Tobacco.org

Ingrid Newkirk: Using Dollar Bills to Light Cigarettes 

With the national debt in the trillions, the U.S. government is still letting money go up in smoke.

For decades now, we’ve known that those men in the white coats who were employed by tobacco companies to appear on TV and tell us that smoking soothed a scratchy throat were not telling us the whole truth. In the 1970s, epidemiology conclusively linked smoking in pregnant women to fetal harm. Since then, every medical organization, the U.S. Surgeon General, and even tobacco companies themselves have advised us to stay away from the smokes, and most strongly warned that women should not smoke during pregnancy.

The federal government, meanwhile, is still funding studies in which stressed monkeys are locked inside metal cages, impregnated, and injected with nicotine; have their babies taken away from them after birth; have lung function tests performed on them; and are then killed. And should you think this is the government foolishly trying to prove for the umpteenth time what we already know - in this case about tobacco and nicotine - it is not. It is to see if women can keep on smoking and have babies too! . . .

The money is considerable. Spindel’s recent NIH grants include $1.3 million to test fetal nicotine exposure in rhesus monkeys, $1.8 million to study the mechanisms that nicotine uses to harm the fetuses of mutant mice, and his share of the $11 million annual support grant for the primate center. Meanwhile, only three states—Maine, Delaware, and Mississippi—fund tobacco prevention programs at the minimum levels recommended by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Thirty-seven states and the District of Columbia fund such programs at less than half the CDC minimum or provide no state funding at all.

The expense is not only borne by us taxpayers and the animals who pay with their lives in such disgusting tests, but by the women and children who are ill served by foolish funding priorities.

Jump to full article »

Opposing view: A much-needed alternative 

By the time you're done reading this column, combustible tobacco smoking will claim four more American lives — and a total of 440,000 lives this year.

Electronic cigarettes — battery-operated products that deliver an inhalable nicotine vapor — offer a much needed alternative. . . .

Electronic cigarettes are not drugs, nor are they sold to cure any disease or affliction. Therefore, the FDA has no authority to regulate or ban them as drug-delivery devices.

But by attempting to mislabel them as medical devices, the FDA wants to force manufacturers to spend as much as $1.5 billion on clinical research, drug trials and FDA fees for potential marketplace approval. We are not large drug companies capable of this type of investment, and the FDA knows it.

President Obama just signed a landmark law giving the FDA authority to regulate virtually all aspects of tobacco products. We understand that to protect the public, some form of regulation may be necessary and would welcome regulation under the new and more reasonable authority. This process wouldn't take us off the shelf or cost hundreds of millions of dollars, and would still provide necessary safeguards. Our goal is to guarantee access for committed smokers who want the freedom of the clear alternative that e-cigarettes offer and ensure that minors do not have access to our products.

Jump to full article »

ABOUHALKAH: Voters make good calls while lawyers whine  

•Liberty voters approved a tough smoke-free law that will protect residents.

The decision to ban smoking in all restaurants and bars overruled the City Council’s weak ordinance from early 2009, which allowed smoking in too many places. Give credit to a dedicated group of residents who hustled to get this initiative on the ballot.

Now, Raytown shamefully becomes the largest area city whose elected leaders have refused to approve smoke-free legislation, mostly because of a few bar owners’ objections. The Board of Aldermen should change that position.

Jump to full article »

FREELAND: Climate Change and Cigarettes 

I smoke cigarettes. I'm not proud of it, but it's a fact. At least I don't throw my butts on the ground. My favorite brand of cigarette is Newport™ brand cigarettes. I'm fully aware of the reasons why I should quit. The studies on carcinogenic pesticides used in the Lorillard fields in Greensboro, NC and their toxic effects is alarming. The pictures of smoker's lungs hanging about in schools other constant advertisements remind me that it's not good for my health. But all these facts mean absolutely nothing to me when I hear the soothing click of a lighter, smell the faint tinge of toasted paper as the tip turns red, as my cheeks pucker with a savory draw of cool mentholated smoke dancing over my tongue as I inhale that first puff deeply with a calming sigh.

