Higher cigarette prices do save lives

These findings are a result of a World Health Organization (WHO) study of 41 countries where smoking policies have been in place since 2007.
From their MPOWER model – which stands for Monitoring tobacco use and prevention policies, Protecting people from tobacco smoke, Offering help to quit tobacco use,Warning people about the dangers of tobacco, Enforcing bans on tobacco advertising, and Raising taxes on tobacco – the WHO was able to predict that 7.4 million deaths could be prevented by 2050.
The research has shown that increasing taxes on cigarettes by up to 75% had the greatest impact on smoking, even more so than anti-smoking policies. While smoke-free air laws in 20 of the focus countries had averted 2.5 million premature deaths, tax rises prevented 3.5 million smoking-related deaths.
“Tobacco use is the single most preventable cause of death in the world, with six million smoking-attributable deaths per year today, and these deaths are projected to rise to eight million a year by 2030, if current trends continue,” said Douglas Bettcher, WHO director of the department of non-communicable diseases.
However, even with greater scientific evidence that smoking kills, some people are still resistant to change. And South Africans are no exception.
An uphill battle
Readers’ responses to an article on Heath24 earlier this year, titled ‘SA set to go 100% smoke-free’, are redolent of the resistance faced by advocates for a smoke-free society.
The article covered the announcement by the South African government that new legislation would make all indoors and some outdoor areas 100% smoke-free.
According to the proposed legislation, smoking will be prohibited in:

  • Stadiums, arenas, schools and childcare facilities
  • Health facilities
  • Outdoor eating or drinking areas
  • Places where outdoor events take place
  • Covered walkways and covered parking areas
  • Outdoor service areas and queues
  • Beaches, within 50 metres of a demarcated swimming area
  • Five to 10 metres of entrances, doorways, windows and ventilation inlets

What some of our readers have to say:
Martin said: “I shall continue to smoke in my office, and people needing to see me will continue to wait outside… I’m sorry, cigarettes contribute so little to general air pollution. Look at cars, industries etc. – there are your culprits… my guys suck up welding fumes all day, but smoking is banned, WTF?!?”
Dieter asked: “Is he [the minister of health] that bored with life that they would do something like that? What about overweight people, are they gonna make them stop eating as well? Get a job you’re good at!”
Raven said: “So, my freedom of choice is removed. Where do I sign to have this law scrapped?”
Charmain Nel said: “People give me the sh*ts when all they talk about is smoking. First do something about the DRINKERS WHO KILL PEOPLE. I have never KILLED WHEN SMOKING. The ones that are having a fit are all DRINKERS, which is why nothing gets done. LEAVE US SMOKERS ALONE!”
But with more studies concretely pointing to the dangers of smoking, both for smoker and non-smokers, it’s clear that researchers are not ready to leave the matter alone.
Scientifically speaking
Scientists from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, in the USA, recently proved that third-hand smoke can also kill over time.
They proved that the smelly residue (third-hand smoke), which sticks to almost all surfaces long after the second-hand smoke has cleared out, can actually cause significant long-term genetic damage to human cells.
The researchers said that chemical compounds found in third-hand smoke are among the most potent carcinogens around and are capable of causing most cancers in humans.
And estimated 30% of South Africans are smokers, and about 60% of all lung cancer deaths in South Africa are due to tobacco smoking, according to the national Lung Cancer Association.
“By taking the right measures, this tobacco epidemic can be entirely prevented,” concluded WHO’s Douglas Bettcher.
Hayden Horner
http://www.health24.com/Lifestyle/Stop-smoking/News/Higher-cigarette-prices-do-save-lives-20130717

