[Badboy]

the Nat sherman's i smoke still haven't gone to FSC, but the packs of marlboros i have smoked that have gone to fire safe cigarette paper just completely suck! You gotta suck yourself blue in the face, and the cigarette tastes different too, so if they do that to all the cigarettes, chances are, plenty of people might finally quit smoking altogether!

[bbuser4u]

I hate FSCs

[cooljay788]

Who said I'm gonna quit smoking altogether WHEN (not if) all Big Tobacco cigarette brands go FSC by the start of 2010?

I'm smoking lesser-known brands that will never go FSC, and I'm not talking about lesser-known brands made by PM or RJR. Native American brands make good alternatives to FSCs. Kick is a good alternative too....that's the actual name of the brand.

Another alternative is making my own cigs. But I don't have time to make my own. It took me almost an hour once just to make 20 of my own cigs (the equivalent of a pack).

[Badboy]

Nat Sherman's are still additive free and they are not FSC compliant, and i think they are one of the best cigarettes out there, way better than marlboro, camel cigarettes, winston's, even like them better than American spirit cigarettes or even newport cigarettes...particularly Nat Sherman Mint which is an extraordinarily tasty cigarette.

[PiccoloNamek]

My Hint of Mint box has "FSC" next to the UPC label. They also have the fire-retardant strips in the paper.

They still smell and taste excellent, though. I do not believe the tobacco itself contains any additives. I opened up one of my MCDs and examined the tobacco. It looks like normal tobacco leaf, and smells absolutely delicious.

Gas station brands may have put extra chemicals in their cigs, but not Nat Sherman.

[cooljay788]

If you saw "FSC" next to the UPC code, that means Nat Sherman Mints are not truly additive-free. Why would they call it "FSC" if the brand is still additive-free to begin with?

I think a smoker of Nat Shermans needs to compare them with even rolling your own cigs (and do that experiment again of examining the inside of the two cigs).

If a Nat Sherman tastes just about the same as rolling up a cigarette yourself, then that means the Nat Shermans really do have 100 percent tobacco in them.

Since tobacco smells delicious in a real cig, that's a good reason for me to smoke a lot more than 5 cigs per day.

I wonder how much Nat Shermans will cost as of April 1st. Since the Fed tax applies to all tobacco products. Not just premade cigs.

[PiccoloNamek]

If you saw "FSC" next to the UPC code, that means Nat Sherman Mints are not truly additive-free. Why would they call it "FSC" if the brand is still additive-free to begin with?

I think this is what we call a "technicality". I believe that the actual tobacco is additive free, even if the entire cigarette isn't. This way, they can still say their tobacco is additive free and get away with it.

[smilin]

Nat Sherman's are now FSC?? They still claim to be additive free on their packaging!

[Sally]

Originally Posted by barfly My girlfriend just showed me a pack of Basic lights 100s (Philip Morris) that has a tiny pamplet stuck to it that says: "If you decide to quit smoking". The thing is stuck to the pack with so much glue though that it wont come off sos we can't read what it says on the inside. Anybody else seen this yet?

I have not seen those yet, I would be interested in what it has to say if anyone runs across one.

[cooljay788]

Originally Posted by smilin Nat Sherman's are now FSC?? They still claim to be additive free on their packaging!

American Spirits claim to be additive free on their packs too. But they're FSCs now. I saw FSC on an online pic of a Nat Sherman Mint pack. The letters were in a bar code on the bottom of the pack.