John le Carré on SPIKED TOBACCO.

Writer John le Carré, in explaining why he chose Big Pharma as the worst of the three worst Corporate entities as the subject of his best seller, "The Constant Gardener", wrote the words below. The other industry was Big Oil.

" I might have gone for the scandal of spiked tobacco, designed by Western manufacturers to create addiction and incidentally cancer in Third World communities already plagued with AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria and poverty on a scale few of us can imagine."

Note he says "spiked tobacco", not just "tobacco". Note also the words "designed" (not "harvested"), and "manufacturers" (not "growers"). This is not about some traditionally used plant...it's about an industrial concoction.

Mr. le Carré could have gone on to note that Big Oil and Big Pharma are part and parcel of the Spiked Cigarette industry because of their many tobacco pesticides and, in the case of Pharms again, because of all sorts of non-tobacco cigarette additives such as preservatives, artificial sweeteners, extracts, flavors, scents and so forth.

Beyond that, Big Pharma and Big Oil are massive users of chlorine, the source of dioxin...a component of smoke from chlorine-contaminated cigarettes. Interestingly, many (if not most) so-called "smoking related" diseases are identical to known effects of dioxin exposure.
Here is link to good clear way to see the "Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act". The Public Comment period has ended, but the problems with this Act remain. The Food and Drug Administration has already outlawed openly-flavored cigarettes---though many other flavorings remain ignored.

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-s982/text

Comments there are not the official comments to the FDA. For that you would have gone to "Federal Register FDA tobacco"...(click or Google that phrase).
You can read the act at links provided there

See how this legislation may reduce nicotine, the reason for smoking tobacco, to as little as an ineffective trace. You'll have to smoke FAR far far more cigs to get the effects....and you'll have to spend far far far more money.

The Act Forbids the FDA from doing anything about all the 450 or so tobacco pesticides and their residues, though most "smoking related" diseases are identical to symptoms of exposures to pesticides....especially the dioxin-emitting chlorine chemicals.
By ignoring all "farm" areas, it will also ignore certain phosphate tobacco fertilizers that leave carcinogenic levels of radiation in typical cigarettes.

The FDA has just (July 2010) forbidden the labeling cigarettes as "natural" or "organic" or "additive free" because that would indicate a Safer Cigarette...something the FDA doesn't want to hear about. That would indict the UNSAFE Cig makers with all their pesticides, burn accelerants, cancer causing radioactive fertilizers and so forth. The FDA is, effectively, a branch of the chemical/chlorine industry...not really a Public Interest Agency.

So...the FDA will all but remove the medicinally beneficial nicotine, except for a trace (because the FDA is about "drugs" and, with no "drug" presence, they'd be out of the tobacco game), and it will ignore the most harmful parts...the pesticides, their residues, and that phosphate fertilizer. It may even ignore dioxin-delivering chlorine-bleached cigarette paper. The Act doesn't say...but maybe paper is considered an Agricultural Product...from trees...and off their table.

Can smokers some day say "We do NOT want chlorine-contaminated, Dioxin Delivering cigarettes!"? Can't we have just plain tobacco? No one seems to have yet studied the health effects of that....except for the health benefits, that is, for alertness, stress relief, appetite suppression, digestive relief, etc. Even the Pentagon admits to the Stress Relief points in letting soldiers continue smoking. FDA pretends to not know about that.

The FDA and Congress have wised up. Alcohol Prohibition failed because they Prohibited Beer and Wine and Liquor etc....and too many people wanted it thus causing a Crime Epidemic. This Time they are smarter. They'll just virtually eliminate the important part...the nicotine. In Alcohol Prohibition, they didn't think to just Lower the Alcohol Content of beer and liquor and wine. You could still drink...but....why bother?

This FDA law is a wholesomely-painted cynical atrocity that may be a violation of law in itself. After all, it is tool to help the Cigarette Industry and its suppliers and insurers and investors evade potentially astronomical liabilities and penalties for what they've done to tobacco, and to defrauded smokers who believed and are still told they're just using tobacco.