E-cigarette regulation and taxes once again on the front burner at the Capitol

By WAYNE GREENE World Senior Writer
OKLAHOMA CITY – Three lawmakers are renewing the fight over an issue that lit up the state House last year – electronic cigarettes.
Last week, Speaker of the House T.W. Shannon approved so-called “e-cigarette” study proposals by Speaker Pro Tem Mike Jackson, Rep. Mike Turner and Rep. David Derby.
Jackson, R-Enid, is the second-ranking member of the House leadership. Derby, R-Owasso, is chairman of the House Public Health Committee and will oversee the studies.
An e-cigarette is an electronic inhaler that vaporizes a liquid nicotine solution, simulating the act of tobacco smoking. Like cigarettes, users get a nicotine fix. Unlike cigarettes, there is no smoke.
During the final days of the Legislature’s last session, the House rejected a bill backed by Jackson to deal with the same issue on a 66-29 vote after nearly three hours of questioning and debate.
At issue in the interim studies is how the devices are taxed and how their sales are regulated.
Derby’s study would investigate “regulation of vapor and other emerging nicotine products.”
The Jackson-Turner study would look into “taxation, tobacco harm reduction, and youth access to electronic cigarettes.”
Currently, state law doesn’t adequately address sales of e-cigarettes to minors, and “youth access is definitely something we need to address,” Jackson said.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is considering classifying the devices as tobacco products, a move that could result in a significant tax burden on people using them, he said.
If FDA action made the devices subject to the state’s tobacco tax, it could make the e-cigarette equivalent of a pack of cigarettes taxed at $8.50 to $9, Jackson said.
“What we don’t want to do is put a higher tax on a less-harmful product,” he said.
Jackson said his brother has used an e-cigarette to gradually reduce his nicotine dependency. He hasn’t used a cigarette in three or four months, Jackson said.
“I have seen first-hand how they can help,” he said.
The American Cancer Society opposed Jackson’s efforts last year and will continue to fight against efforts to reduce taxes on e-cigarettes, said James Gray, director of government relations for the Cancer Action Network.
There is no scientific evidence to back claims that e-cigarettes are an effective means of weening smokers from their habit.
No other state has taken the actions Jackson has proposed for Oklahoma, Gray said.
“I think this is a new direction of Big Tobacco, and (legislators are) really cautious about doing anything that provides a new market to Big Tobacco,” he said.
Doug Matheny of tobaccomoney.com said the claim that an FDA regulation could lead to a dramatic state tax hike is a “scare tactic.”
“It’s one of those classic examples of the tobacco industry – and I do believe the tobacco industry is behind this – to make legislators feel like they have to do something – they have to act,” Matheny said. “And actually they don’t need to at all in Oklahoma.”
A simple bill to restrict youth access to e-cigarettes should take less than one page, but the design here is about expanding markets for nicotine, not reducing smoking, Matheny said.
“These companies don’t really care what you buy from them as long as you continue to buy from them. They’re selling an addictive product that contains nicotine. As long as you don’t quit altogether, they’re happy.”
Tobacco lobbyists are a powerful force at the state Capitol, Matheny said.
According to Oklahoma Ethics Commission reports, contributions to Oklahoma state legislative campaigns from the Reynolds American Inc. political action committee increased by 70 percent in the 2012 election cycle. Meals purchased by lobbyists on behalf of Reynolds American Inc. increased by more than 50 percent, Matheny said.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/article.aspx/E_cigarette_regulation_and_taxes_once_again_on_the/20130716_11_A1_CUTLIN990334?subj=1

Forum editorial: Take deep breath and relax

Some folks in North Dakota are in a snit because anti-smoking funds are being used to promote the cause at specific events, such as the Fargo-Moorhead gay pride festival. They should take a deep breath, preferably at a nearby smoke-free bar, and calm down.
ND Quits and the state health department are doing what they’re supposed to be doing. They are using funds, some state and federal, some from the multi-year settlement with tobacco companies, to get smokers to quit or others to never start. They are developing and implementing strategies to educate about the known dangers of smoking and secondhand smoke. The efforts can include targeting groups with high rates of tobacco use, such as the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender population, which is 70 percent more likely to smoke than the general population, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Since the federal dollars for state smoking-cessation programs come from the CDC, it logically follows that the state effort should include the at-risk LGBT community. It’s no different than spending a portion of the budget for information and education programs aimed at youth, women or oil workers – groups, by the way, that are in the anti-smoking agencies’ sights. ND Quits operates under a clear mandate from the people of North Dakota, who overwhelmingly approved a ballot measure that set up an agency to manage and spend tobacco settlement dollars. That came a few years ago after an intransigent Legislature refused to act responsibly, even as anti-smoking sentiment took hold in the state.
More silliness about the application of anti-smoking money came from the North Dakota Policy Council’s Zack Tiggelaar. He said that while he supports efforts to encourage smokers to quit, “… is it something the public and taxpayers should be funding?” The answer, as made crystal clear by North Dakota voters, is “yes.”
He added: “The government shouldn’t be using taxpayer dollars to support specific causes.”
Where has he been? North Dakota has special state tax that goes to research sponsored by the Lignite Energy Council. That’s pretty specific. The state funds loans and grants for beginning farmers. That’s specific. The Renaissance Zone program for cities uses tax incentives (public money) to stimulate private development. Yet another specific cause.
Purists of the council’s ilk might wag a finger, but such programs evolved from long-standing public policy, and ND Quits is operating within the same ethic.
Oh, and by the way, those partnerships – whether associated with lignite research, farm and city investment or smoking cessation – work. The money is well spent.

