http://www.tobacco.org/newsfeed/category/oped.rss Latest top tobacco news headlines en-us http://blogs.montrealgazette.com/2012/02/07/ban-the-butt-for-a-greener-cleaner-world/ http://tobacco.org/news/333615.html Set aside the costs and consequences of the toxicity of the billions of cigarette filters that have found their way in our rivers, lakes and oceans and consider the clean-up costs in our cities. One recent assessment of tobacco litter estimated that public litter costs for large U.S. cities range from $3 million to $16 million a year, with tobacco litter comprising between 22 to 36 per cent of the visible litter. The concept of user-pay or, in this case, polluter-pay should reign but doesn’t. Think tobacco lobby, political gridlock and tax fatigue. And tobacco addicts already pay all sorts of taxes for their nicotine fix while not every single one of uses the great outdoors as their ashtray. Some smokers even chow down on unfiltered cigs. . . . If you can’t tax cigarette butts – and ensure that part of the tax will cover all clean-up costs – then ban them. A ban on single-use non-biodegradable cigarette filters would be a form of inexpensive sustainable development: Cut off toxic pollution at the source. Harsh, you say? We are talking about folks who already hack and who, as a collective, often can’t be bothered smoking within designated areas, seem unable to find their way to outdoor ashtrays provided them and can’t be bothered to pick up their own toxic crap. Reusable cigarette holders were good enough for Audrey Hepburn ( as Holly Golightly in Breakfast at Tiffany’s), they should be good enough for that smoky-smelling lot. Montreal Gazette Canada Tue, 07 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.columbiamissourian.com/stories/2012/02/09/george-kennedy-rep-mary-still-faces-tough-road/ http://tobacco.org/news/333588.html Mary's biggest metaphorical boulder is her proposal to increase Missouri's lowest-in-the-nation cigarette tax. In a rational world, this would be a no-brainer. The revenue -- estimated at $396 million a year -- would come close to eliminating the budget shortfall that has led Gov. Jay Nixon to slash funding for higher education by 15 percent. As a bonus, research shows that the extra cost of a pack would discourage smoking, especially among the young. Of course, ideology trumps rationality. The Republican majority in the legislature and our Democratic governor are in agreement that no tax shall be raised on anything for any purpose. Neither is likely to be swayed by the fact that an increase of 72 cents a pack would leave Missouri below our neighboring states and far from the national average of $1.46. . . . In her Arkansas drawl that sounds misleadingly soft, she made clear that she plans to persevere. These issues, she said, "are bipartisan everywhere in the state except Jefferson City." Her Republican colleagues, she said, "are wrong on these issues, and they know it." She admitted she may not prevail, but "I make it uncomfortable for them." She's comfortable with that. I'm just glad we're on the same side now. Columbia Missourian Thu, 09 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://tobacco.ucsf.edu/bbc-lobbying-weaken-welsh-smokefree-regulations-yes-real http://tobacco.org/news/333570.html The Welsh Government has launched a consultation to amend the smokefree premises legislation to create an exemption that would allow allow performers to smoke in enclosed and partially enclosed spaces when filming for television or film. The moving force behind this is the BBC, which has lobbied the first minister in Wales, Carwyn Jones, to create this exemption claiming that productions have stayed in England where there is currently such an exemption in the smokefree regulations. Of all the crazy economic arguments I have heard for exposing people to secondhand smoke, this one takes the cake. Are we really to believe that the BBC has ignored the fact that it just opened a major new production center in Cardiff, Wales to take advantage of lower labor costs that exist in London just so they can favor actors generate secondhand smoke? I think not. Stanton Glantz blog raoul.walsh@newcastle.edu.au ( Submitted by sglantz on Thu, 2012-02-09 08:18 ) UK-Wales Thu, 09 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/opinon/2012/02/137_104509.html http://tobacco.org/news/333562.html According to researchers, more than 1 in 5 high school and middle school students are passengers in cars while others are smoking. (One caveat: In the case of the high school students, the study did not determine if they were in cars with their parents or their peers.) The study, based on national surveys in schools, and released by the CDC Monday, reports that more than 22 percent of teens and preteens were exposed to secondhand smoke in cars in 2009. That's the latest year that data are available, according to the Associated Press, but we doubt it has changed much, except perhaps to rise. . . . Smoking is a bad habit. Smokers know it. But turning smokers into criminals isn't the answer. Raising cigarette prices has been somewhat effective, although that has created a black-market trade that will only get worse. Attempts at prohibition didn't work with alcohol. And let's be honest: It hasn't worked with