One is advised to contact their Congressional representatives to raise the problem issues and to ask for new legislation, and repeal of this one.


Is the Problem About Natural Plants?...or Chemical Plants?

In April 2003, the US General Accounting Office (GAO) condemned lax government oversight of pesticide residues in cigarettes. http://www.gao.gov/atext/d03485.txt
If a problem there, search up "GAO tobacco pesticides".

That is, government officials who stand on their heads to show concern for health effects of “smoking” (of what, exactly?) have been ignoring arguably the most diverse stew of toxic industrial chemicals to ever show up in any consumer product.   These officials, and even “anti-smoking” activists, still ignore it all, preferring instead to cast blame onto the unpatented, public-domain, traditionally-used tobacco plant.   Can’t sue Mother Nature, the scapegoat for many industrial crimes.

How convenient for those who, in virtual secret, contaminated typical cigarettes so thoroughly. How convenient for the cigarette makers who put it all together, and how convenient for the public officials who remain AWOL from their sworn and paid duties to the public welfare as they instead serve this homicidal industrial cartel.

Follow The Money:
Though the under-reported, widely ignored GAO report, “Pesticides on Tobacco”, addressed 37 (out of many more) pesticides that have been, and still are, used on tobacco, nothing was noted about what firms made and supplied the pesticides. This is important because, if one wants to follow the money trail between these businesses and our government regulators, one needs to know who gave what campaign money to whom.
  The next question is: how many so-called “anti-smoking” officials are “anti-smoking” (by unwitting victims) because they seek to avoid being implicated in approving, facilitating, profiting from, getting regressive taxes from, and covering up homicidal manufacturing processes ever since the dawn of the pesticides industry in the early 1900s ?


Below is the list of pesticides addressed by the GAO…but with the addition of the pesticides’ manufacturers.    A smattering of the pesticides seem to be no longer used on tobacco, or anything, for that matter.   One pesticide was cancelled at the request of the manufacturer because they said it cost too much to do the paperwork…even though that pesticide was being widely exposed as being very dangerous.   If a firm self-cancels a chemical, they can’t say it’s because of bad health or environmental effects because that would open the door to those darn “trial lawyers” working to get justice and compensation for victims.

* Corporations that are noted may or may not be the only manufacturer but have been listed as the principle or main supplier. Info mostly retrieved from the invaluable Extoxnet. Googling of terms like “Extoxnet [pesticide name]” got most results.

* Pesticides are listed in order of quantity dumped on tobacco, although there are changes between surveys in 1993 and 1998.

* A while back, Pesticide Action Network said there were over 400 pesticides registered for use on tobacco. So, this is the tip of a very toxic iceberg. Thinking about the combination effects of even a couple dozen of these things reels the mind.

* Think of typical (very non-organic) cigs as Pesticide Pegs or Dioxin Dowels…not just “coffin nails”. Regarding the still legal use of radioactive phosphate tobacco fertilizers (Polonium 210), think also of Radiation Rods.

* Is this potentially huge cig liability situation a top reason so many work rein in “trial lawyers”?

* Is this a part of why our Corporate Media are so hot to ban tobacco and “smoking” but utterly silent on industrial parts of typical cigs? Rhetorical question.

* How many of our “anti smoking” public officials, including judges, have economic links with the firms listed here? There may be no direct links to cig makers, of course. Too obvious.

* If we can now find what Insurance Firms invest in, and insure, these chem firms, we’ll open another heavy Pandora’s box.

(Note presence below of Bayer's (and FMC and Ortho, etc.) imidacloprid, a top suspect in causing collapse of honey bee populations globally. Perhaps we ought not trust Tobacco Pesticide Suppliers with our vital food supply.)   (NB also that pesticides with "chlor" in their name are chlorine chemicals that are sources of dioxin in smoke from contaminated products.)

1, 3-dichlorrpropene: Niklor Chem. (Long Beach, Calif.)

Chloropicrin: Niklor Chem.

Maleic hydrazide: Drexel Chemical Co. (Tenn.)

Acephate: Valent USA (Calif.)