Forum editorials represent the opinion of Forum management and the newspaper’s Editorial Board.

Sherman man's e-cigarette explodes while charging

SHERMAN, TX — They’ve been touted as the 21st-century cigarette. But, one Texoma man has a warning for e-cigarette users after he says simply charging his caused it to blow up.
Sherman resident, Wes Sloan, says when he decided to kick the habit he made the switch to an electronic cigarette thinking it would be safer.
But, he says the device literally blew up in his hand, and he wants you to know just how dangerous they may actually be.
“The battery was into about a two hour charge and it exploded and shot across the room like a Roman candle,” Wes Sloan said.
These are Wes Sloan’s fingers after he says his electronic cigarette caught on fire, eight months ago.
“I still now today have numbness in both of those fingers,” he said.
Sloan says he suffered second and third degree burns, and both he and his wife Cathy say they had to be treated for smoke inhalation
He claims he was charging his e-cig in the USB port of their Macbook. This isn’t the only incident that’s been reported. Just last month, a Tulsa man charging his e-cigarette the same way, says the device started a fire.
One dealer says he discourages people from using anything but the wall charger.
“A lot of people do it, a lot of people have zero problems, but do you want to take that chance?” Jeff Barnard said.
“There wasn’t anything that said how long to charge it. There wasn’t any warnings. It’s marketed as a safe, good product. And the reason we bought the one we did is it was one of the best ones on the market and it was U.S. made,” Sloan said.
Sloan contacted the retailer who sold him the device, and manufacturer, but says he’s had no luck.
News 12 called the company Sloan says made this e-cigarette. They told us their legal team is looking into the matter. They say they’re aware of knock-off versions of their cigarettes roaming around, and won’t comment until they investigate further.
“We want to recover our losses. Most of all, we want the consumer to know that this isn’t as safe a product as they market it to be,” Sloan said.
Texoma Pulmonologist Dr. Don Wynn, says he and doctors around the world recommend e-cigarettes to smokers as a last resort to quit smoking. But, the FDA does not regulate e-cigs. Dr. Wynn says that’s concerning, not only because of the potential injuries they could inflict, but because you may not always know what’s in them.
“We don’t know what the industry put in the electronic cigarettes,” Dr. Wynn said. “I believe we need more research to determine whether the electronic cigarettes are harmful or helpful for patients.”
As for the Sloans, they say they’ll never try another.
“Every time I see someone buying one at a gas station or anywhere, I let them know that you know, be careful because they can explode,” Sloan said.
Dr. Wynn wants to study the long-term effects of the e-cigs, to find out whether they actually do improve smokers’ health. He needs 200 participants for the study.
If you would like more information regarding the study, contact Dr. Wynn’s office at (903) 463-0003.
http://www.kxii.com/news/headlines/E-cigarette-explodes-in-Texoma-mans-home-215771641.html  (Video included)

