Fire-Safer Cigarette Credited for Saving a Life in Oregon

Oregon is the 9th state in the nation to set aside tobacco manufacturers arguments that safer-cigarette technology was unproven.

(TIGARD, Ore.) - State fire officials say a Tigard nursing home avoided potential tragedy recently when a fire-safer cigarette self extinguished after a resident fell asleep while smoking.

Oregon Governor Kulongoski signed Oregon's safer cigarette legislation in April, requiring only fire safer-cigarettes be sold in Oregon beginning January 1st 2008.

"Credit for this event not turning tragic goes to members of the Oregon fire service for making fire-safer cigarettes their number one legislative priority and to the Oregon Legislature for their near-unanimous support," says Oregon State Fire Marshal Nancy Orr.

Fire-safer cigarettes use specially designed paper with ‘speed bumps' to act as small fire breaks restricting the burning of tobacco. When not puffed on, the burning tobacco reaches one of these speed bumps and self-extinguishes.

In April, Oregon became just the 9th state in the nation to convince state legislators to set aside tobacco manufacturers arguments that safer-cigarette technology was unproven and forcing them to sell only fire-safer cigarettes would increase consumer costs.

Currently, 22 states have laws requiring the sale of fire-safer cigarettes and in October 2007, cigarette manufacturer R.J. Reynolds announced it will manufacture all of its cigarette brands using the fire-safer technology.

Salem-News.com Top Stories

2025: Hope for the Best, Prepare for the Worst

Two Wars with No Way Out

No One Owns the Future

The Ugly Origins of Trump's America First Policy

A One-State Solution Could Transform the World

Comments Leave a comment on this story.

All comments and messages are approved by people and self promotional links or unacceptable comments are denied.

Henry Ruark December 15, 2007 7:57 am (Pacific time)

Neal et al: Act OR product, society can exercise its will and does so constantly, choosing which it means to enforce and how that is to be done. Values, beliefs, even religion play constant roles in decisions, changing constantly so that now change itself is acknowledged as the only constant in society. Re "learning" --at heart of of your points and processes-- one cannot beat it into head, but must persuade and provide all possible assistance. That DOES, ALWAYS HAS, and will continue to include simple guidance where that works for most - as in STOP-signs. For some others it requires sensitive, sometimes sophisticated, methods and patterns --very rarely including abusive language.

Neal Feldman December 14, 2007 11:25 am (Pacific time)

I understand your point Henry, but tobacco is merely the means. It is unhealthy but so is fast food and fast food kills too. Murder is prohibited but it is an act not a product. As stated before Prohibition will never work. Banning tobacco will just give criminals a new income stream. Nothing more. All prohibition style laws should be lifted, all imprisoned by them pardoned, and the targets regulated and taxed and monies provided for education and treatment. With the added revenue as well as the savings the govt will be able to maintain infrastructures, refund senior and disabled services, and deal with all the other needs it has. It is a universal truism that you cannot protect someone from themselves. You can only educate and provide avenues back (treatment). Some day they will learn. Ah well...

Henry Ruark December 14, 2007 11:00 am (Pacific time)

Jones: Easy answer --none-- if all are banned re murderous content AND intent, done simply, solely, for centuries, built on slavery, still making slaves for life, while any remains in users. World society in beginnings of revolt, with largest gains in human health and happiness, when this revolting and reviling product finally put away, as inevitable societal responsibility for ending any death-dealing drug addiction.

Jones December 14, 2007 7:05 am (Pacific time)

How many will Die from the fire retardant in the new fire safe cigarettes. As if they don't put enough chemicals in already

Henry Ruark December 13, 2007 5:30 pm (Pacific time)

Neal: We prohibit murder, I do believe...and some of us think government should not be involved in financial gain by allowing nicotine murders to continue. You may be right about common sense policy escaping the masses, but for this one I do believe commong greed, encouraged by decade upon decade of allowing continuance, is at the heart of the matter. Disclosure: I have one son whose life is terribly shaped by his addiction, caused by early-youth vulnerability to Big-T advertising.

Neal Feldman December 13, 2007 2:53 pm (Pacific time)

Henry - there is only one reason to continue to allow the sale of tobacco and alcohol... the same that says all drugs, prostitution, gambling etc should be legalized, regulated and such. Prohibition, as a policy, has never been anything but a complete and absolute failure in every and any context it has ever been applied. Legalization with regulation provides public safety as well as tax revenues that can fund education and treatment, not to mention the gargantuan savings in not investigating, prosecuting (persecuting), trying and incarcerating those who would then be committing no crime. But the common sense of this just continues to escape the ignorant masses and the politicians who cater to the ignorant masses. Ah well...

Henry Ruark December 13, 2007 9:15 am (Pacific time)

To all: If "fire-safe" now surely seen to save lives, how much more accomplished by simple, sensible, rational, reasonable total ban on extremely unethical permission to continue sale of known and deadly poison ? Only possible motivation to allow continuance is monstrous dollar-power exerted on our officials by death-stick profits still allowed to accrue --and then pervert our properly and reasonably still-treasured civil responsibilities vote-power.

[Return to Top]