Methyl bromide: Great Lakes Chemical (Indiana)

Pendimethalin: American Cyanamid (Wayne, N.J.) [not Wayne, PA]

Chlorpyrifos: Dow; Bayer

Fenamiphos: Miles Laboratories

Mancozeb: DuPont

Flumetralin: Ciba

Metalaxyl: Ciba-Geigy

Clomazone: FMC Corp (Phila.)

Ethoprop: Bayer

Endosulfan: FMC Corp. (Phila.); Bayer

Mefenozam: Syngenta

Pebulate: Staufer Chem Co (Conn.)

Ethephon: Rhone-Poulenc (NC); Bayer

Napropamide: Zeneca (Wilmington, Del.)

Sulfentrazone: FMC Corp. (Phila.)

Imidacloprid: Bayer (KC, Mo.); FMC; Ortho.

Aldicarb: Rhone-Poulenc (NC); Bayer.

Dimethomorph: American Cyanamid (Wayne, NJ)

Methomyl: DuPont (Del.)

Disulfoton: Sanex (Ontario); Bayer

Sethoxydim: BASF (NC)

Spinosad: Dow

Carbaryl: Rhone-Poulenc (NC); Bayer

Fonofos:  Zeneca (Delaware)  [Zeneca no longer makes pesticides.]

Benefin: Dow Elanco

Bacillus thuringiensis: Sandoz Agro; Abbott Labs, Bayer.

Carbofuran: FMC Corp. (Phila); Bayer

Diphenamid: Tuco Upjohn

Isopropalin: Dow Elanco

Methadathion: Ciba Geigy (NC)

Trichlorfon: Miles (KC, Mo.); Bayer

( Remember that some of these firms may change names, change owners, sell chemical rights to other firms, and may take a chemical off the market for all or some uses. So, for up-to-date info, re-check the details. )
Cartoon Usage:
Interested parties may contact j_jonik (at) yahoo (dot) com. Use is free for no-budget activists.
Others, those with ordinary art budgets, please get in touch.

----- Double-click on images to enlarge.




































Here are some essential links. Just about any one of them can be helpful in undermining the bogus "war on tobacco" or "war on smokers". Bogus because the campaign is about protecting the cigarette industry, including all ingredients/contaminants suppliers, their advertisers, and all their insurers and investors...not to mention their friends in government positions. Attorneys for affected bars and restaurants may find some of this useful.
Caveat: Links do not last forever. It is a good idea to copy and save wanted items to a safe place. If any links here no longer work, try to Google the terms.
Warning...if you print out the cig additives pages, it may take about 16 sheets of paper. Smoke the paper...it's safer than the stuff they call "tobacco". Better...find or grow actual plain tobacco.

*** Partial list of non-tobacco Cig Ingredients (none tested for safety in this use) from which manufacturers select their secret recipes: http://tobaccodocuments.org/profiles/additives/

*** April ('03), the U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) condemned lax government monitoring of tobacco pesticides. >See: >http://ipm.osu.edu/trans/043_252.htm<

*** A Year Later, in '04, US Govt stopped testing import tobacco for pesticide residues. See: >http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1017-05.htm<

*** Official sought import tobacco testing for DDT, chlordane, hexachlorbenzene, etc etc.
http://lists.essential.org/intl-tobacco/msg00203.html
(No wonder there is dioxin in smoke from typical cigarettes. See below for more on that.)

*** DDT on Tobacco is no secret; it's just ignored.
http://www.mindfully.org/Industry/2003/Philip-Morris-DDT-Tobacco04nov03.htm

http://www.quit.org.au/quit/fandi/fandi/c05s8.htm

*** GAO fails to note dioxin from the chlorine chemicals, and fails to define what it means by "smoking", and did not name manufacturers, but... http://www.gao.gov/atext/d03485.txt
3 dec 2005
Also...PDF version: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d03485.pdf

**** Health Insurers' Links To Big Cig. Fantastic scandal...that hasn't heated up. But, with release of Michael Moore's "Sicko", Big Insurance may now get the attention it deserves. http://www.pnhp.org/news/2000/march/insurers_are_major_i.php
And: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1448443
See also: http://www.reutershealth.com/archive/2000/08/09/eline/links/20000809elin003.html
(ooops. That link now requires Sign-in. 2/08)

