Tobacco.org

• Strip resort sued over second-hand smoke  

A second Las Vegas Strip casino is being sued over allegations that the health of employees is being affected by second-hand smoke.

A suit seeking class action status to represent all affected workers was filed Tuesday in U.S. District Court in Las Vegas by Wynn Las Vegas employee Kanie Kastroll against the casino resort and its parent company Wynn Resorts Ltd.

The suit was filed by law firms including KamberEdelson LLC of Chicago, which in July filed a similar suit against Harrah's Entertainment's Caesars Palace hotel-casino.

Attorneys for Harrah's and Caesars have not yet filed their answer to that complaint. That suit has also not completed the significant legal hurdle of being certified as a class action. . . .

The suit alleges exposure to smoke is causing eye irritation, coughing, sore throat, sneezing, shortness of breath, dizziness, wheezing, tightness in the chest, asthma, headache, nausea and ingestion of cancer-causing chemicals and toxins.

Jump to full article »

Massachusetts Supreme Court: Smokers Can Pursue Medical Monitoring Costs Against Philip Morris 

To the casual observer, tobacco litigation may seem very 1990s. But could it be making a comeback? A decision Monday by the Massachusetts Supreme Court hints that it's trying.

The court ruled that plaintiffs in a purported class action pending in federal court can pursue claims against Philip Morris USA for medical monitoring expenses even though they have not been diagnosed with smoking illnesses. In a unanimous opinion written by Justice Francis Spina, the court noted that theories of negligence have to be updated. . . .

Steven Phillips of Levy Phillips & Konigsberg, an attorney for the plaintiffs, told us that in fact most states have not addressed medical monitoring. He called the Massachusetts opinion "carefully thought out," and predicted that other courts would find it persuasive. He was also upbeat about the prospects of class certification. "I rather like my chances," he said.

Jump to full article »

EDITORIAL: Quebec's hypocritical tobacco legislation  

as targets go, Big Tobacco is one of the easiest.

After all, who's going to take issue with the government picking on tobacco companies? . . .

However, we unfortunately find ourselves agreeing with the Big Tobacco spokespersons that have called the provincial lawsuits an example of "sheer hypocrisy." Tobacco is a heavily regulated, heavily taxed industry off of which the Quebec government collects more than $700 million per year. It takes a twisted leap of logic for the government to endorse tobacco as a legal product, yet claim tobacco companies should be responsible for Quebecers' poor choices. The consequences of smoking have been known for decades - it's just that individual smokers choose to ignore these health warnings. . . .

Consumers are going to pay for any money awarded in a lawsuit through higher cigarette prices - the Quebec government might as well skip the hypocritical court case and increase the one tax that Canadians don't seem to mind being raised. Taxing tobacco - now that's an easy target.

Jump to full article »

Health authority ups smoking-cessation efforts  

A special designation will help the Horizon Health Network approach more smokers about giving up their habit and support them in their effort to butt out for good.

The regional health authority has been named a Centre of Excellence in Clinical Smoking Cessation - one of only three designated centres in Canada.

The other two sites are located at the Vancouver Coastal Hospital and, where the program was initially developed, at the University of Ottawa Heart Institute.

Jump to full article »

• New Survey Finds One in Three Sports Fans Smoke, Five Out of Six Smoke While 

A new survey conducted by the American Legacy Foundation(R) (Legacy) finds that the majority (63 percent) of sports fans surveyed are current or former smokers and 76 percent of them have smoked while watching or attending sporting events. The study examines whether sports fans were exposed to secondhand smoke while watching sports; smoked while watching sports at certain venues; or whether those who quit smoking relapsed while watching a game. The survey also examined whether watching sports was a trigger for fans who smoke.

The survey also indicated that 60 percent of sports fans have been exposed to secondhand smoke in the past year while watching or attending sporting events and that 36 percent of sports fans who smoke or used to smoke are extremely or very tempted to smoke while viewing sporting events in their own homes. When the score of the game is close, nearly one third are extremely or very tempted to light up.

Starting this week and through the winter, many smokers will be exposed to new quit smoking messages through the EX(R) national smoking cessation campaign. Legacy, along with the National Alliance for Tobacco Cessation (NATC), announced today that the next round of new ads in its two-year old EX campaign are now being featured during FOX Sports' broadcast of Major League Baseball's American League Championship Series (ALCS) and World Series.