E-Cig Sellers Make Most of Regulatory Breathing

By DAN MANGAN, CNBC
Sell ’em if you’ve got ’em—without regulations.
Makers of electronic cigarettes are enjoying a booming marketplace even as they keep wary eye on the Food and Drug Administration, which is expected to release proposed regulations of the nicotine-vapor-peddling category this fall.
The lack of federal regulations on e-cigarettes—in contrast to tight rules on traditional smokes—has given companies a long leash. Sales of the products are projected to double to $1 billion, with about 250 different brands, all without nationwide restrictions on advertising, Internet sales, flavorings or even the age of buyers.
But those days are numbered.
Vivien Azer, a Citigroup tobacco analyst, said the lack of federal regulations has given e-cig companies “some breathing room” to grow. “You think about the competition landscape,” she said. “Part of that is trying to get as much done as possible before regulation.”
In early July, the FDA said that it would issue proposed rules on unspecified “tobacco products” in October. Those products are widely assumed to be e-cigarettes, which a 2010 court decision allows the agency to regulate.
The FDA declined to comment on the timing or contents of its planned “deeming regulations” for e-cigs, which are gaining popularity because they are perceived as being less harmful than traditional cigarettes. They also help and avoid the smell and indoor bans that plague tobacco smokers.
Azer and other industry observers said implementation of the regulations, after the FDA considers public comment could take another 12 to 18 months.
“There’s an incentive now to get as good as you can before the FDA starts regulation,” said Dr. Neal Benowitz of San Francisco General Hospital Medical Center.
“People know at some point these products are going to be evaluated. Therefore, there’s an incentive to put together an effective product that people like, that are also safe,” said Benowitz, who co-authored the article “The Regulatory Challenge of Electronic Cigarettes” published Monday in the Journal of the American Medical Association.
‘May the best company win’
“At this point, it’s a free trade, and may the best company win,” said Eli Alelov, CEO of Logic Technology, the nation’s No. 3 e-cig company.
His company is being realistic about possible FDA rules, however. For example,Logic advertises on more than 15 radio stations and is contemplating launching an expensive television campaign. That would follow TV ads by two of its leading competitors, Njoy and Blu (the latter was bought by Lorillard last year). Both radio and TV are off-limits to traditional cigarette ads.
“We’re supposed to start a campaign by the end of the year,” Alelov said of Logic’s TV push. But, he added, “we want to wait for the FDA’s proposed regulations to suggest “what we can and can’t show on television.”
Matthew Steingraber, co-founder of White Cloud Electronic Cigarettes, said there are “positives” that come from having no federal regulation, including “flexibility in the type of nicotine we can offer, and we’re not held to a certain flavor.”
White Could sells e-cigarettes containing six different strengths, ranging from “nicotine-free all the way up to 5.4 percent by volume,” he said, adding that the options are a selling point to those looking to transition to e-cigs and then taper down their nicotine consumption.
The Tarpon Springs, Fla.-based company also sells 19 different flavors of e-cigs, including two added last month: Iced Berry and Zero K, which boasts “a cold blast of peppermint.”
Flavors are prohibited for traditional cigarette makers. In 2009, the FDA flexed its muscle in regulating tobacco for the first time by banning candy- fruit- or clove-flavored cigarettes because of concerns they would attract teens.
“Adults, in fact, like fruit-flavored things, and I think it’s a nice change, whenever you’re switching from tobacco, which tastes horrible, to have different flavors available to you,” Steingraber said.
He is concerned that the FDA might decide to ban flavored e-cigarettes as well. That “would most likely turn smokers off of the product” because they would be left with “an essentially flavorless” vapor that would make traditional cigarettes appear preferable in comparison, he said.
He argues that banning flavors in or setting maximums on nicotine content in e-cigs would make kicking the tobacco habit even harder for traditional smokers.
But a perhaps bigger concern for Steingraber and other executives at e-cig makers is a potential ban on Internet sales. Seventy-five percent of White Cloud’s business is in online transactions.
“What would deliver the hardest blow to e-cigarettes … would probably be something that eliminates online sales,” said Steingraber, adding that such a ban would only help the tobacco giants that sell e-cigs and already have a massive retail footprint from their traditional products. “It would be somewhat catastrophic,” he said.
But White Cloud, Logic and a number of other companies welcome the prospect that the FDA regulations will include quality-control standards in e-cigarette manufacture and in the nicotine-laced liquids the devices vaporize for inhalation.
In fact, a number of e-cigarette makers are already marketing their products as if some rules are in effect.
Altria, the parent of Philip Morris, will begin selling its e-cig line, MarkTen, in August in Indiana. David Sylvia, a spokesman for Altria, said any FDA rules should encourage “good product guidelines and good manufacturing practices” in the category. “It should lead to better product performance and reduced variability,” he added.
Altria has not disclosed details of its MarkTen campaign, and Sylvia declined to answer whether the company would advertise on TV or radio.
But Altria is holding the product to standards similar to those for its traditional cigarette brands, he said.
For example, although there are no federal rules about purchase age or behind-the-counter display, Altria’s contracts with vendors state that “the product will be sold behind the counter, in a clerk-assisted fashion, to people 18 and over,” Sylvia said.
Those agreements happen to comply with an Indiana state law enacted in July, but Sylvia said Altria supports federal regulation that would provide consistency for e-cig vendors, who now face a “hodgepodge patchwork” of state regulations.
After years on the sidelines, No. 2 tobacco company Reynolds American is entering the e-cigarette market, rolling out its Vuse line in Colorado this month. The company plans to advertise Vuse on TV as it tries to build share in a tight market.
“The FDA recognizes that we do have the right … to advertise on TV,” said David Howard, spokesman for R.J. Reynolds Vapor, the subsidiary selling Vuse. But, he added, “in our television ads you will not see people using the product.”
In addition, Vuse will not be marketed online. Howard said that decision was a function of not having enough security to ensure that the products were being sold only to adults—a concern that reflects recognition that the FDA will be regulating e-cigs as tobacco products.
“Therefore, we are marketing them as tobacco products,” Howard said.
This article originally appeared at CNBC.com. Read more at CNBC:
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2013/07/18/E-Cig-Sellers-Make-Most-of-Regulatory-Breathing-Room.aspx#g11MtCIZc8W4wkGW.99

