Contains a chemical known to the state of California to cause

Kwaite2011

I was wondering what it means when the package says this product has a chemical known to the state of California to cause cancer. Does anybody know what the chemical is or what chemicals they are talking about? I just started smoking a pipe and love it but I would like to know more about this. Thanks!

Abreathawayfromglory

propylene glycol is sometimes used to case tobacco but I am just betting its cause it is Tobacco and tobacco is bad lol 

PappyJoe

anti-smoke nazi logic: smoking cigarettes causes cancer > cigarettes are made from tobacco > tobacco contains nicotine therefore anything which contains tobacco contains nicotine and must also cause cancer.

Nice how they overlook all the other chemical compounds added to cigarette tobacco.

PappyJoe

I want California to put signs up on the beach: Warning the Pacific Ocean contains chemicals which have been known to cause drowning.

Kwaite2011

Thanks, exactly what I was thinking...lol

pylorns

They actually still don't know why some smokers get cancer.  It's for sure not nicotine - that's natural it's in egg plants that you eat even and turns into cotinine.  You have natural receptors in your brain for it. 

PappyJoe

Pylorns - I believe its all the additive chemicals they put in tobacco used to make cigarettes. A theory from a pipe smoker even older than me has always been it's not the tobacco but the paper and filter material used in cigarettes. 

Topaz75

Clearly, this warning applies only to those folks living in California. I currently live in Connecticut, so I figure I'm good to go. Those nasty chemicals should be pretty weak by the time the reach the east coast. Of course, I must confess to having enjoyed a few bowls in San Francisco back in the 1970s. . .

thomas

ITS THE ADDED CARCINOGENS,THAT POISON,YOU

PA1907

I think the fact that its non-specific is telling. As a consumer I can only comclude that nobody really knows what the specific issue is in the product. If there is a warning label it should be specific as there is with lead crystal stemware and glasses.

Anthony

Wow, thanks to all of you on this, very interesting I did not know about the Egg plant, and being Italian I have eaten a lot so I should have had problems by now. LOL I will say this I started smoking a pipe in High school, I smoked on and off no problem. Once I got into the business world, after collage it was easier to smoke cigarette's as you could do that any where, in those days,once I was hooked there was no more smoke on occasion, you had to have it (Hmm) I quit them 22 yrs. ago with much work and pain. I have return to my pipe and again I control it, it does not control me, maybe on the weekends, holidays or maybe not at all, no problem no pain. Interesting isn't it, what is in them? Pappy I do agree that maybe the real problem is the paper or filter, it seems there has been way more cancer since they added filters to cigarette's then before. For now lets just enjoy tobacco in it's purist form.   

JoeHandyman

So, when you're asked at the doctor's office if you smoke, how do you reply? I always assume they are inquiring about cigarettes and reply accordingly.

Topaz75

I respond in the affirmative with the clarification that I'm a pipe smoker. The problem comes with the follow-up question which is invariably: How many bowls a day? The truth is that I have absolutely no idea. I've never gotten into the daily habit of counting the number of times I pack my pipe.

PappyJoe

I've told my doctor I occasionally smoke a pipe. Usually no more than one bowl a day and usually not everyday. I've also admitted to him that I will smoke a cigar on special occasions. He doesn't have a problem with that. Of course, I omitted the fact that I usually smoke 3 bowls a day on weekends and days I'm not working.

LostMason

I don't go to doctors so I safe,,,,

kaleehb

I always tell the doc I smoke recreationally. Similar to @JoeHandyman I assume the doc is talking about cigarettes and he has never had anything to say about my cigar and pipe smoking.

JoeHandyman

Do you think most people in the health or insurance fields are knowledgeable about the difference in pipe or cigar tobaccos, which I don't inhale, and cigarette tobacco with all its additives, which is inhaled? Apparently people in government agencies are not based on the OP's question.

PipeProfessor

@joehandyman No amount of smoking is healthy, but they each have their own risk to benefit ratios. They are well aware of the differences, however it does not benefit insurance companies, government agencies, or health advocates to differentiate between them...The truth is that smoking is big business, and not just for the tobacco companies. Smoking allows insurance companies to charge higher premiums even though the risk factors between the types of smoking greatly differ. Many governments have 'sin taxes' which depend on smokers to pay more for a product (just watch, there will soon be taxes on high calorie, nutrient deficient food aka McDonalds, because high consumption is correlated with obesity).  May government officials love to tax the hell out of 'sin' because it only effects a minority of people who won't swing a vote, and it is viewed as a positive from the general public. Unfortunately, many (not all) health advocates want to end tobacco use period, not have a population of informed consumers who can make their own decisions. Major grant dollars are dolled out to fight tobacco use, and thus these grant dollars pay peoples salaries. It's ironic how smoking marijuana is becoming socially acceptable (despite the carcinogens, addictive properties, and psychological effects) while smoking a pipe and Ecigs are being drug under the rug. 