Jump to full article »

MAIER: Too soon for an all-campus tobacco ban 

Even though 94 percent of UM students surveyed said they don’t smoke on a regular basis, that’s still 6 percent that does. If that number can be applied to recent fall enrollment numbers at the University — 14,921 students — that would mean about 895 students would be affected by the ban as smokers. Some of them are probably freshman required to live in campus housing.

It’s fine to try to educate people about the negative effects of smoking and it’s good to have resources available to help people quit. But it’s too soon for a complete ban of tobacco products.

I don’t doubt that there are good intentions behind this policy or that it has the potential to do some good things for this campus. But because I remain troubled by its overbearing nature, I can’t bring myself to support it. For better or for worse.

Jump to full article »

UK wants smoke-free to include sidewalks 

When the University of Kentucky campus goes smoke-free on Nov. 19, there's about a 4-foot wide loophole where people could still smoke.

It's the city sidewalks. The university's jurisdiction to ban smoking on campus stops at the edge of the sidewalk.

Anthany Beatty, assistant vice president for campus services, asked the Urban County Council at its Tuesday work session to allow UK to enforce its tobacco-free policy "to the curb." This would apply to sidewalks immediately adjacent to the main campus.

The council voted to put the resolution on its Oct. 22 docket for a first reading.

The university's medical center went smoke-free in November 2008, but people stand on the sidewalk to smoke, Beatty said.

Jump to full article »

STAFF EDIT: Addiction affliction 

Americans are quick to sue whomever they believe is behind the products and activities that put them in uncomfortable positions. It's easy to take money from giant corporations with bad reputations, and then play the victim of the capitalist monster. But this is a backward practice that only corroborates claims that Americans are indulgent and greedy - and eager to blame anyone but themselves. But it's time to stop wasting the resources of the courts and ask that American smokers, fast food consumers and general bad habit-holders take responsibility for their own actions and get themselves out of the problems they willingly get themselves into. Money won't cure cancer or heart disease, and it certainly can't pay for this country to start making smarter decisions.

Jump to full article »

• Smoking costs economy $31 billion 

A REPORT that reveals the $31 billion social cost of smoking to the Australian economy is a mandate for tobacco taxes to be hiked, health groups say.

The Cancer Council of Western Australia released what it says is the first independent analysis of economic arguments put forward by the tobacco industry.

The report, prepared by two health economists, assessed the economic impact of both the tobacco industry and public health measures aimed at reducing tobacco use.

It put the economic contribution of the tobacco industry at about $1 billion a year and the estimated social costs of smoking at $31 billion. . . .

Tobacco industry studies estimate cigarette and tobacco retailers provided 500,000 Australian jobs.

But Prof Lapsley said the number was overstated and the study found the industry was a minor and declining contributor to manufacturing output and employment, with profits largely remitted to parent companies overseas.

"The figures put forward by the tobacco producers include jobs of those who sell materials to the industry as well as those at the retail level for whom only a fraction of their business depends on tobacco," she said.

"It also ignores the fact that money saved by quitting or reducing smoking will be spent on other goods and services, themselves generating employment and tax revenues."

Public Health Association of Australia president Mike Daube said the tobacco industry's arguments were misleading and based on self-interest.

Jump to full article »

GMC not likely to succeed in handling its responsibility? 

It is more than a year, when use of tobacco products and smoking were banned in the public places throughout the country. Though a few law abiding people have made it their habit in their life, the 'young generation' has accepted it as a challenge to 'defy the laws'. A number of organizations are working to publicize the harm caused by the use of tobacco, but the results do not seem to be effective. Most of the people have taken it as a 'fashion to ignore the laws', even if those are beneficial for their health and wealth. Under the circumstances, it is very important for the administration to be strict in the matter of implementing the rules framed under the law.

Recently, a sensitization meeting for officials cum discussion on tobacco control initiative and future action plan by Guwahati Municipal Corporation (GMC) was held in the chamber of GMC joint commissioner, Ratul Barman. . . .

No doubt, these actions have already been taken in papers, but since those are ineffective, it requires some 'hard step' to be taken. In most of the public buses, it is observed every day, while driving the vehicle the driver smokes and if any passenger objects, he or she faces rude behavior of bus employees. Nobody is found to support the right things and other passengers remain silent spectators. Similarly, a number of shops dealing in tobacco products are doing brisk business in front of or very close to educational institutions and nobody dares to 'quarrel or oppose' the 'undisciplined tobacco users'.

