Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Disclosure:

The statements in this forum have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration and are generated by non-professional writers. Any products described are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.

Website Disclosure:

This forum contains general information about diet, health and nutrition. The information is not advice and is not a substitute for advice from a healthcare professional.

Herbal Cig. mixed with Weed?

Discussion in 'Apprentice Marijuana Consumption' started by pmarlow, Mar 1, 2001.

  1. Does anyone have an opinion about creating a joint with an Herbal Cig. and weed? Is there an alternative to using tobacco in your joint?

  2. herbal cigarettes. hmm...

    April 27,2000 Release-
    FTC Accepts Settlements of Charges that "Alternative" Cigarette Ads Are

    --Settlements require companies to disclose that Herbal Cigarettes are dangerous and that "No Additives" does dot mean a safer smoke

    Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Company, Inc., based in Santa Fe, New Mexico, and Alternative Cigarettes, Inc., based in Buffalo, New York, have agreed to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that ads for their
    cigarettes are deceptive. Santa Fe markets "Natural American Spirit" tobacco cigarettes, and also sold tobacco-free herbal cigarettes.
    Alternative Cigarettes markets "Pure" and "Gold" tobacco cigarettes, as well as "Herbal Gold" and "Magic" herbal cigarettes. The FTC alleged that the two companies implied in their advertisements, without a
    reasonable basis, that their tobacco-containing cigarettes are safer to
    smoke than other cigarettes because they contain no additives. The Commission also alleged that Alternative Cigarettes falsely implied that smoking its herbal cigarettes did not pose the health risks associated
    with smoking tobacco cigarettes. Under separate settlements, which the FTC has accepted for public comment, the companies have agreed to disclose prominently in future ads that make a "no additives" claim: "No
    additives in our tobacco does NOT mean a safer cigarette." Both companies have also agreed to disclose prominently on packages and in ads for herbal cigarettes that: "Herbal cigarettes are dangerous to your
    health. They produce tar and carbon monoxide."

    According to Jodie Bernstein, Director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection, "These cigarettes are marketed with a 'natural' aura, but they're neither healthy nor safe. The new disclosures should make it
    clear that herbal cigarettes and cigarettes without additives are not safe to smoke. The fact is, there's no such thing as a safe smoke."

    According to the FTC's complaints, Santa Fe and Alternative Cigarettes represented that because their tobacco cigarettes contain no additives, they are less hazardous than otherwise comparable cigarettes that
    contain additives. They did this through a variety of statements, including Alternative Cigarettes' assertion that "Native Americans
    smoked all-natural tobacco without the ills that are associated with smoking today." The complaints allege that the two companies did not have a reasonable basis for the representations at the time they were
    made. Among other reasons, the FTC alleged, the smoke from the Pure, Gold and Natural American Spirit cigarettes, like the smoke from all cigarettes, contains numerous carcinogens and toxins, including tar and
    carbon monoxide.

    The complaint against Alternative Cigarettes also charged that the company falsely represented that smoking its Herbal Gold and Magic herbal cigarettes does not pose the health risks associated with smoking
    tobacco cigarettes. According to the complaint, Herbal Gold and Magic cigarette smoke, like smoke from tobacco cigarettes, contains numerous carcinogens and toxins, including tar and carbon monoxide. Herbal cigarettes, because they do not contain tobacco, are not statutorily required to bear a Surgeon General's warning and, in all but a few states, are not subject to laws that bar tobacco sales to minors.

    The proposed consent orders address the deceptive "no additive" claim by
    requiring that both companies include a clear and prominent disclosure that: "No additives in our tobacco does NOT mean a safer cigarette" in advertisements that make a "no additives" claim. The disclosure is not
    required if the companies have scientific evidence demonstrating that their "no additives" cigarettes pose materially lower health risks than other cigarettes.

    In addition, the proposed settlements would require both companies, on packaging and in advertisements that represent that an herbal smoking product has no tobacco, to include a clear and prominent disclosure that: "Herbal cigarettes are dangerous to your health. They produce tar and carbon monoxide." The disclosure is not required if the companies
    have scientific evidence demonstrating that their herbal smoking products do not pose any health risks.

    The Alternative Cigarettes order also prohibits it from claiming that any herbal smoking product does not present the health risks associated with smoking tobacco cigarettes, or from making any other claim about the health risks associated with the use of any herbal smoking product unless the claims are true and the company has scientific evidence demonstrating its claims.

    The proposed settlements would also require Santa Fe and Alternative Cigarettes to notify distributors and retailers that they should stop using existing ads and promotional materials that make the challenged
    claims and would require the companies to stop doing business with them if they do not do so.

    The Commission vote to accept the two separate proposed consent agreements for public comment was 5-0. Announcements regarding the proposed consent agreements will be published in the Federal Register
    shortly. The agreements will be subject to public comment for 30 days, (until May 30, 2000) after which the Commission will decide whether to make them final. Comments should be addressed to the FTC, Office of the
    Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20580.

    Brenda Mack
    Office of Public Affairs
    Michael Ostheimer
    Bureau of Consumer Protection
    (Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Company, Inc.)
    Matthew Gold
    Western Region - San Francisco
    (Alternative Cigarettes, Inc.)

  3. Thanks for the info! Depressing though, that no matter what alternative there may be, there will be something to prove that it can be just as bad. That is life I guess....


  4. when i read your post and went searching for some info, what i had in mind is completely different from what i posted.

    but, i found this!! kinda depressing, but nice to know the all around facts.

    maybe you could create your own blend, minus the big corporations? just like making your own tea? hmmm =]
  5. I say the only alternative to putting tobacco in your joints is to put nothing other then weed :D ALWAYS :)
  6. Yep! All pot. No tahbacky. If you find you have problems breaking up the pot into the 'perfect' consistency, buy a coffee bean grinder. Throw some bud in, *WHIRRRRRR* for 5 seconds. Viola! Perfect doobie rollable pot. :) PLUR!
  7. :D Thats what I did, DeeJ, except i use an old blender...."TEXAS STYLE", SON ;)
  8. Hey koda! Texas Style eh? Well, they do like things bigger in Texas, so I guess the blender does it. lol! :) I don't use my grinder too much, just when I get in a fresh shipment of Salvia Divi.

    I dunno, I just love to sit, watch tv, and break up buds. Way back when I was dealing, we had a day where we sat around, smoking, and breaking up pot to roll into joints to take to Rainbow Valley. :) Fun stuff. ;)
  9. I say don't mix the tobbaco with the herb. Unatural + Natural = SuperNatural..?
  10. lol tobacco is (mostly) natural too
    I was wondering about these "herbal" tobacco alternatives too, I roll with rolling tobacco atm and I'd like to try these out. As long as they aren't worse for my health than tobacco, probably not addictive either.
  11. no worse for you than weed.

Share This Page