drugs. Why would we expect it to work with tobacco? Education would be a more worthy effort, if we spent as much time ― and funding ― on discussion as we spend trying to dictate individual behavior. Korea Times Thu, 09 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.courierpress.com/news/2012/feb/09/smoking-issue-a-political-football/ http://tobacco.org/news/333541.html On Saturday, Dr. Ray Nicholson, Vanderburgh County health officer, wrote a Community Comment in this newspaper and stated that owners of smoking establishments are more interested in profit than people. He wrote: "Their claims are made in the name of freedom of choice, when it is, in fact, perceived financial gain." The state of Indiana and the U.S. government are "in fact" profiting from the sale and use of cigarettes to the tune of roughly $2 per pack. . . . Bans and stigmatizing individuals may make nonsmokers feel self-righteous and "pro-active," but they do nothing to help smokers want to quit. In fact, they make many smokers angry and want to continue smoking just to spite them. As a former smoker myself, none of their actions or taunts made me want to quit; they in fact kept me smoking for many more years. Evansville Courier & Press Thu, 09 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.abqjournal.com/main/2012/02/08/opinion/legislators-blow-chance-on-fair-tobacco-taxes.html http://tobacco.org/news/333498.html If you’ve rummaged through your teen or ‘tween’s backpack recently, you might have missed the cigars and smokeless tobacco, hiding in plain sight amid the schoolbooks, pens, iPods and breath mints. It’s not that you’re clueless. Rather, the tobacco companies have cleverly packaged the cigarette-sized “cigars” and smokeless tobacco pellets to masquerade as innocuous lip gloss and breath mints. With cigarillo names like “Happy Hour” and “Prime Time,” and flavorings like chocolate, strawberry and peach, these products are clearly intended for the middle and high school-age crowd. Low prices, teen-friendly packaging, and the myth that cigars and smokeless tobacco are healthier than cigarettes, makes these products a gateway to a lifetime of tobacco use. Although smokeless tobacco products and cigars cannot legally be sold to minors, there are no laws against underage possession of these items, unlike underage alcohol possession. You can’t blame the tobacco companies. They’re in business to sell products, and if their packaging bamboozles parents and teachers, so be it. But to bamboozle New Mexico legislators is another story. Since 1986, a loophole in the tax law has allowed buyers and sellers to avoid the cigarette tax by buying or selling loose tobacco, cigars and spit tobacco in place of higher-priced cigarettes. Simply put, these products are undertaxed compared with cigarettes, due to the influence of the very powerful smokeless-tobacco and cigar lobby. It’s a loophole New Mexico legislators are unwilling to close. . . . Only one legislator, Rep. Gail Chasey, countered that HB 133 was a public health issue rather than a taxation issue. Chasey was the only legislator out of five who voted for the bill. Thank you, representatives Chasey and Stewart, for recognizing that our children’s lives are at stake. Albuquerque Journal Wed, 08 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.pressconnects.com/article/20120208/VIEWPOINTS02/202080301/Guest-Viewpoint-Anti-smoking-funds-should-increased-not-slashed?odyssey=mod%7Cnewswell%7Ctext%7CFRONTPAGE%7Cs http://tobacco.org/news/333492.html The New York State Tobacco Control Program has been working for years with one hand tied behind its back because of inadequate funding and seen some success in spite of it. Now, Gov. Andrew Cuomo has included a $5 million cut to the program in his 2012-13 proposed state budget. There are many things that seem unfair about the ongoing cuts to this vital program. It's unfair that the governor proposes cutting anti-tobacco programs. After all, the state raises lots of money from tobacco revenues and Cuomo has proposed increasing the tax on loose tobacco (a good idea). As a result, more people will want to quit smoking because of higher prices, but they'll have fewer resources to help them do it. It's unfair that smokers pay into the state's coffers in the form of the highest cigarette tax in the nation ($4.35 per pack), to the tune of $1.5 billion this year, but get little in terms of services when they want to quit. Binghamton Press & Sun-Bulletin Wed, 08 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.hastingsobserver.co.uk/news/local-news/house_to_home_with_amber_rudd_mp_risks_of_fake_cigarettes_1_3487060 http://tobacco.org/news/333461.html Unfortunately the buyers and the vendors, are doing more than cheating the Government and fellow tax payers of the legitimate duty on the tobacco, which is bad enough. They are also endangering the health of the consumers more than they can imagine. The smuggled cigarettes are often not just duty free from across the Channel. They are ‘fake’ cigarettes. However damaging regular cigarettes are, we do at least know the health risks. But these unregulated fake fags, are loaded with lead and other nasty bits of poison. Recently, a test of one packet of smuggled cigarettes revealed that they had eight times