Tobacco Industry

In the discussion, I have found the sponsors of this strategy to be somewhat involved in the role of nicotine products that can smoke as much as they climb. One of the most popular beliefs of smokers is "the best in the resurrection." Sadly, the following - that smokers should be allowed to choose from a different market on these products - are not really welcome.

The tobacco industry history is full of examples of immorality of business.

Location view "smoking instead" is one example. Internal interconnections had one RJR that describes the sale of tobacco to new smokers as they fill the need to create smokers, so they continue the company's interest.

How does the business model of tobacco industry be seen in the future to reduce injury?

Well, as I said above, in a short and a while, it's very profitable. The slightest change in smoking cigarettes-not heat can transmit "government share" to the merchant through goods change. For a long time, it's not clear. Will these products "create IOSOS instead"? Is nicotine a hazardous combination of people that they choose to use when safe products are available?

In some cases, this may be the new light of the tobacco industry. Nicotine can eventually be used by more people than currently having highly competitive health problems. Indeed, it is thought that these new products are safe, that it is impossible to even detect any side effects of public health.

In some cases, products are also focusing on smoking until "smokers" are falling faster than ever before.

The next stage - politics, laws and science

The PMI has announced that it will apply for the amendment of the Modified Risk Tobacco (MRTP) products by sending it first to FDA at the end of this year. MRTP is one of the provisions made by the Tobacco Act that allows companies to make a statement "of a hazardous change" regarding their product and tobacco. But first of all, they should show FDA that such a statement examines scientific truth. See E-Liquid Packaging Boxes 

So far, only one company attempted to obtain MRTP permission. The Swedish game spent $ 50 million in research and sent over 100k scientific wishes to General Snus a list of oral medical products. Despite the hard evidence that (all) the snus is more secure than smoking the application has been issued by the TPSAC and the process continues. To date, politics have conquered science.

Getting the MRTP status may sound like a huge effort to make no profit: the ability to say something that is true. But to reduce injury, basically, interaction interaction, and at present, the law prohibits this communication. Minimum reduction in information from the MRTP's effective system can detect sea change in smoking behavior at macro levels. The question is whether politics is so aggressive that it will never be allowed to happen.