Poor Diet, Tobacco Use and Lack of Physical Activity Taking Toll on Nation's Health

By Derek Yach, executive director, The Vitality Institute, and a former executive director of the World Health Organization (WHO), and Will Rosenzweig, institute commission chair and managing partner, Physic Ventures
While we’re living longer, poor diet, tobacco use and inadequate physical activity are negatively impacting our health. These are some of the findings of research released this week by the U.S. Burden of Disease Collaborators, prompting much discussion and debate. To those of us on the front lines of promoting workplace health this comes as no surprise. This study should only add to the sense of urgency that we as a nation must have in solving this crisis.
There is a direct link between the health of the U.S. workforce and the overall wellbeing of the U.S. economy. Currently, greater than 50 percent of Americans live with one or more chronic disease. With this rising burden of chronic disease comes rising costs within the health care system, and increased premiums at a cost to employers. Compounding this, employees with chronic disease take more sick days and are less productive on the job. Workplace health is of significant importance to the economic productivity of the nation and critical to reducing the national debt. The U.S. is slipping behind its major Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development Countries (OECD) competitors regarding improvements in population health. Specifically, the U.S. falls in the bottom 20 percent of the 34 OECD countries for the following chronic diseases: ischemic heart diseases (rank: 27), lung cancer (28), COPD (32), diabetes (31), cardiomyopathy (31), chronic kidney disease (31), and hypertensive heart disease (27). Poorer health today could translate into lower productivity tomorrow.
This is the first major analysis of the health status of the U.S. population in more than 15 years, led by a global collaborative of scientists from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) at the University of Washington. The study found that while Americans are showing progress in reducing death rates (adjusted for age, across a variety of diseases), we aren’t living healthier. Additionally, death rates from illnesses associated with obesity, such as diabetes and kidney disease, as well as neurological conditions like Alzheimer’s disease, are on the rise. Poor diet, tobacco use and physical inactivity are driving the disease burden.
The negative impact on our health care system cannot be understated as people who live longer and unhealthier lives are costly — not only in terms of health care spend, but the impact on the productivity of our workforce and the ability of U.S. businesses to compete in a global economy. A point made recently in the Bipartisan Policy Center’s recent report.
None of this is news to The Vitality Institute, a global health think tank focused on reducing chronic disease risk. In fact, we recently released new data indicating a dangerous gap in the chronological age of Americans and their risk adjusted Vitality Age, as calculated based on a variety of factors including those cited in this new report.
So now that we so clearly understand the problem, what are we going to do about it? To that end, we’ve recently assembled The Vitality Institute Commission. We’re bringing together prominent thinkers in health and business including: Dr. Rhonda Cornum, with deep expertise from the Department of Defense; Susan Dentzer, with Robert Wood Johnson Foundation; Ginny Ehrlich, with the Clinton Health Matters Initiative; Jeff Levi, with Trust for America’s Health; Ellis Rubinstein, with the New York Academy of Sciences; Dr. Dennis Schmuland, with Microsoft; and Dr. Kevin Volpp, from the University of Pennsylvania. All with the urgent goal of placing the power of evidence-based prevention at the center of health care policies and actions in the U.S. Better evidence, smarter laws and higher levels of innovation we believe could make a difference.
There is strength in numbers, and we are working with corporations, associations, federal, state, and local government to identify multi-stakeholder solutions that will address the issues facing our nation’s health in bold and transformative ways.
For the U.S. to maintain its economic competitiveness, our health policy efforts need to address the risk factors of preventable chronic diseases that disproportionately affect the U.S. population (e.g., physical inactivity, diet, and alcohol and tobacco consumption) by effectively investing resources to ensure that each individual has the opportunity to make beneficial contributions to society and therefore progress the economy. We will soon issue a call for wide participation to harness the myriad of great ideas and actions already making a difference at the community, city or state level to ultimately improve America’s health.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-derek-yach/americans-health_b_3588588.html