Jump to full article »

Tobacco costs the Australian economy more than it’s worth (PDF) 

A new report commissioned by the Cancer Council Western Australia debunks tobacco industry arguments that higher tobacco taxes will be detrimental to the Australian economy.

‘Weighing the evidence: evaluating the social benefits and costs of the Australian tobacco industry’ is the first independent analysis of economic arguments the tobacco industry has put forward in its defence over many decades.

Director of the Cancer Council Western Australia’s Tobacco Program, Denise Sullivan said the report assessed the economic impact of both the tobacco industry and public health measures aimed at reducing tobacco use.

“The tobacco industry frequently employs economic scare tactics when policymakers are considering measures for reducing demand for tobacco, such as increases in taxes on the sale of tobacco,” Ms Sullivan said.

“This report provides the evidence that there would be few, if any negative economic consequences in further measures to curb tobacco consumption in Australia.” . . .

“A fall in demand for tobacco, while significantly affecting the tobacco industry, will have very little, if any, negative economic impact. Indeed, it is possible that the overall impact would be mildly positive.”

Professor Collins said the tobacco industry analyses of their contribution to the Australian economy were flawed.

“The industry fails to take into account healthcare costs imposed on the community for the treatment of illnesses caused by tobacco,” he said. . . .

“Clearly tobacco tax revenue paid by the tobacco industry itself does not cover the social costs of tobacco consumption,” Professor Collins said. . . .

“This report gives the Federal Government a strong mandate for a significant tobacco tax increase, which will also enable them to spend more money on public health, including further action to reduce smoking, which still kills one in two regular smokers,” Professor Daube said.

“The only people with anything to lose with this strategy are the tobacco companies themselves.”

Jump to full article »

• Where there is smoke, there will be fire 

The Public Health Ministry is warning the organiser of an Asian tobacco exhibition against breaking the laws covering the advertising of tobacco products and smoking during its three-day event next month.

The Disease Control Department has sent a letter to the Impact Exhibition and Convention Centre asking it to inform the organiser, US-based Tobacco Reporter magazine, about the restrictions on tobacco promotion, public health spokesman Supan Srithamma said.

Mr Supan yesterday said public health officials would work with police in "inspecting and arresting" violators of the law at Tabinfo Asia 2009 in mid November.

Jump to full article »

Tobacco will be kept out of sight in shops 

MPs have agreed further action to protect young people from the dangers of taking up smoking and to support smokers who are trying to quit.

At Report stage of the Health Bill in the Commons on Monday, MPs agreed the Governments proposals which mean that shops will no longer be allowed to promote tobacco in enticing multi-coloured displays. MPs also agreed to an amendment tabled by Ian McCartney MP to prohibit tobacco vending machines. The Government will take stock and consider how best to take this important policy forward. . . .

Gillian Merron said:

Nobody benefits from impractical or expensive regulations. Thats why its vital that we get feedback from shopkeepers so we get it right.

I have already met with retail organisations but it is important that we hear the views of all interested stakeholders so we can find the right balance.

Two thirds of young people who have ever smoked in the UK started before they were 18. Since the advertising ban in 2002, evidence shows that the tobacco industry has instead invested in promotional displays of tobacco in shops. There is clear evidence these promotional activities encourage children to start smoking.

Jump to full article »

• Health ministry asked to implement anti-smoking laws 

The Ministry of Health has been asked to implement the prohibition of smoking and protection of non-smokers health ordinance in true spirit.

Citizens complained that though the government had withdrawn Statutory Rules and Orders (SRO) on smoking in designated areas, however the concerned laws are still being violated. According to them, the said SRO was withdrawn in order to protect the health of non-smokers and making the smokers abiders of the concerned laws, but there is no such implementing body to check the violation of such laws, they added.

They said, after withdrawal of SRO all public and work places have been declared smoke free and smokers couldn't smoke or use tobacco in any other form in any place of public work.However, they complained that smokers are still smoking in public places and offices while many public and private organizations and departments have allocated designated areas for smokers which is against the concerned laws.

Jump to full article »

• Bill on controlling tobacco sent to social affairs committee 

The People’s Majlis has yesterday voted to proceed with the Bill on controlling tobacco and has been sent to Social Affairs Committee of the Majlis.

Interestingly the debate on this Bill was not divided on party lines; rather there was much appreciation from MDP members to the former government’s strong campaign against smoking and tobacco control.

This was the second reading of the Bill and almost all members who spoke at the debate stage supported the legislation but some members expressed concern that this Bill was too harsh

Jump to full article »