**** More Insurer Investments in Cigarette Manufacturing--this from 2009:
http://www.pnhp.org/news/2009/june/health_life_insurer.php

**** Top For-Profit Insurers Invest in Other Health-Harming Industries...including
Tobacco Pesticide Manufacturers:
These are just two...
MetLife: http://www.secinfo.com/d14D5a.u3nht.htm
CIGNA: http://www.secinfo.com/dWcPa.5c.htm

**** Here's how Lincoln Financial dealt with shareholder complaints about investments in cigarette manufacturers. http://sec.edgar-online.com/lincoln-national-corp/def-14a-proxy-statement-definitive/1999/04/08/Section11.aspx

***** Rep. Henry Waxman re/ GAO report. EPA "regulates" tobacco pesticides (badly) but forgets this entirely when testifying against "tobacco":
http://oversight-archive.waxman.house.gov/documents/20040629083127-61028.pdf


 *** Unintended Cig Ingredients (glass, plastic, etc.) due to about no government regulation, and absolutely zero attention by "concerned" promoters of "Smoking and Health" policies. The more harmful things there are in a cigarette, and the more health harms, the more false justification there is to impose tobacco Prohibition. Again, some links at this site have gone dead...so remember to copy any good hits for safe keeping. http://www.tobacco.org/Documents/dd/ddmorecontaminants.html

*** Cancer Research: "cigarette smoke has unexpectedly high dioxin-like potential " http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/66/14/7143

*** For US Patents for Fake Tobacco materials and processes...type in Pat.No. 3,978,866, for starters, at: http://patft.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.htm
Then try 3638660, 3796222, 6289897, 3993082, 3964495 and others in Class 131, Subclass 347.

*** Bill Drake's invaluable site, "Smoke and Illusion": http://cultivatorshandbook.com
Also, see interview with Bill at You Tube   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lCiMFymqFLI

*** Big Cig Weakened Pesticide Regulations. Why do that?
http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/article/7494

*** (Philip Morris had to post this as part of "settlement") http://www.pmdocs.com/

*** Radiation Contamination of Tobacco:
 http://www.acsa2000.net/HealthAlert/radioactive_tobacco.html
http://acsa.net/HealthAlert/lungcancer.html
http://www.webspawner.com/users/radioactivethreat/index.html 

*** More Radioactive Tobacco Fertilizers: New England Journal of Medicine. Why do so many "concerned" doctors ignore this? [Copy somewhere to get rid of the green background.]
http://nepenthes.lycaeum.org/Drugs/THC/Health/cancer.rad.html
And this: Radiation contaminated cigarettes
---Italy:
http://health-physics.com/pt/re/healthphys/abstract.00004032-200701000-00008.htm;jsessionid=GdDT3PvwQwfN8J2p9yv9BVfpgSjspGkpsX0ScF70hKkpzpVFG41h!-79285651!181195629!8091!-1
One cannot blame tobacco for the effects of radioactive fertilizers.

*** More Radiation in Typical Cigarette Smoke:  Scroll down to parts about the still-legal phosphate fertilizers and itsPolonium 210 radiation.
          http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2509609/

*** Dioxin in Cigarette Smoke: The Muto-Takazawa study. [Abstract, below.] http://www.mindfully.org/Pesticide/Dioxins-Cigarette-Smoke.htm

*** Chlorine, not Tobacco or any natural plant, is Dioxin Source: EPA
http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=55264&CFID=627977&CFTOKEN=81966286&jsessionid=c2305c214c6d804b6742TR60306630c230 --EPA notes that dioxin is “anthropogenic” (industry made) and is “not likely in nature”.  This material is no longer at the link.  But, see just below.