Letter: Thoreson did not tell the full story

By: Vicki Voldal Rosenau, Valley City, N.D., INFORUM
The gentleman doth protest too much, methinks. State Rep. Blair Thoreson, R-Fargo, that is.
In last Sunday’s (July 7) Forum, Thoreson oozed indignation over Dr. Eric Johnson’s 2-months-old public debunking of Thoreson’s failed resolution touting the discredited, unproven “tobacco harms reduction” scheme.
Thoreson testily asserted he “never had any affiliations” with the out-of-state “special-interest groups” referenced in Johnson’s May letter, but I think he forgot about ALEC. Disingenuously named, the corporate-funded American Legislative Exchange Council is a corporate bill mill. It connects corporate lobbyists and right-wing politicians behind closed doors where they craft ALEC “model” legislation serving corporate interests over the interests of ordinary Americans. The bills get introduced in statehouses nationwide (after being stripped of their ALEC origin).
Two big tobacco companies on ALEC’s private board, Altria (formerly Philip Morris) and Reynolds American, have long worked through ALEC to push “harm reduction” as their alternative to actually preventing and reducing tobacco use.
Thoreson is public sector chairman of ALEC’s Communications and Technology Committee, and is a former ALEC state chairman for North Dakota.
Small wonder that Mark Twain reportedly loved to proclaim: “No man’s life, liberty or property is safe while the legislature is in session.”

Letter: Thoreson fronts for Big Tobacco

By: Jay Taylor, Mapleton, N.D., INFORUM
In a recent letter to the editor, Rep. Blair Thoreson, R-Fargo, criticized a Grand Forks physician for not supporting his support for e-cigarettes. Actually, Thoreson’s push was not supported by anyone in the Legislature, but you gotta give him points for keeping at it.
The push today is from those supporting a “Harm Reduction Strategy,” which includes Thoreson. This push kind of sneaks in the door as it’s supported by some of the Big Tobacco folks. Their theory is that we have failed to get everyone in the world to quit using tobacco, so why not try some products that may have less risk. They often recommend the e-cigarette as well as some smokeless tobacco products.
E-cigarettes have not been shown to be safe, and each brand that we look at seems to have different chemicals within. They are not approved by the Food and Drug Administration, and my guess is that they never will have that approval.
What is approved and what does work is three-fold: attitude, education and medicine. First, want to quit! Then learn why you should and use safe, effective medications in the correct dosage to get the job done. Call the Quit Line: 800-QUIT-NOW and get going.
http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/406052/