I will quit someday, that is known. But whether I quit because I contract cancer and die, or because I take a conscientious effort to stop smoking is the true unknown. Draw all the parallels you like.

Jump to full article »

TORT: Support from big tobacco 

The planned use of additional cigarette taxes for targeted spending on children’s health care is a perfect example of how smokers themselves, through their support for additional taxes on their vice, can contribute to public welfare. A recent study by the government think tank Philippine Institute for Development Studies (PIDS) indicates that the proposed restructuring of local taxes on cigarettes and liquor can prospectively raise up to P60 billion in additional revenues for the government every year.

Simulations by the government also show that the proposed increase in “sin” taxes, now pending in Congress, can have the biggest impact on revenue collection—an estimated P22 billion in the first year of implementation, another P30 billion to P40 billion in the second year, P40 billion to P50 billion in the third year, and P60 billion to P70 billion annually thereafter. And while Congress contemplates this proposal, the Executive should likewise move to make efficient, transparent, and accountable the collection of taxes on cigarettes and perhaps liquor.

If only smokers can support the noble aims of efficient taxation of their vice, then there shouldn’t be any reason for cigarette makers and importers, and even tobacco farmers as well as their representatives in Congress, to fight efforts for better—if not higher—tax collection and cigarettes and tobacco products. How can any of them begrudge or fight efforts to improve health care particularly for children?

Jump to full article »

Sadie Nardini: Mr. President: I Challenge You To Quit! 

So before all you smokers brush off the "healthy" chick, let's be clear that I'm talking to the sometime smoker in my own mirror, too.

And I don't think I accept my friends' offers to join them outside because movies and the media make it so inviting. I, like the president, am not easily swayed by advertising executives marketing to my target group. I also have a sneaking suspicion that if Barack Obama wants to smoke, it's not because he wants to be just like Joe Camel.

So, Mr. President, and readers, I invite you to do what I promise to do this month--own our proclivity for bumming smokes (and smoking) and stop this nonsense together. In so doing, I will teach you, readers, how to get all the benefits of a cigarette--without ever smoking another one again.

Because really, we're after the ritual, the alone time, the sense of calm and space and camaraderie and relationship we get with this often-deadly lover. None of us want to be codependent, but, dysfunctional or not, we are. They might be hurting us, but cigarettes are always there for us when we need them, and we keep going back for more.

Though cigarettes are quite the stimulant, smokers most often cite the sense of calm, and centering as their primary reason to reach for one. . . .

Mr. President, if anyone in this country needs a freakin' ciggy, it's you. I get it. But let's get all of us that moment of Zen--and the buzz, too--without all the carcinogenic accoutrements. . . .

THE BUTT-KICKING BREATH:

Use this technique any time you would normally choose to smoke, or any time stress or anxiety gets the better of you.

This breath has been shown to slow your brain waves down, switching your central nervous system from the fight-or flight of anxiety to the still waters of the parasympathetic, and release endorphins that give you that same glad-to be alive buzz without, oh, say, the carbon monoxide. . . .

It's just this bad habit of yours has been fooling you into thinking you're handling your stress. In fact, the smokes are managing you.

Yoga and mindful breathing is all about taking control, real control, of your life. I know you can get the relief and peace you're looking for in another, more life-affirming way. And I'm all for trading up.

In fact, Mr. President, and readers...I'm starting today.

Jump to full article »

IDRIS: Cigarettes: Charge 'em RM30 for twenty 

The Consumers Association of Penang lauds the move mooted by Health Minister Liow Tiong Lai that with effect from January 2010, a minimum price will be fixed for a 20-sticks pack of cigarettes at RM6.20.

However, it is disappointing to note that the price fixed is so low that this will be a futile move if the government is really serious about addressing the fight against the growing smoking epidemic.

In a recent survey carried out by CAP, we found that the sale of 'value brand' cigarettes had increased. We found various brands - some of which were duty-free from Langkawi - being sold and easily available in outlets which sell cigarettes. Some of the brands were imported from Vietnam, Bangladesh and India. Most of these value brands do not even carry the health picture warning.