*** EPA---Dioxins in Cigarette Smoke:
http://www.epa.gov/ncea/pdfs/dioxin/nas-review/pdfs/part1_vol1/dioxin_pt1_vol1_ch05_dec2003.pdf
EPA---Dioxin "anthropotenic" i.e., man made, not from nature.
http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=23968
EPA---Dioxins, from chlorine.
http://www.epa.gov/ncea/pdfs/dioxin/nas-review/pdfs/part1_vol1/dioxin_pt1_vol1_ch02_dec2003.pdf

*** Burn Accelerants Added: http://www.burnsurgery.org/Modules/prevention/firesafecigarette/sec1.htm
…manufacturers often add accelerants such as citrate, phosphate, or calcium carbonate to cigarette paper to maintain continuous burning… http://www.burnandfireprevention.org/new_page_2.htm

***The Massachusetts Tobacco Ingredients and Nicotine Yield Act is at: http://www.state.ma.us/legis/laws/mgl/94-307B.htm
The 1st Circuit Court of Appeals Decision is at: http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=00-2425.01A

***The revised "Ninth Report" that contains all addendum materials is available on the Internet from the National Toxicology Program's web page at http://ntp-server.niehs.nih.gov/

*** The 12 initial POPs, "the Dirty Dozen", include eight pesticides (aldrin, chlordane, DDT, dieldrin, endrin, heptachlor, mirex, and toxaphene), two industrial chemicals (PCBs and hexachlorobenzene, which is also a pesticide), and two unwanted by-products of combustion and industrial processes (dioxins and furans). Those in bold are or have been tobacco pesticides and/or cigarette pollutants. http://www.chem.unep.ch/pops/

***** From Pesticide Action Network, re/ 450 registered tobacco pesticides Tobacco, Farmers and Pesticides: The Other Story. May 1998 By Ellen Hickey and Yenyen Chan http://www.panna.org/resources/documents/tobacco.dv.html
For some reason, that is no longer available.   See this instead...though this doesn't mention the number of pesticides.   http://www.panna.org/legacy/panups/panup_20060512.dv.html
  
**** An Agricultural site showing A Lot Of Tobacco Pesticides, with Manufacturers noted. Scroll down.   Ooops....Site no longer there.
http://www.ext.vt.edu/pubs/tobacco/436-050/436-050.html

*****
Tobacco Workers Exposure To Tobacco Pesticides:
http://www.ehponline.org/members/2003/111-5/spheres.html
Site no longer there.

*****
Wildlife Harmed By Tobacco Pesticides:
http://ipm.ncsu.edu/wildlife/tobacco_wildlife.html

**** Links about Tobacco Pesticides at http://www.tobacco.org/articles.php?pattern=Pesticides But you may have to register.
This isn't a secret...it's all just ignored in "concerned" anti-smoking actions, activists, and laws.

--- RJR, DDT, etc: http://www.tobacco.org/Documents/dd/ddpesticides.html

*** Israel Knows: A Jerusalem Post item about Pesticides in Cigarettes has vanished at the site, but here is the first part of it: http://www.tobacco.org/news/222856.html

*** Only THREE pesticides? Hmmm... A bogus article, generally, but ... http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2006/04/cigarettes_pesticides.html

*** Polystyrene Foam TOO?!
http://www.tobacco.org/Documents/dd/ddpesticides.html

*** Pesticides? What Pesticides? Gov't Stops Testing Import Tobacco, 2004:
http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/1733978p-8002264c.html (This link now not available. Will try to find alternate report.)

*** Novelli "Tobacco Free Kids": (No thought of PFK, Pesticide Free Kids): http://www.tobaccofreekids.org/reports/yearsinreview/1997inreview.shtml

**** Wm. Novelli, first president of TFK, was founder of Porter-Novelli PR firm, big chlorine and big pesticides etc best friend. This is just one reference: http://www.fwhc.org/health/nocure.htm
[ This article also addresses "Race for the Cure", Zeneca, American Cancer Society, and other parts of the cancer-causing....and also cancer "cure" industry. ]

*** RJR's (biased) review of Judge Osteen's rejection of EPA "secondhand smoke" stuff. http://www.tobacco.org/resources/documents/osteensummary.html

