Posted on 07/26/2021 9:45:18 PM PDT by Olog-hai
The chief executive of the company that makes Marlboro cigarettes was quoted by Britain’s Mail on Sunday as saying that the tobacco company foresaw an end to its sales of traditional cigarettes in Britain within 10 years.
“I want to allow this company to leave smoking behind,” Jacek Olczak, the CEO of Philip Morris International, was quoted in the paper saying. “I think in the UK, ten years from now maximum, you can completely solve the problem of smoking.” […]
For years, Philip Morris has said that its future will not include Marlboro cigarettes as it shifts to electronic devices. The company has been vocal in laying out its goal of replacing cigarettes with alternatives such as its IQOS heated tobacco system that heats tobacco without burning it. …
(Excerpt) Read more at apnews.com ...
This is good news as far as I’m concerned. The cigarette companies have lied to a gullible public for decades. Heck, they are almost as bad as Democrats.
I used to do work for PMI in analytics. They have moved head on into electronic cigarettes. Those are far more profitable for pmi.
The cigs and sugar industries most definitely #’d the American consumer — along with the “medical” industry.
I’m a libertarian and have no problem with one’s consumption choices. I appreciate a Nicaraguan stogie when the time permits.
But we’re generally lied to regarding the critical facts. And today, the lies are blatant with consequences should one object.
Flip-Top Box--Dickie Doo & the Don'ts (1958)
Oh? I’ve only heard the “lung cancer” side of the story for decades; it’s not like we’ve been saturated with a “cigarettes are good for you” message in the media.
Funny enough, the Amish cultivate and smoke their own tobacco but have extremely low incidences of any type of cancer.
Yes, the dangers of smoking have been known for a long while. Even back in the 1940s cigarettes were called “coffin nails”.
But that was countered (at least to some extent) by the advertising put out by the amoral cigarette companies. Smoking is cool. And cigarettes are refreshing.
A wise person would see through all that. But the typical 18-year-old kid? Maybe not so much.
I get that it’s a free country. No one forced anyone else to smoke. That doesn’t let the cigarette companies off the hook. IMHO.
That kind of reasoning could be applied to makers of alcoholic beverages. And then we’d have prohibition again, and the proponents of Sharia would rejoice.
There’s a reason why the USA emphasizes personal responsibility. Cigarette advertising has not been a thing for several decades, but that did not stop the demand for tobacco.
> That kind of reasoning could be applied to makers of alcoholic beverages. <
I actually thought about that! But there is, I think, an important difference between cigarettes and alcohol. A small amount of alcohol can be good for you (or so some researchers say). But no amount of cigarettes can be good for you.
I want to emphasize that I’m not advocating prohibition of anything. What I am saying is that the cigarette companies behaved quite immorally, especially back in the day.
Anyway, I’ll let you have the last word on this.
Regards!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.