Posts

NEWS RELEASE: ALA & TFND celebrate WHO “World No Tobacco Day”

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:    Saturday, May 31, 2014

ALA & TFND celebrate WHO “World No Tobacco Day”

In honor of “World No Tobacco Day”, celebrated by the World Health Organization (WHO) each year on May 31, the American Lung Association in North Dakota (ALA) and Tobacco Free North Dakota (TFND) encourage policymakers and all North Dakotans to examine the current taxes on tobacco products in our state and its relationship to above average tobacco use rates in both adults and youth in North Dakota.
Research and studies have long shown the correlation between cheap tobacco and higher use rates.  Unfortunately, North Dakota has both.
While the U.S. average tax on a pack of cigarettes is $1.53, as of today, North Dakota ranks 46th lowest in the nation at just $0.44 per pack.  At the same time, North Dakota’s high school smoking rate of 19.4% exceeds the national average of 18.1%; our youth smokeless tobacco rate of 13.6% almost doubles that of the 7.7% national average; and our adult smoking rate of 21.2% continues to rank higher than the 19.0% national average.
“We challenge our leaders – from top to bottom – to keep the health of North Dakotans, especially our young people, in mind as they set priorities and enact policies in the future,” said Kristie Wolff, Manager of Advocacy and Tobacco Control for ALA.  “We know what policies work, and the health and economic benefits are proven.  We just need leaders with the courage to do what’s right by our kids.”
The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends the per pack cigarette tax should reach or exceed 75% of the total cigarette price.  In North Dakota, that tax would equal a minimum of $3.34 per pack, more than 7.5 times higher than that of the current $0.44 per pack.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Background:  May 31, 2014 marks the World Health Organization (WHO) annual commemoration of “World No Tobacco Day”.  Their ultimate goal is “to contribute to protecting present and future generations not only from the devastating health consequences due to tobacco, but also from the social, environmental and economic scourges of tobacco use and exposure to tobacco smoke”.
This year, WHO is calling on partner countries to raise taxes on tobacco.  Research shows that higher taxes are especially effective in reducing tobacco use among lower-income groups and in preventing young people from starting to smoke. 
Source:  CDC – http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6321a1.htm?s_cid=mm6321a1_x

You Now Have To Be 21 Years Old To Buy Cigarettes In New York City

 | by  Brigitte Dusseau

New York raised the minimum age to buy cigarettes to 21 on Sunday, in its latest initiative to encourage healthier behavior among residents.

The law, signed November 19 shortly before former mayor Michael Bloomberg finished his third term, had a six-month waiting period before it came into effect — but its impact can already be clearly felt.

“Under 21, no tobacco,” warned a small sign at the entrance of a small shop that sells smokes, newspapers, candy, coffee and cakes, in the Nolita neighborhood (North of Little Italy).

No tobacco, either, for anyone who can’t present a valid ID proving their age. Shopkeeper scan IDs to test their authenticity before handing over the box of cigarettes.

The measure — unprecedented among America’s big cities — raises the legal age to buy cigarettes from 18. It also applies to other forms of tobacco and to e-cigarettes.

It’s the latest of New York’s efforts to reduce smoking in the city, which bans cigarettes and, as of April 29, e-cigarettes in restaurants and bars, in parks or squares, and at the city’s public beaches. Some private residential buildings have also banned smoking.

Cigarette taxes in the city are also the highest in the country: $5.85 a carton, which brings the overall price to around $12. In addition, the city has established a minimum price of $10.50 a box for cigarettes.

Nataleigh Kohn, 23, who works at a startup company, underwent her ID check with good grace.
“It is a good thing. People in high school can’t start smoking,” she said.
Thomas Wall, 24, a former smoker who works in architecture, agreed, though he said the measure probably wouldn’t eliminate teen smoking all together.
He compared the new age restriction to the ones around alcohol, which set the US drinking at at 21.
When underage people want alcoholic drinks, they often get them from older people who buy for them.
Shopkeeper Muhammad Arisur Khaman said he’s seen some complaints since the law was implemented, but not many. He just tells unhappy clients: “It’s the law.”
The higher minimum age is “a step in the right direction,” said Pat Bonadies, a teacher walking with a group of students in Union Square.
The 52-year-old said there has been a sea change in attitudes towards smoking.
“When I was younger, smoking was much more prevalent among teenagers and preteens in restaurants and social settings,” she said.
“Even my mother’s friends, they smoked during their pregnancies.”
The city has seen a sharp drop in adult smokers, from 21.5 percent in 2002 to 14.8 percent in 2011, according to official statistics.
But the smoking rate among young people has been steady since 2007, at 8.5 percent, which was part of the impetus for raising the minimum age.
Authorities hope that the new law will cut the smoking rate among 18 to 20 years by more than half.
New York hopes to inspire other cities to pass similar age restrictions.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/18/new-york-city-cigarettes-minimum-buying-age-now-21_n_5348490.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000063

Health Insurance Surcharge Has Vapers Fuming

By  via GOOD MORNING AMERICA

Under the Affordable Care Act, insurance companies can charge smokers and other tobacco users up to 50 percent more than non-smokers for a health insurance policy. But where do e-smokers fit in?

E-cigarettes are battery-operated nicotine inhalers that consist of a rechargeable lithium battery, a cartridge called a cartomizer and an LED that lights up during each puff. Although they contain no tobacco, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration plans on regulating them like cigarettes and cigars. This, it turns out, is complicating things for insurance companies.

While the ACA allows insurance companies to charge higher premiums to smokers and other tobacco users, the definition of a “smoker” is unclear under the law.

One way insurance companies could deal with e-cigarettes is to lump them in with tobacco products – a move that would subject so-called vapers to the same higher premiums as cigarette smokers. The companies could also swing the other way and decide to cover the cost of e-cigarettes as a means to help people quit smoking, despite a lack of evidence that the devices work as well as a patch. Insurers could also choose to ignore e-cigs altogether.

”The Affordable Care Act does not specify e-cigarette use for purposes of cessation coverage or tobacco surcharge application,” the American Cancer Society said in a statement to ABC News. “The lack of clarity may allow health plans to try to add the surcharge for e-cigarettes.”

If and when the FDA regulation of e-cigarettes goes into effect, insurance companies could change any of their current policies to reflect the agency’s direction. In the meantime, most companies claim they have too little experience with the devices to have a position, according to an informal poll by the National Association of Health Underwriters.

Carrie McLean, director of customer care for the online health insurance brokerage eHealth, said some insurers are telling their agents to add a smoking surcharge for those who vape.

“If a consumer indicates they use e-cigarettes, the carriers are expecting them to be uprated just as if they are a smoker,” she said, noting that consumers aren’t actually asked about the type of tobacco products they use during the health insurance application process – just whether they use them at all.

America’s Health Insurance Plans, an association which represents most of the country’s large health insurance companies, recommends that agents ask about regular tobacco use in the last six months and the most recent use. However, if a consumer were to ask for clarification about whether or not e-cigarettes count as tobacco use, then an agent is obliged to add the surcharge, McLean said.

“The problem arises because most people fill out their applications online and, as of now, most applications don’t ask specifically about e-cigarettes,” McLean said. “Consumers are left to decide on their own whether or not they consider themselves a tobacco user.”

It’s an important question to settle, as the price differential can be significant.

For example, a plan for a 40-year-old non-smoker with a $35,000 income that costs $3,857 a year minus a $532 tax credit would rise to $5,254 for someone labeled a smoker, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation’s exchange subsidy calculator. In some cases, the rate increase might even be larger than the 50 percent increase the ACA allows because government tax credits only apply to the base premium and not the tobacco surcharge.

Not surprisingly, e-cigarette advocates are fired up about vaping being likened to smoking by insurance companies. Cynthia Cabrera, executive director of the e-cigarette industry organization Smoke Free Alternatives Trade Association, said that e-cigarettes and other vaping products are a healthier lifestyle choice than combustible tobacco cigarettes, and argued that it seems inconsistent to apply the same higher insurance rates to vapers.

“The SFATA does not agree with any policy that positions users of electronic cigarettes and other vapor products in the same category as smokers,” she said. “These products do not emit smoke and do not contain tobacco, tar or any of the many carcinogens known to exist in combustible cigarettes.”

But the phenomenon of vaping is so new that experts say there’s insufficient science to determine whether e-cigarettes really are a healthier alternative to traditional tobacco products.

Dr. Ravi Ram, the chief medical officer for Blue Shield of Northeastern New York, said that although New York has chosen to eliminate rate increases for e-smokers, he suspects most plans would place e-cigarettes on par with cigarettes in terms of their health risk.

“Until you have some long term data and some actuarial differences to health outcomes such as lung cancer, emphysema, heart disease and other conditions which are significantly impacted by smoking, and likely to be impacted by e-cigarettes as well, you have to rate them the same,” he said.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/health-insurance-surcharge-vapers-fuming/story?id=23628060

 

House panel moves to block Navy proposal to ban tobacco sales on bases, ships

FoxNews.com
House lawmakers approved a measure this week that would protect tobacco sales on military bases and ships and effectively block the Navy’s plans to drop the products in a bid to get servicemembers to stop smoking.
The House Armed Services Committee added language to a fiscal 2015 defense authorization bill that bans defense officials from enacting “any new policy that would limit, restrict, or ban the sale of any legal consumer product category” on military installations, the Navy Times reported.
The Pentagon said last month that no final decision has been made about banning sales to troops, but Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said he asked for a review to address the “astounding” health care costs associated with tobacco-related illness.
A March 14 Defense Department memo issued guidance to all service chiefs:
“Although we stopped distributing cigarettes to our Service members as part of their rations, we continue to permit, if not encourage, tobacco use. The prominence of tobacco products in retail outlets and permission for smoking breaks while on duty sustain the perception that we are not serious about reducing the use of tobacco.”
Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., who sponsored the amendment prohibiting the Navy’s plans, said the move amounts to a hand-holding of troops who are responsible adults and should be able to make their own life choices, the Navy Times reported.
“Just because you joined the service doesn’t mean you can’t live comfortably,” said Hunter, a Marine veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan. “If your goal is to make the military healthy, let’s outlaw war. That’s as unhealthy as you can get.”
The measure passed by a 53-9 vote on Wednesday, with some Democrats objecting to limits on the military’s efforts to promote health and fitness. In order for the regulation to become law, the  Senate would have to adopt the House measure.
Rep. Susan Davis, D-Calif., objected to the proposal, arguing that promoting good health is just as important as military readiness, The Washington Times reported.
“This is not telling people that they can’t use tobacco, clearly people can go across the street almost wherever they are and purchase that,” Davis said. “But we are sending a kind of double message, I think, by not saying that we recognize tobacco can cause damage, not only to a sailor, but also to their family, second hand smoke we know is a concern.”
The Navy Times reported that measure covers any product legal in the U.S. as of Jan. 1, including alcohol and sugary drinks. The measure does not cover marijuana.
Fox News’ Jennifer Griffin contributed to this report.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/05/09/house-panel-moves-to-block-navy-proposal-to-ban-tobacco-sales-on-bases-ships/

Higher taxes on cigarettes make good sense

Washington Post Editorial Board
Maryland has one of the highest state-imposed cigarette tax rates in the nation ($2 per pack) and, unsurprisingly, one of the lowest smoking rates. Virginia has one of the lowest cigarette tax rates in the nation (30 cents per pack); its smoking rate is almost 20 percent higher than Maryland’s.
America is well past the debate about the health effects of smoking, but tobacco taxes in many states remain low, thanks largely to the influence of tobacco companies. Yet it is clear that higher cigarette taxes have a direct effect on smoking rates, and they are particularly effective in dissuading young people from taking up the habit.
In Maryland, where the tax on a pack of cigarettes was raised in 1999 (to 36 cents), 2002 (to $1) and 2008 (to the current rate of $2), smoking rates have fallen by about a third, much faster than the national average. At the time of the last increase, Maryland’s tobacco tax was 6th-highest in the nation; since then it has slipped to 12th as other states have leapfrogged each other in an effort to further discourage smoking — and raise revenue in the process.
In Annapolis, public health advocates and other groups are now pushing for another $1 increase, which would bump the state tax in Maryland to $3 per pack. Depending on how much of the increase tobacco companies decide to absorb, that could raise the average retail price of cigarettes above $7; it’s currently around $6.40.
The projected benefits of a $1 increase in Maryland make a persuasive case. They include $95 million in additional revenue (which health advocates would like to use to extend Medicaid health coverage to the poor); a 10 percent decrease in the rate of youth smoking; thousands of adults who would be persuaded to quit; and the prevention of thousands of premature deaths, which in turn would produce considerable economic benefits.
It’s true that raising the tax would cause more Marylanders to cross the border to buy cigarettes in Virginia or North Carolina. But cigarette sales fell much more dramatically in 2008 in Maryland, the District and Delaware, all of which raised their tobacco taxes that year, than they rose in Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Virginia, which did not. And while cigarette smuggling remains an unquantifiable challenge, declining smoking rates and the associated public health payoffs are real.
Legislation to raise the tax went nowhere in Annapolis this year, possibly because the state has raised so many other taxes in the last few years. Advocates are mounting a push to gather pledges of support from lawmakers to enact the increase next year.
Meanwhile, in Virginia, where the tobacco lobby remains virtually unchallenged, the average price of a pack of cigarettes, about $4.60, is among the lowest in the nation. If Virginia lawmakers want to encourage children to take up the habit, they’re doing a great job.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/higher-taxes-on-cigarettes-make-good-sense/2014/04/20/aa90bd08-c716-11e3-9f37-7ce307c56815_story.html