*** Commentary, with back-up material, about questionable science used to test air in smoking establishments. Such tactics would not happen if the cause had legitimacy.
http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2007/02/lets-clear-air-about-air-quality.html

*** Though "Smokers' Club" and other Anti Ban groups fail to address toxic/cancer-causing or other harmful NON-tobacco cigarette components, they do offer info about harms of the bans to businesses...a detail missing from mainstream media:
http://www.smokersclub.com/banloss3.htm

*** The Dangers of Tobacco Prohibition, byPierre Lemieux. Despite lapses in calling cigarette makers their preferred, deceptive name, "tobacco companies", this is on target.
http://www.pierrelemieux.org/artkessler.html

*** More on EPA/2nd hand smoke; It all avoids anything about what's IN "secondhand smoke". Cigarettes not defined or analyzed...smoke not defined or analyzed. This is not Science. http://stic.neu.edu/osteen.htm

**** Speaking of Health Care...Nicotine as Beneficial Drug for Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, etc. http://www.psych.org/pnews/00-03-17/nicotine.html


*** Useful News :
--- Nicotine Replacements Don't Work:
   http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/10/health/study-finds-nicotine-gum-and-patches-dont-help-smokers-quit.html?_r=0
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/press-releases/nicotine-replacement-therapies/
--- Pot Not Bad For Lungs: 
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/240146.php 
http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1104848#qundefined
---Nicotine Aids Memory
 http://news.vanderbilt.edu/2012/01/nicotine-may-aid-memory-for-some-older-adults-study/
 

 *** The American Cancer Society is often helpful in enacting "smoking bans". But the ACS is up to here with interests from the tobacco pesticide and chlorine industries, the very ones with most to lose if a typical cig was examined or described properly.
http://www.preventcancer.com/losing/acs/wealthiest_links.htm

*** Methyl Bromide use in tobacco agriculture: http://www.tobacco.org/articles.php?pattern=Pesticides ( Methyl Bromide is one of the top GreenHouse substances responsible for Global Warming. Cigarette firms, not with the tobacco, but with that chemical, are part of the Global Warming problem....but, so far, not condemned for this.)

*** Tobacco Pesticides: Israel knows...
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1145961235065&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

*** HEALTH EFFECTS OF DIOXINS ...with info re/ U.S. dioxin maximum limits etc. (Compare to Muto/Takazawa discoveries re/ dioxin in cig smoke. Dioxin levels in cigarettes. Do the math. Result: just 20 typical cigarettes, with chlorine, hit unwitting victims with 716 times the U.S. established minimum for Dioxin Exposures!):
http://www.gascape.org/index%20/Health%20effects%20of%20Dioxins.html

*** Title: “How cigarette additives are used to mask environmental tobacco smoke”. This assumes, incorrectly, that a cigarette is made of tobacco, or just tobacco. Of course, what needs to be masked is the toxic smoke from all the pesticides and adhesives and fertilizers and so forth. Dr. Gregory N Connolly, Director, Massachusetts Tobacco Control Program, Massachusetts Dept. of Public Health: Dr. Connolly knows that a typical cigarette is far more than tobacco or just tobacco. He was active in the failed Mass legislation to compel cig makers to list all the non-tobacco ingredients, EVEN the radiation from fertilizers. http://tc.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/abstract/9/3/283

*** Cigarette Flavorings Are Toxic...but still legal, no warning given or required:
http://http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2000/05/000509003850.htm

**** Cigarette Additives & Adulterants, big issue in the industry....but the public hears nothing about it in commercial media or from government officials, even those who claim to oppose the cigarette industry.
http://www.escholarship.org/editions/view?docId=ft8489p25j&chunk.id=d0e7363&toc.depth=1&toc.id=d0e7363&brand=eschol

