"Some products are inherently unsafe, and that is precisely what the costumers want."
Radioactive material in tobacco might be mutually exclusive from nicotine and MAOI content. My layperson guess is getting rid of the radioactivity would require prohibitively expensive hydroponic growing. It's the drug part that consumers want, and I'm pretty sure if given the knowledge and option they'd go for non-radioactive cigarettes.
Swedish snus is made to minimize tobacco-specific nitrosamines (TSNAs), but seems to not address Polonium-210 on account of the radioactive stuff being "comparable to that from the natural background radiation sources or dental x-rays": https://harmreductionjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1...
That excuse doesn't seem to hold up to scrutiny. Who really wants to have 10-20 chest x-rays done per day? Are "dental" x-rays really as weak as "background" radiation?
Alcohol seems to be in a similar position - see the popularity of nice wine and beer over e.g. guzzling cheap spirits.
I think people want health AND pleasure, and are willing to do their own hedonic calculus.
Swedish snus is made to minimize tobacco-specific nitrosamines (TSNAs), but seems to not address Polonium-210 on account of the radioactive stuff being "comparable to that from the natural background radiation sources or dental x-rays": https://harmreductionjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1...
That excuse doesn't seem to hold up to scrutiny. Who really wants to have 10-20 chest x-rays done per day? Are "dental" x-rays really as weak as "background" radiation?
Alcohol seems to be in a similar position - see the popularity of nice wine and beer over e.g. guzzling cheap spirits.
I think people want health AND pleasure, and are willing to do their own hedonic calculus.