New tobacco products lure younger smokers

By Adelaide Effie Beckman
For The TimesDaily
It remains illegal to market tobacco products to teenagers, but some health experts argue it hasn’t stopped some companies from finding a way around the law.
Tobacco companies are now targeting teens with cheap nicotine products in colorful packaging, according to Melanie Dickens, tobacco prevention and control coordinator for the Lauderdale County Health Department.
Dickens said teens are more susceptible to the new flavored tobacco products such as nicotine sticks and orbs.
However data collected by the Alabama Department of Public Health shows that the number of high schools students who smoke has significantly decreased. Nearly 19 percent of high school students in Alabama smoked in 2010, compared to 30.2 percent in 2000.
Nicotine sticks look like toothpicks, but they are pure nicotine. Dickens said teenagers can easily have them in their mouths without attracting attention from their parents or their teachers. She added nicotine orbs are small dissolvable tablets of nicotine that come in different flavors, which “look like little Tic-Tacs.”
Dickens said parents don’t always know if their children are using tobacco because the new nicotine products don’t create the smoke or smell of cigarettes and cigars.
“A lot of times if the kids are not using cigarettes . . . mom and dad might not be aware,” she said.
Dickens said teens often don’t realize how much nicotine they’re using. One Black and Mild cigar has the same amount of nicotine as 10 cigarettes, and one pinch of smokeless tobacco has the same amount of nicotine as three or four cigarettes. Both products are popular with teens, she said.
“They feel invincible; that’s why they don’t want to quit,” she said. “It’s an addiction and a habit.”
Talking to children early on about the dangers of tobacco use is the best way to keep them from becoming smokers, according to Valerie Thigpen, prevention specialist for the Lauderdale County schools district.
“If you wait until they’re in the sixth grade, they’ve already been exposed,” she said.
Thigpen said children need to be taught the risks associated with tobacco and how to say no to peer pressure.
“I am a major believer in if you can prevent someone from starting, it’s a whole lot easier than getting someone to stop once they’ve started,” Thigpen said.
There are lots of reasons teens smoke or use smokeless tobacco, Dickens said. Peer pressure, boredom and marketing all play a role. Thigpen said teens often smoke because their parents do.
University of North Alabama student Jestin Coats said he only smokes when he’s stressed after a long day. He said he rarely smokes, maybe once every nine months, and he has no trouble stopping once he’s started.
Coats said he had his first cigarette when he was 19 and his parents didn’t know. “I don’t want them to.”
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention say other factors that contribute to tobacco use in teens are low socioeconomic status, lack of parental support or involvement, low self-image or self-esteem, low levels of academic achievement and exposure to tobacco advertising.
Religious participation, racial/ethnic pride and higher academic achievement or aspirations are factors that have been found to protect teens from tobacco use.
“Tobacco is a huge issue with a lot of our high school students,” Thigpen said. “They tell me, ‘I just like it. I like the way it makes me feel. It calms me down.’ The kids seem to live by ‘if it feels good, do it,’ because if it brings them pleasure they can’t get enough of it.”
Officials with the disease control center say tobacco use in teens is associated with high-risk sexual behavior, use of alcohol and use of marijuana and other drugs.
“Tobacco is still truly the gateway drug,” Thigpen said.
“We’re not saying that everyone who uses tobacco is going to use bigger things,” Dickens said, adding it’s a risky behavior that leads to other risky behaviors.
Katelyn Cosby, 22, a resident of Rogersville, said she started smoking when she was 14 or 15.
“My mom was not happy,” Cosby said. “She used to steal my cigarettes out of my purse and put ‘how to quit smoking’ pamphlets in my purse. I usually just gave them back to her.”
Cosby said she started smoking because many of her friends were smoking. She quit smoking while she was pregnant with her children, but she said she hasn’t made the effort to quit permanently because it’s too much of a habit.
“It’s weird to try not to (smoke),” she said.
Dickens said 6.3 million children who are alive today will eventually die of tobacco related illnesses if the current rates of tobacco use do not change.
“(Not using tobacco) is the one thing you can do to reduce your risk of cancer,” said Amy Fields, a spokeswoman for the American Cancer Society. “People who quit at any age, whether they’re young or old, they’re going to live longer.”
Fields said as many as one-third of cancer deaths could be prevented if people avoided tobacco products. Lung cancer is the cancer most commonly associated with smoking, but using tobacco products increase a person’s risk of developing all types of cancer.
“Kids have no idea the damage they do to themselves (by smoking),” Thigpen said.
Dickens said teens should try to break their smoking habits as soon as possible because the longer a person smokes, the harder it is to quit.
For information on how to quit, Dickens suggested calling 1-800-QUIT-NOW or talking to a health care provider.
Fields said her advice to parents whose children smoke is to do everything possible to help their children kick the habit immediately.
http://www.timesdaily.com/news/local/article_4488ab9a-ec3a-11e2-bb9b-10604b9f6eda.html

