In the United States, kreteks have been the subject of legal restrictions and political debate, including a proposed 2004 US Senate bill that would have prohibited cigarettes from having a "characterising flavor" of certain ingredients other than tobacco and menthol.[12] A study by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control found kreteks account for a relatively small percentage of underage smoking, and their use was declining among high school students.[13] Critics of the bill argued that support of the bill by the large U.S. tobacco maker Philip Morris, which makes only conventional and menthol cigarettes, indicated that the bill was an attempt to protect the company from competition.[citation needed]
Some U.S. states, including Utah, New Mexico, and Maryland, have passed laws that prohibit the sale of kreteks.[14] On 14 March 2005, Philip Morris International announced the purchase of Indonesian tobacco company PT HM Sampoerna after acquiring a 40% stake in Sampoerna from a number of Sampoerna’s principal shareholders.[15]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kreteks#Legal_status
O argumento:
Djarum Black cigarettes produced for consumption in Indonesia contain a significantly higher quantity of Tar and Nicotine, 25mg and 1.6mg respectively
Mas...
Djarum Black cigarettes sold in Europe and South American countries have 10–12mg tar and 1mg nicotine, as indicated on the pack. This level of tar and nicotine is comparable to the majority of other regular or "full-flavor" cigarettes available.
(...)
The venous plasma nicotine and carbon monoxide levels from 10 smokers were tested after smoking kreteks and were found to be similar to non-clove brands of cigarettes, such as Marlboro.[8]
Rats were given equal inhalation doses of conventional tobacco cigarettes and kreteks over a short period. Those that had inhaled kreteks did not appear to show worse health effects compared to those that had inhaled conventional cigarettes.[9] The study was repeated with a 14-day exposure and kreteks again did not produce worse health effects than conventional cigarettes.[10]
Pra mim, não passa de uma medida populista/pseudo-científica e de um maniqueísmo esquerdista sem tamanho, já que não há estudos suficientes sobre males grotescamente maiores que dos cigarros normais, sendo que a proibição daqueles também justificaria a proibição destes.
Pronto, não sou puxa saco dos cigarros americanos nem dos americanos.