JoeHandyman

@PipeProfessor, All good points, especially how pot is becoming socially acceptable while tobacco is not. All influenced by media and government. We have wonderful resources on the Internet, such as this site, but the majority of people don't want to make any effort at self education, just let the TV and government tell them what to believe. Oh well, I have to keep reminding myself of the 50% rule, you know, 50% of the people are below average, and average isn't anything to brag about.

PipeProfessor

@joehandyman I love that rule! Your entire post was very true. Sadly people want to be told whats good and bad for them because they dont want to do the research to find out themselves.

LostMason

Between Win 10 and Exede internet my comment was ;lost and now I'm too pissed to rember it,,,,,sorry

drac2485

@joehandyman You bring up a point I have been thinking about recently with all the FDA stuff going on.  How is that pot is being legalized in different states and the FDA isn't doing anything but they are attacking tobacco.

A note on the California sticker.  I used to work for a company that sold a product that contained a chemical that "could cause cancer" and we had to put that California sticker of every individual tube of product because of it.  The exposure to this chemical had to be in such high quantities as to require the person to bath in it everyday for years to cause problems but because of the most minute amount that was used in the product, it was required by California that the sticker was put on it.

PappyJoe

@drac2485 - simple answer to your question about pot. The FDA only attacks what its liberal masters tell it to attack and all the liberal pot heads are telling the FDA that marijuana is harmless.

drac2485

@pappyjoe yeah that's what I had thought and I find it BS... I'll leave it at that to prevent a massive politically based tyrant in this forum.

PipeProfessor

@drac2485 Thanks for sharing that info...It's just another example of scare tactics to control others. I don't smoke e-cigs, but a recent study came out that highlighted the dangers of their second hand smoke. The authors listed the levels of micro-particle exposures but failed to put it in terms that regular Joes could understand. Using the numbers the article provided other researchers found that the levels of these particles from second hand smoke of these e-cigs would equal smoking 11 cigarettes...if you were confined in a room with someone constantly smoking them...for 8 hours a day....for an entire year.

PappyJoe

@pipeprofessor - that sort of reminds me of when they pulled saccharin off the market back in the late 60s/early 70s. A "scientific" study linked saccharin with kidney cancer in rats and the FDA bought into it and almost banned the use of saccharin. The argument at the time against the FDA and the study was that a human would have to consume some impossible amount of saccharin on a daily basis for 10 years to have the same problem. The study was later debunked by scientist who proved that the cancer caused in the rats was because of the rats themselves. More studies have now shown there is no link between saccharin and cancer.

I dream of the day when 100 years from now someone does an unbiased scientific study that is not funded by either the anti-smoking Nazi organization named the American Cancer Foundation or by big tobacco. In my dream they find out the the cigarette manufacturers were adding chemicals to tobacco and that was causing the cancer and that plain leaf tobacco used in cigars and pipe tobacco did not cause cancer.

As it is now we live in a society that ignores the facts of the current studies that so only a slight increased risk of cancer in cigar and pipe smokers.

PipeProfessor

I agree @pappyjoe, it's easy to spout off statistics, but many people never put the into context. Your Saccharin example speaks to this perfectly. 

Jeremyh70

Interesting points @pappyjoe about saccharin studies. I would be interested in reading any of these studies and also any tobacco related studies you are referring to, if you could provide links or point me in the right direction.

Subtilis87

@drac2485. The FDA has control over recreational controlled substances, however marijuana is still federally illegal, and the FDA can not make rulings regulating something that is illegal, federally. In states where marijuana is legal, the state law enforcement will not arrest them, but the federal government could choose to enforce the laws and arrest them. In terms of chemicals in tobacco causing adverse health effects.

Is it healthy to smoke?

No, probably not, we are setting material ablaze and drawing the hot charred particles into our bodies. But it is moderation thing. Yes pipe smoking is different, and there have not been the kind of studies needed to show what the real risks are. But lack of data does not mean we should assume safety.

I don't think we ever will get the data either.

Nobody will find that kind of research, except maybe the pipe tobacco industry. Then you have a conflict of interest.

I think that pipe smoking is a different beast than cigarettes. Pipe smokers are not generally smoking for a quick nicotine fix all day long. It tends to be a more thoughtful, mindful, meditative process, and stress is as much of a killer as anything.

Wow, did not mean to write a novel. Everything in moderation, including moderation.

PipeProfessor

Great comment @subtilis87, I agree with you!

PappyJoe

 @jeremyh70  here's a couple that's on the internet about saccharin: http://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/diet/artificial-sweeteners-fact-sheet 

or http://enhs.umn.edu/current/saccharin/fda.html

If you want to dig through it. The 1964 Smoking and Health report is here: https://profiles.nlm.nih.gov/NN/B/B/M/Q/