North Dakota puts $2,500 in anti-smoking funds toward Fargo pride festival

By: Kyle Potter, The Forum, INFORUM
BISMARCK – A division of North Dakota’s health department that aims to help smokers quit is putting $2,500 toward a gay pride festival in Fargo later this summer.
Officials from North Dakota Quits and the health department say they’re trying to target populations with high smoking rates, but it’s raised a question of whether the state should put public dollars toward endorsing a cause – whether it’s a gay pride festival or just trying to get North Dakotans to kick the habit.
Krista Fremming, director of the Department of Health’s Tobacco Control Program, said their $2,500 contribution for this summer’s pride festival is not a simple sponsorship but a means to reach the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender population, which is 70 percent more likely to smoke than the general population, according to the Centers for Disease Control.
That contribution covers setting up a booth and handing out brochures, plus advertising in the F-M Pride’s guide and on their website.
“We have a limited budget,” she said. “What we want to do is reach the people who are most in need of our services. It’s not just the LGBT community.” She said other populations targeted include Native Americans, oil workers in the Bakken region and pregnant women who struggle with quitting.
Fremming said they attend 5 to 10 such events a year, such as the Women’s Health Conference in Fargo and an expo for oil workers in Minot.
North Dakota Quits spent about $854,000 on promotion over the last two years – 15 percent of its $3.5 million in expenditures, according to the agency’s budget. Three-quarters of that spending paid for TV, magazine and newspaper advertising to recruit people into quitting smoking.
The remainder of its promotional budget is split between attending events like Fargo-Moorhead Pride and printing informational brochures to hand out and put in doctors’ offices.
ND Quits specifically targets current smokers. A separate state agency focuses on smoking prevention programs and advertising. About $2.6 million of ND Quits’ expenditures cover the direct costs of smoking cessation programs, including the cost of medications.
The agency’s programming is funded with both state and federal money. About $2.3 million of its last two-year budget came from grants from the Centers for Disease Control, which is funded with federal taxpayer dollars. Fremming said the CDC encourages each state to direct some of that money toward outreach and advertising.
North Dakota’s $3.2 million share doesn’t come through general tax revenues, but from a state fund filled with money from North Dakota’s settlement with tobacco companies. The tobacco industry agreed to pay out $206 billion over 25 years to 46 states, including North Dakota, to cover some of the health care costs of smoking. To date, North Dakota has received about $360 million.
But whether they’re from a dedicated state fund or from federal coffers, those are public dollars and that’s the problem, the North Dakota Policy Council’s Zack Tiggelaar said.
Tiggelaar, the group’s executive director, said he supports efforts to encourage smokers to quit, “but is it something that the public and the taxpayers should be funding?” he asked.
“The government shouldn’t be using taxpayer dollars to support specific causes. If the money was completely private and there were no public dollars at all, there would be no issue,” he said.
Rep. Joshua Boschee, a Democrat who represents Fargo in the Legislature and is one of the organizers of this year’s pride festival, said the festival has partnered with other anti-smoking groups in the past. He calls it an “education partnership.”
The festival runs from Aug. 8 through Aug. 11.
“Would we rather the government pays for it on the front end?” to try to curb the negative health effects of smoking, Boschee asked.
“Or do we want to pay for it in the long run when Medicaid and Medicare are covering the costs?”
http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/406135/