Tobacco firms sued over low tar

[T_i_B]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/5378794.stm

A lawsuit which accuses tobacco firms of duping smokers into thinking low tar or "light" cigarettes are less harmful has been given the go ahead in the US.

Federal judge Jack Weinstein has ruled that the case can proceed as a class action, involving potentially tens of millions of plaintiffs.

Experts estimate that if successful, the case could cost the tobacco industry up to $200bn (£105bn).

Defendants include Philip Morris, RJ Reynolds and British American Tobacco.

[The_Casual_Observer]

1. They should have been sued 40 years ago about menthol.

They claimed it was good for your health to smoke cigarettes with menthol.

[Tellurian]

2. They'll claim we got it wrong..

It was good for THEIR health!

[azurnoir]

3. The people who were actually "injured"

will not receive a penny, the state governments will however. In Minnesota the repuke Governor used the money from the original suit to balance the budget and keep taxes low for those in the upper 20% of income, all the while cutting health care. These suits are a boondoggle the only ones really hurt are smokers who get it from both ends. No one under 60 did not know smoking was harmful when they started smoking it is that simple, as far as second hand smoke, well I don't drive but those who do are harming my health so do I get to sue them? BTW I quit smoking a few years ago, but I do have a problem with the over blown anti-smoking campaign that is going on right now.

[jseankil]

4. Actually it's not that simple.

Cigarette companies targets kids and have used ploys in advertising to make smoking seem like an attractive, healthy thing to do and they have been caught lying about it.

The simple fact is that Cigarette companies sell a product that kills and they have and still do target it to children and have deceived the public of how harmful smoking is.