as much lead in them as normal ones. . . . I urge smokers to check what they are smoking. Don’t touch the cheap smuggled brand. They could be a lot more dangerous than you think. Hastings Observer UK Mon, 06 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.casperjournal.com/news/opinion/my_turn/article_1587b629-7a95-5d36-934a-f3b06cf838d9.html http://tobacco.org/news/333443.html The “Smoke Free” initiative has stirred strong emotions on both sides of the issue. I’m passionately anti-smoking. I do understand the resistance to government intrusion into private business but in this case I think the aversion is misplaced. Most people are in favor of government-imposed fire safety regulations for theaters as well as health safety regulations for food service. . . . So where does a person’s “right” to smoke end? How can otherwise good, caring people behave so selfishly and inconsiderately as to subject their family and friends to harmful cigarette smoke? How can otherwise reasonable and intelligent people think that they have the “right” to foul the air that other people breathe? If people who smoke would be honest with themselves, they would stop calling smoking their “right” and start calling it what it actually is ... it’s their addiction. And then they would realize that no person or business is under any obligation to accommodate their addiction. Casper Journal Tue, 07 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.thetigernews.com/news.php?aid=7444&sid=4 http://tobacco.org/news/333419.html Being a hookah owner, I was honestly more than a little skeptical about going to a hookah bar to smoke. I expected to be ripped off with the price and given a crappy setup to smoke on. Fortunately, I was pleasantly surprised to be proven wrong during my visit to Friend’s Cafe. The food was reasonably priced, with a 10-percent discount given if you plan to smoke while you are there. On top of that, you can’t beat $2 mixed drinks (Mon. – Thurs., from 6-9 p.m.) which were pretty generous on the alcohol. . . . To finish out this week’s column, I would like to just take a moment and respond to a few questions that I got from readers last week about the health concerns related to smoking hookah. Obviously, smoking anything is not something that your doctor is going to recommend you do (unless of course you happen to live in California), but smoking hookah is very different than smoking other tobacco products like cigarettes. Shisha is just tobacco leaves and molasses ­— no rat poison, no fiberglass shards, no other hazardous chemicals that were originally designed to kill other organisms. Furthermore, no studies have positively linked hookah smoking and cancer. So while it isn’t going to make you healthier, smoking hookah is not nearly as deadly as other tobacco products. As I said last week, I will never claim to be an expert in this subject, but causal use causes less damage to one’s body than a night of heavy drinking. To top it off, hookah smoking isn’t addictive like cigarettes can be, so you can smoke as much or as little as you please. The Tiger tigerhookah@gmail.com (JOSHUA S. KELLY) Tue, 07 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://farmingtonhills.injuryboard.com/defective-and-dangerous-products/the-definition-of-tort-reform-hypocrisy-the-us-chamber-of-commerce.aspx?googleid=298148 http://tobacco.org/news/333376.html The Chamber filed its brief in support of the tobacco industry (one of the industries that provides back-door funding of the Chamber's "tort reform" initiatives) and against the Food and Drug Administration (in other words, the Federal Government), arguing that the government has "no legitimate authority to take space on a tobacco company's packaging or advertising to persuade consumers not to buy the product". . . . Can you think of anything more hypocritical than this lawsuit and the U.S. Chamber's support of it? The goverment (you, the taxpayer) has to spend millions in taxpayer dollars defending it. What a waste of taxpayer money and government time, just to buy time to save a few years profits for a corporate polluter, perhaps the most serious health hazard on the planet. The Chamber is constantly railing against "lawsuit abuse" (a campaign funded, in part, by the tobacco industry), but this one is not "frivolous"? A producer of an acknowledged dangerous product files a lawsuit against the government for trying to graphically warn the public that the product is grossly unsafe and the Chamber backs this lawsuit but attacks those filed by citizens to address and punish corporate wrongdoing? This is the same Chamber that says when a citizen sues a corporate wrongdoer for the serious harm suffered by the citizen, that citizen is guilty of "lawsuit abuse". This organization has zero credibility when it comes to this issue. The public should repudiate the Chamber and any candidate it supports, by its voice and its vote. As corporate lackey and tort reform hypocrite, John Stossel, would say: "Give me a break"! InjuryBoard.com Mon, 06 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.examiner.com/public-policy-in-cincinnati/cigarette-makers-intend-to-defy-the-government http://tobacco.org/news/333334.html Apparently, Cigarette makers have told U.S. District Judge Richard Leon they can't be