***from the National Center on Food and Agricultural Policy, from 1997 use data. (Not all, just major tobacco pesticides); Number is pounds used per anum. This list no longer appears at this link. ( This is a sort of warning to COPY good material before it is disappeared.) (5/07) http://www.ncfap.org/
1,3-Dichloropropene 13,279,285
ACEPHATE 871,899
ALDICARB 59,719
BENEFIN
BT
CARBARYL 2,057
CARBOFURAN
CHLOROPICRIN 6,761,644
CHLORPYRIFOS 406,822
CLOMAZONE 217,617
DIAZINON
DIMETHOMORPH 36,818
DIPHENAMID
DISULFOTON 13,495
ENDOSULFAN 172,766
ETHEPHON 102,130
ETHOPROP 182,321
FENAMIPHOS 379,841
FLUMETRALIN 352,742
FONOFOS 16
IMIDACLOPRID 67,896
ISOPROPALIN
MALATHION 15,437
MALEIC HYDRAZIDE 1,790,089
MANCOZEB 356,811
MEFENOXAM 139,199
METALAXYL 271,368
METHIDATHION
METHOMYL 29,773
METHYL BROMIDE 685,026
NAPROPAMIDE 92,622
PEBULATE 131,665
PENDIMETHALIN 473,718
SETHOXYDIM 9,579
SPINOSAD 2,815
SULFENTRAZONE 69,073
TRICHLORFON
TOBACCO Total: 26,974,241

**** Warnings about Tobacco Pesticides...Manufacturer's noted:
http://commodities.caes.uga.edu/fieldcrops/tobacco/handbook/worker-stand98.html

**** If one thinks that cigarette warning labels are insufficient because they say nothing about pesticides, chlorine, dioxin, radioactive fertilizers, fire-starting additives, and hosts of untested, often dangerous, inevitably-deadly non-tobacco adulterants, The Law (corporate law) says otherwise. Using this as a guide, one could put piranha in their pool, post "warnings" that "swimming may be dangerous" (which all but the youngest child knows), and then not be charged with the murder of shredded pool guests. See this case:
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:F0UII3GLuPwJ:www.ca9.uscourts.gov/coa/newopinions.nsf/2E1F799C53A4857688256F97005A7959/%24file/0316100.pdf%3Fopenelement+Sufficiency+of+cigarette+warnings&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=19&gl=us

**** Dioxins in Cigarette Smoke
The Muto-Takazawa Study
This report was cited in Lois Gibbs' "Dying From Dioxin".
Here below is the Abstract of the study, but the entire report is viewable at:
http://www.mindfully.org/Pesticide/Dioxins-Cigarette-Smoke.htm

Here is an excerpt from the long version:
"The concentration of PCDDs in cigarette smoke was similar to that found in the flue gas-of a municipal waste incinerator. However, the presence of PCDDs in cigarette smoke is more significant than that in tile flue pas because cigarette smoke is inhaled directly into the lungs without diffusion and/or dilution. "

H. MUTO et al Archives of Environmental Health, Pg. 44 (3) : 171-4 May/Jun89

H. Muto, Y. Takazawa
Department of Public Health
Akita University School of Medicine
Akita, Japan

Abstract:
Dioxins in cigarettes, smoke, and ash were determined using gas chromatography/mass spectrometry. The total concentration of polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDDs) in cigarette smoke was approximately 5.0 µ/m3 at the maximum level, whereas various cogeners from tetra-octa-chlorodibenzo-p-dioxin ( -CDD) were detected. Particularly, the total concentration of hepta-CDD cogeners was the highest among these cogeners. Mass fragmentograms of various PCDD cogeners were similar to those in flue gas samples collected from a municipal waste incinerator. The PCDD cogeners that were not present in the cigarettes were found in the smoke samples. The 2, 3, 7, 8-TCDD toxic equivalent value---an index for effects on humans—for total PCDDs in smoke was 1.81 nng/m3 using the toxic factor of the United States Environmental Protection Agency. Daily intake of PCDDs by smoking 20 cigarettes was estimated to be approximately 4.3 pg. kg body/weight/day. This value was close to that of the ADIs: 1-5 pg. kg body/weight/day reported in several countries.

