I am not in favor of tobacco use. I am less in favor of introducing anti-oxidants that reduce combustion into the human bloodstream. Our conversion of food into energy requires a slow form of combustion within the body. According to sources I have checked, no one has published results on the effects of long-term exposure to anti-oxidants. Will smokers self-extinguish because of exposure to these mandated substances? We need to know the answer to this before requiring every smoker to be the living experiment for this question.

Fire Safe Cigarette are actually more toxic and more of a threat. Here's why: For those states that haven't passed the so called Fire Safe Cigarette law be thankful they didn't. There is no such thing as a fire safe cigarette. This so called fire safe cigarette will succeed in not only putting the smoker at greater risk with additional health related issues because of the additional toxins that are released into the air, but they produce twice the potential fire starting ash than the original. This cigarette is 20 to 30% more toxic and almost doubles the possibility of an careless person starting a fire. Here are some of the facts: The Harvard School of Health reported when comparing NY Cigarettes (FSC) versus Regular Cigarettes, the FSC cigarettes produced 13.9% more Naphthalene and 11.4% more carbon monoxide than regular cigarettes. Naphthalene is commonly found in moth balls, and exposure in high amounts results in more critical Symptoms of acute exposure include headache, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, malaise, confusion, anemia, jaundice, convulsions, and coma. Therefore, it has been proven that FSC cigarettes contain higher levels of chemicals that are harmful to smokers.

I live in a high rise apt. building (condo) mostly owner occupied, in Denver. The heating and cooling system (1968) allows air, including smoke, to move from one unit to another. Is there a legal precedence for making a building non smoking? About 10% of residences smoke, delivering carcinogenics into others homes.

My questins are simple,Has the government and state officials publicly announced the amount that the chemicals they put in the cigarettes are more harmful now? They need to put this on the cigarette packs,,non fsc versus fsc,and a place or number to contact,that way the public will be informed and have an opportunity to speak, They required warning on the packs for the non fsc ,the public needs to know fsc has more harmful ingredients,,What better way to get the publics opinion? and why wasn,t it posted on the packs right away?,,In my oinion ,if the public knew all of this from the start,the laws never would have been passed,,,Everyone who agrees with this should respond,so your opinion as well as others can be heard. People have the right to know that FSC cigarettes have 11.4% more carbon monoxide as well as 13.9% more Naphthalene. The warnings on the label should be a comparison,,then let the people decide,,The message would be loud and clear then,,Do away with FSC cigarettes. ps. they also tast like crap ,versus non fsc,,thank you,please give a response to this,,ask the state government why it isn,t on the pack,,thank you

I am not a fan of the new FSC! I have been suffering from a head ache for about the past month and I finally figured it out. FSC!! The more and more we as Americans allow the government to choose what is best is for us, the less freedom we have. We have to wear a seatbelt, such things like these take away the freedom this country fought soo hard for. I want my non FSC back. I have never lit my house on fire. Also, while I was smoking my cigarette, it appeared to be out and then all of a sudden, half way down my cigarette the fire came out. There is no such thaing as a fire safe anyhthing that requires fire. In order for us to smoke we need it to be lit. My neighbor likes the fact that it puts itself out, well I dont. Why cant we choose which one we want? Another issue is that I dont always smoke the cigarette. I light it, take a drag, talk for a while and take another one. Now I have to constantly smoke it so I dont have to relight it. The government needs to stay out of my backyard.

I was reading an article the other day when I came across someone saying that these other more dangerous chemicals they are adding to FSC cigarettes have not been thoroughly tested before adding them to cigarettes then I thought hmm not true they are being tested, RIGHT NOW! every time you take a drag off of one it is being tested I mean after all what a better way to save money on clinical and lab tests and make money on it all at the same time by have the consumer be the test dummy. I think it will take years before they would consider getting rid of FSC. They need statistics (enough DEAD people) caused by FSC cigarettes before they will budge on the issue. I mean after all in my old neighbor hood where I used to live there was this intersection that was very dangerous and needed at least one stop sign well the community kept asking the city to put one up, their reply was that not enough fatalities had occurred to warrant such an action until three years later when 23 people total had died from collisions at that intersection and finally they put two stop signs up. So in making my point what is the body count number have to be when it comes to FSC cigarettes before they do something about it. Something to think about. Sincerely, Test Dummy 1,432,987