Jump to full article »

WILLIAMS: Ban and advocates need something stronger for support 

The question on many minds these days is, what’s up with Purdue’s proposed campus-wide smoking ban? To me, it’s just showing a dog (Purdue and secondhand-smoke opponents) that’s all bark and no bite. . . .

Let’s be honest, though: how many of you secondhand-smoke-on-campus complainers actually inhale smoke and not just the scent left behind from a cigarette? Don’t know the difference? Well, smoke is defined as a visually present cloud of gas particles produced from burning something; scent is the residual smell the dissipated smoke leaves behind.

Do you know how fast smoke dissipates in the open, outside air? . . .

The long and short of it is the University can’t back up the proposed (or current) policy with enforcement, and policy advocates can’t legitimately back up their secondhand smoke claims. Both entities should stop blowing smoke instead of trying to demonize actual smoke-blowing.

Jump to full article »

St. Louis County Voters Embrace Future; Vote "Yes" for Smoking Ban 

That crisp, clean air you're smelling this morning? Ladies and gentlemen, that's progress!

That's (dare we say it?) the future! . . .

Oh, and that Kirkwood vote also won somebody a bet with anti-smoking-ban crusader Bill Hannegan. (I'll take that case of Schlafly Pale Ale whenever you get a chance.)

One last note: The city and county smoking bans don't go into effect for another 14 months -- January 2011. So, smoke 'em while you can.

Jump to full article »

Pete Robinson: Smoke signals from Ireland 

To get a glimpse of things to come we need look no further than a few miles across the water to Ireland, where a number of new reports have surfaced. Curiously they've all failed to appear in the ASH Daily News.

The worst of these is pub closures which, over the last five years, have reached a depressing 1,500 outside Dublin. . . .'' On the contrary Irish smoking rates have RISEN yet again! New figures from the EU show they are now at 33% - the highest for 11 years. That's up 6% since the inception of their smoking ban.

However as I've argued before bans increase smoking numbers, forbidden fruits and all that. So had the pre-ban trend been allowed to continue Irish smoking rates would today be below 22%.

Meanwhile Ireland has witnessed an epidemic of grand-scale cigarette smuggling so there's not even any revenue gains. The EU survey also revealed that today the largest group of smokers - 45% - is aged between 16 and 30, significantly the main target group of the original de-normalisation program. . . .

Yet still the health fascists trumpet Ireland's smoking ban as some kind of 'success', being held up as a model all over the world. Ireland's ASH-equivalent, the Research Institute for a Tobacco Free Society, insist that bar workers health has 'improved' and are calling for even heavier taxes and legislation.

So there you have it. The only reason your livelihood is under threat is to feed the spiteful, insatiable arrogance of these nannying do-gooders. You've already had your behaviour 'corrected' by the hate-mob and lost vital trade as a result.

Jump to full article »

COLUMN: "Sweeney's Side" - H1N1: The next chapter  

While at the fair in Florence two weeks ago I happened to witness a perfect example of how simple precautions can be misconstrued or interpreted. As I walked around the midway looking for a group of friends I was supposed meet, I happened to overhear a conversation from two older gentlemen standing near one of the game booths. When I walked by, one was asking the other if he "wanted a hit" from the cigarette he was just finishing up. "No way man," came the response in a raspy voice that was most likely from years of smoking himself. "I don't want to catch that swine flu or anything!" The other nodded in agreement.

Assuming that the cigarette in question was of the tobacco variety and not its "wacky" counterpart, several things were a bit off about this situation. First, the idea that these two gentlemen were talking about health issues while smoking anything was totally hilarious. Either they were high, which would explain the size of the lit object and the topic of conversation when I walked by, or unaware that in their overall health forecasts catching the swine flu was probably the last thing they would have to worry about as a result of smoking that cigarette.