forced to spread the government's anti-smoking advocacy with "massive, shocking, gruesome warnings" on products they legally sell. Since there is so much evidence to support how detrimental cigarettes and cigarettes makers are to society; why is there so much resistance to reduce of remove cigarettes from human consumption? Why all the fuss? Just do it. . . . For all practical purposes it seems that the cigarette makers intend to defy the government and take their products to market at any cost if it means robbing you of your health and/or costing your life. Examiner.com Sun, 05 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://us.rd.yahoo.com/sports/rss//SIG=11maap78i/*http://sports.yahoo.com/pga/news?slug=ycn-10930163 http://tobacco.org/news/333318.html The PGA needs to change some of its rules during play. Sunday, during the WM Phoenix Open, Spencer Levin presented a good example of one rule that needs to go. While the tournament was hosting its annual green-out, Levin was contentedly puffing cigarettes and leaving the butts scattered around the course for someone else to clean up. Every other sport has condemned the smoking habit. . . . As long as it is allowed, smoking on the green will continue. The presiding authority, the PGA itself has to be the one to step forward and put a stop to it. The fans can complain, but as long as people like Levin can laugh it off, complaints do not mean a thing. Levin seemed immune from the criticism projected on him for his ugly habit. He even referred to the objectors as "you mean guys in the crowd". Yahoo! Sports Sun, 05 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-brower-smokingdeaths-20120205,0,1869576.story http://tobacco.org/news/333317.html The Smoking Deaths billboard isn't famous. It's not the Hollywood sign or Rodeo Drive. Tourists don't come to town clamoring to see Disneyland, Grauman's Chinese Theatre and a billboard that counts up annual smoking deaths. But if you live in West L.A. anywhere near the 405, you know the sign. You've seen it looming over Santa Monica Boulevard, quietly toting up the number of Americans who've kicked the bucket after years of sucking on cancer sticks. The Smoking Deaths billboard is black, with big white letters that say "Smoking Deaths This Year." Underneath is a digital readout with a number that increases by one every minute or so. I usually pass it on my way to the gym or the self-serve frozen yogurt place. If there are 250,000 smoking deaths when I drive by, there might be 250,050 when I drive back. . . . A guy named William E. Bloomfield put up the billboard in 1987. A former smoker himself, he got rich putting coin-operated washers and dryers in apartment buildings and college dorms. He said he wanted people to see the real cost of smoking. He didn't anticipate the other, more upbeat public service the billboard would perform. I bet no one did. . . . There was no one around when I got to the sign this New Year's. Just drivers speeding down Santa Monica. Around 11:45, an SUV drove up. A group of twentysomethings got out. They were excited and a little drunk. They said they'd always wanted to see the sign turn over and this year they'd finally gotten themselves organized to come. Soon more people . . . That's how I see the Smoking Deaths billboard. It's modest, and a bit on the morbid side, but as the centerpiece of an end-of-year ritual, it really works. Something about the way that counter turns over at midnight feels strangely like a rebirth. It's a fresh start, a brief reprieve from grim reality. As much as a billboard counting smoking deaths can be, it's like spring. Los Angeles Times Sun, 05 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.press-citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2012302040020 http://tobacco.org/news/333306.html In 2001, in response to the millions of dollars flowing to the state from the Tobacco Master Settlement, legislation was passed that established the Division for Tobacco Use Prevention and Control, with a full time director, a citizen commission to manage and coordinate funding and a youth program "directed by youth for youth." . . . In the past year, we have seen major attempts to disembowel one of the most successful tobacco control programs in the nation: * The director of the Division of Tobacco Control, a nationally recognized leader in the field, was let go. . . . Yet tobacco use remains the most preventable cause of death and disease and will kill more than 4,000 Iowans this year unless we do something about it. The tobacco industry spends more than $100 million a year in Iowa marketing its products and they never quit. This state of affairs make the governor's aspirations to become the healthiest state in the nation quite absurd. But the circus continues. A recent bill to address the increasing use of smokeless tobacco products -- such as snus, candy containing tobacco and "dissolvables" -- by creating tobacco-free schools, a bill supported by school superintendents across the state, was passed out of the Senate and the House Education Committee and was then sidelined by the House majority leadership. Joe Camel seems to have got his nose back under the Iowa House tent! Iowa City Press-Citizen Sat, 04 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT