoking.
What a disgusting filthy habit.
Tobacco Subsidies in the United States totalled $1.3 billion from 1995-2011.
Your tax dollars given for free to companies who kill people.
The judge should have ordered the government to admit, "THE GOVERNMENT MAKES MORE MONEY ON A PACK OF CIGARETTES THAN CIGARETTE COMPANIES DO."
Why don't these liberal piece of sh*ts get off the Tobacco companies. They sure do not mind being party to the 308 billion dollars of taxes collected last year.
How about getting on all the factories and the automotive manufactures that are spilling 100 trillion times the amount of the same chemicals plus more into the air. Why not make everyone state the truth!
Lets treat everyone the same and make it fair. Wait till the legalize Pot and see what happens!
Still going after tobacco companies, yet 2 states just voted to legalize marijuana. Only in modern day America. What do you think will happen when pot is legal. You get the same stuff? a company controls the crops. Adds pesticides (perhaps a little something to help it be a bit smoother that might also be addictive). The new marijuana companies will make a fortune, then have it all stripped away when it 'comes out' that they 'lied' at some point.
Except if marijuana were legal people could grow it themselves, organically. It's a hardy plant and would be as easy to grow as carrots in a garden.
But I suppose that's why it's not legal; there's no way for the pharmaceuticals to make money off it.
It's illegal because it's a drug and makes people high as s***, God everything isn't a conspiracy. Alcohol has been ingrained in western civilizations for 10,000 years, nearly impossible to make illegal, marijuana wasn't and was quite easy to make illegal without ruffling many feathers.
wow. bone up on your history...mankind has been using cannabis for over 5,000 years. and it's been illegal for less than a hundred years. and the AMA (american medical association) was against it being illegal.
WOW cannabis was not ingrained in western society at all prior to its being made illegal, bone up on your reading comprehension.
uh, yeah it was...europeans have been using it for centuries.
And if you read your history you'll learn that cannibis was made illegal and classified as a Schedule1 narcotic, like heroin, because in the 1930's it was primarily blacks who were using it.
Don't mind Mike, he does this nonsense in every thread. I've yet to see him be correct about anything.
He's just trolling.
huh. i thought it was the mexicans. oh wait, no i remember how they said it made white women jump up and dance with the "negros with big lips"...yeah, that's a part of actual congress hearings if anyone ever wants to look it up.
You guys seem to missing the difference between well ingrained and used by some small class of people. Canabis was NOT well ingrained in western society like alcohol was therefore it was very easy to make illegal based on its hallucinatory effects. pretty simple, reading comprehension 101 guys, learn it, use it.
uhhh, yeah it was...even queen elizabeth II smoked its resin...for its medical benefits...it's much, much more ingrained into our culture than you believe, mikey.
uhhh no it wasn't, 99.9% of the population did not smoke weed when it was made illegal, probably 98% of the population drank alcohol in some form, not a hard concept to get joey...
yet...it was used for over a hundred years if not two here in america before it was made illegal and used by western society for thousands of years across the pond...legally.
You seem to have no ability to discern the difference between used and "well ingrained" so I really don't know how to have a discussion with you about it anymore.
In this Digital Era, everybody should.
Awareness has come a long way since the '50's and 60's . . . back then it was considered very "uncool" NOT to smoke. Very few people really had a grasp on the implications of smoking then -- and the tobacco companies went to great lengths to suppress it. Most all the important celebrities smoked and it would have been impossible to turn on the television without seeing a cigarette commercial -- it paid for alot of programs back then . . . it was glamorous to smoke -- ashtrays were even provided in hospitals. Everywhere people went they were reminded of how "in" and sophisticated it was -- on billboards, busses, everywhere. And they had the cutest, catchiest "jingles" to get you to start, because they knew how dangerously addictive their product was. And once you did you were theirs. It was a well-thought-out marketing scheme to get people hooked, from the catchy TV ads to the packaging and delivery system.
Personally, I think the tobacco companies should be publicly humiliated, sued into bankruptcy and then burned to the ground. Their business was a deliberate effort that would kill people. They KNEW their product would take many, many lives, yet lips remained sealed because the almighty dollar took precedence over the lives of their fellow human beings . . . how utterly disgusting is that? There isn't a punishment suitable for what they did.
WOW! a Judge that has Balls! This should have been done decades ago since it was well known in the scientific community. However, cowardly, hypocritical Judges, Lawyers and Expert Witnesses, denied, lied, and stagnified any arguments that smoking was addictive or unhealthy. Kudos, for this Lady!
"One sure way to get smokers to cut down or quit is to make cigs with NO filters! The bits of tobacco in the mouth are gross to most. This will also eliminate the mess of butts that are everywhere."
Yes, non-filters are eco/biodegradable friendly (field stripping is easier) and a wider selection of filterless cigs is welcome to many. It is those filters that are the cause of the lung cancer problem. Take five, lightem if you gotum. :)
your gov't has done nothing to tobacco industry when they knew it was killing people. The gov't makes big money from the tobacco industry. Yet as your health insurance keep rising due to people dying from smoking due to rising costs they still don't stop it. The whole thing doesn't make sense gov't could help healthcare costs and people from dying but they won't. Like your gov't cares think about it.
There has NEVER, EVER been one proven case of second hand smoke. Every case that was tried failed because there is no evidence. Where did Kessler get her info? She just has it out for tobacco companies. Almost $500 billion paid to states and hundreds of billions in taxes that states received, they do not want to see tobacco companies go away. Another waste of tax payer dollars, people know smoking is unhealthy, now it is there choice.
Smoking is bad for you. Smokers and tobacco companies are always going to be legal losers. Deal with it.