Judging by each man's age and voice quality, it wasn't the first time either had indulged in treats of the tobacco variety. Now, while these two gentlemen's hearts were in the right place, their "precaution" was just one example of the crazy notions that can arise from what is ultimately an issue of commonsense.

Jump to full article »

MOHEN: Renewing an old addiction 

Envision five years from now teachers telling students not to vaporize tobacco.

However unlikely this scenario may seem now, vaporized cigarettes will become a well-known and warned-against product in the near future. . . .

Hardly any tests or evidence have been conducted on the smokeless cigarettes, establishing a strong caution amongst health officials of the product, but no regulation from the FDA.

With its increasing popularity, the FDA holds a responsibility to the American people to conduct greater research into the E-Cigarette and the true effects it has on users.

Strict regulations must be imposed on the device to prevent its trendy appeal from influencing the young and old alike who do not need to become hooked on such an equally, if not more, addictive version of the common cigarette.

According to a representative from ECigarettesChoice.com, Electronic Cigarettes are unavailable to minors across the country as they contain nicotine.

However, this does not mean kids and teens are unable to get their hands on the tobacco gadget.

Jump to full article »

MACGREGOR: Smoking on campus: a Brit’s perspective 

Since arriving in the states I've noticed several cultural differences with regard to smoking. First and foremost, American cigarette packs do not have the angry black and white warning signs that plague cigarette packs in Europe. American smokers seem to be fully aware of the dangers of smoking and do not need telling that "Smokers die younger," . . .

Other small differences include the lack of ten packs of cigarettes in America and the lack of the lovely slang term Brits use for their cigarettes, "fags," which I am fully aware has a whole other meaning this side of the pond.

Finally, smoking in Britain is almost totally unacceptable among young people. It's not uncommon for it to be the key reason not to date someone and very often you'll find that groups of friends are split into smokers and non-smokers. A lot of this is a direct effect of the smoking ban. Smokers are banished outside while their non smoking friends can stay inside by the bar (assuming that's where they are, which in Swansea - my hometown - is a safe bet). Smokers are regularly taunted for their filthy habit by smug individuals with healthy lungs, especially if it's raining. Of course in Britain it will probably be cold, too, and so smokers are subjected to being taunted by dry, warm, healthy smug individuals while they shiver outside in the cold, struggling to light their cigarette in the wind.

Jump to full article »

QUINN: A Soldier in the War on Smoking  

Hopkins Kicks Butts has been doing a lot of kicking lately. . . .

Do I think HKB is a terrorist organization? No. On the contrary, I support the majority of their actions. In fact, I believe much of what the do is laudable. Their focus on helping people quit and doing community outreach programs that try to keep kids from smoking is commendable. And I agree that students shouldn't smoke directly outside of campus buildings and they should be compassionate towards their non-smoking peers. But this is going too far. Students shouldn't be allowed to smoke indoors. But outside? Come on. Why not just send all the smokers to Gulags? . . .

If this ban goes through I will take up smoking. I will sit on The Beach and smoke. I will stand outside of the lecture halls and smoke. I will stand outside Levering and smoke. And I will not pay a single fine. I don't want to do this, but I will not sit idly by and allow you to harass these students. HKB, my life is in your hands. Do what you think is right.

Jump to full article »

BENANTI: Smoking: Ban it everywhere indoors 

Posted 4:44 p.m. Tues. June 23 - Clayton is close to having a ban that would take effect in July 2010. Ballwin is already smoke free. What about the rest of the area? Health considerations should count there, too. . . .

Of the 30 largest cities in the United States, St. Louis and Detroit are the only two left without smoke-free protections. I think Mayor Slay said it best in his state of the city address: "Nothing quite says 'regressive place to live' to young people like resisting a change already made in 29 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico."

We look forward to the day when our entire region is smoke-free. Now is the time to start making positive changes in our communities. Wildwood, Kirkwood, Creve Coeur and others are in the process of making the switch. Eliminating smoking indoors is an effective, cost-free way to improve our community's health in a tangible and measurable way. What are we waiting for?

Jump to full article »