A heretofore unrecognized health risk was represented by the presence of PCDDs in cigarette smoke.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Those PCDDs...dioxins...would be impossible in cigarettes without the presence of chlorine substances, namely, chlorine pesticide residues (on contaminated tobacco and contaminated non-tobacco agricultural additives) and chlorine-bleached paper.
Even the most zealous officials, seemingly concerned with matters of Smoking & Health, have kept this legal. They do not so much as warn anyone or require warnings; they do not ask or require medical facilities to check patients for body-burdens of dioxins or (other) pesticide residues or the Po-210 radiation from tobacco fertilizers to thereby facilitate appropriate treatment; and they do not seek compensation for the unwitting victims. Chlorine industries and others, including complicit cigarette manufacturers, and all their insurers and investors, are thus protected. They all prefer to blame and legally burden unwitting victims via the "smoking ban" charade.









This is all rather simple. If an official or other says that tobacco did this or that, the alarm bells must ring.
NO studies of smoke from tobacco ITSELF have yet to be brought to court, legislatures, or establishment medical journals.
No Public Interest has been shown to justify laws about Tobacco Smoke! Yet tobacco is the guilty party, NOT those who adulterated it (or replaced it entirely) with more untested and toxic/carcinogenic non-tobacco things than one could find in a Toxic Waste Site. Tobacco, whether one likes it or not, is being "convicted" without a trial.
It's Reefer Madness II.

Either Google your way to the "U.S. Patent Office" ("tobacco substitute material"), or go to a library...and seek out Class Number 131, subclass, 359 and/or 347. There's almost 300 patents for fake tobacco, "tobacco" compositions, processes to make this stuff, and related things.
OR...just see this:
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&amp;amp;amp;amp;d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&amp;amp;amp;amp;f=G&l=50&s1=3978866.PN.&OS=PN/3978866&RS=PN/3978866
...and then wander back and forth in that category. [If that patent doesn't open up, type "3978866" into the "number" box.] This one's about "tobacco" (part or all of a cigarette) made from Peanut Shells. No laws yet exist to regulate "EPSS" (Environmental Peanut Shell Smoke). (This isn't to say there's no nicotine. That's added in measured doses to achieve "uniformity".)

At U.S. Patent Office, search up also Patent Numbers, 3964495 (popped corn substitute for tobacco), 3993082 (paper), 3796222 (coffee bean hulls), 3964496 (rice), 6289897 (about 11 different crops) and etc etc etc. The chances of any of these cellulose sources being Organic are about zero, or less. Plus, of course, none have been tested by labs, or, like tobacco, by thousands of years of human use. They are all just substitutes, cheaper than tobacco, more profitable if they can be sold as if they are tobacco. Even our "concerned" anti-smoking officials tolerate it being called "tobacco". Such officials are either abysmally ignorant, or complicit. No other option possible.

These bogus "tobacco products" CANNOT produce Tobacco Smoke, the ostensible target of so many prohibtionary laws. However, if contaminated with chlorine substances, if wrapped in chlorine-bleached paper, they CAN and do produce Dioxin...a chlorine by-product that causes diseases identical to most of those said to be "tobacco related" or "smoking related". Big Chlorine has not yet been dragged into any "smoking and health" hearing, nor questioned or condemned by the media.

You might want to just revisit this Partial list of non-tobacco cig ingredients from which manufacturers select their secret "recipes." "Big Tobacco" constitutes every one of the providers of those chemicals and crop products, not to forget the suppliers of radioactive phosphate tobacco fertilizers, advertisers, insurers/investors...and adequately bribed "public" officials.

The bottom line question to ask (under oath, preferably) virtually anyone speaking about "tobacco" is..."What Do You Mean by "Tobacco"? Tobacco, itself, without adulteration, the Target of Law and Displeasure, still has not been studied for real or potential harms. Certainly no such studies have been brought to court, legislatures, or corporate-linked medical journals. It is a convenient "sinful" scapegoat for the effects of industrial chemicals. Tobacco is a natural, unpatented, public-domain element of "pagan" Native American culture, convicted, as it were, Without A Trial.

What happened over the years, since development and use of industrial chemicals, is that the RISK from smoking has actually been eliminated.
Yes.
That risk, that CHANCE of Harm (as anything has) from using plain tobacco, has been replaced by Inevitable and Inescapable Harm, even death.