Higher Cigarette Tax May Reduce Smoking Habit

By: Steve Urness (NewsDakota.com)
VALLEY CITY, N.D. (NewsDakota.com) At 44 cents per pack of cigarettes, North Dakota has one of the lowest cigarette taxes in the nation. Research has shown that cheap tobacco is a leading cause for tobacco use among our state’s youth, so the North Dakota Center for Tobacco Prevention and Control Policy and  City-County Health District in Barnes County and Valley City are advocating the health benefits of increasing that tax.
According to the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids and the American Cancer Society Action Network, increasing the cigarette tax from 44 cents to $2 could reduce youth smoking by 25 percent. Some 4,700 North Dakotans would be saved from premature smoking-related death and the state would save over $312 million in long-term health care costs.
Executive director for the Center, Jeanne Prom says the benefits of raising the tax are clear, “It’ll also make it more difficult for tobacco companies to hook our children on their lethal products.”
Prom adds, “It’s clear that between saving lives and decreasing health care costs by millions of dollars, increasing the cigarette tax is positive step for North Dakota.”
City County Health District Tobacco Free Coordinator Vicki Voldal Rosenau says “If we raise the price of tobacco, it becomes less affordable and chances for tobacco companies to hook our youth on nicotine are significantly reduced.”
For additional information about North Dakota’s tobacco tax, contact CCHD at 845-8518, or visit www.breathend.com.
http://www.newsdakota.com/2014/04/07/higher-cigarette-tax-may-reduce-smoking-habit/

Study: Tobacco use declines on prime-time TV dramas

By Saba Hamedy, Los Angeles Times
Prime-time television dramas are less smoke friendly than they were in the 1950s.

According to a study published online in the journal Tobacco Control on Thursday, there has been a dramatic decline in visibility of tobacco products on prime-time U.S. broadcast television.
Researchers at the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania determined this drop in portrayals of smoking and tobacco use in prime-time dramas mirrored the national decline in consumption.
The study examined 1,838 hours of popular U.S. prime-time dramas — everything from “Gunsmoke” (in the 1950s) to “House M.D.” (in the 2000s) — shown on television over 56 years.
Research suggested that from 1955 to 2010, tobacco use on television declined from a high of 4.96 instances per hour of programming in 1961 to 0.29 instances per hour in 2010.
The research also noted a decline in consumption and suggested that less prime-time smoking may have led to less smoking by the general population.
“TV characters who smoke are likely to trigger the urge to smoke in cigarette users, making it harder for them to quit,” said Patrick E. Jamieson, the study’s lead author, in a release.
“We now have further evidence that screen-based media are an important factor to consider in continued efforts to reduce the burden of smoking related illness in the U.S. and around the world,” said Dan Romer, the study co-author and APPC associate director.
However, the study, the largest ever of tobacco use on television, looked only at broadcast television shows. Cable programs, such as AMC’s “Mad Men” — where characters frequently smoke cigarettes on screen — were not part of the study.
“Despite the decline since 1961, tobacco use on TV remains a cause for concern,” Jamieson said. “The decline in prime-time TV tobacco use is welcome news, but we need to learn more about tobacco portrayal on cable TV, YouTube, and other popular Internet-based sources.”

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-tobacco-use-primetime-tv-dramas-20140403,0,5751556.story#ixzz2yJOrzdCI

Selling a Poison by the Barrel: Liquid Nicotine for E-Cigarettes

By , New York Times

A dangerous new form of a powerful stimulant is hitting markets nationwide, for sale by the vial, the gallon and even the barrel.

The drug is nicotine, in its potent, liquid form — extracted from tobacco and tinctured with a cocktail of flavorings, colorings and assorted chemicals to feed the fast-growing electronic cigarette industry.

These “e-liquids,” the key ingredients in e-cigarettes, are powerful neurotoxins. Tiny amounts, whether ingested or absorbed through the skin, can cause vomiting and seizures and even be lethal. A teaspoon of even highly diluted e-liquid can kill a small child.

But, like e-cigarettes, e-liquids are not regulated by federal authorities. They are mixed on factory floors and in the back rooms of shops, and sold legally in stores and online in small bottles that are kept casually around the house for regular refilling of e-cigarettes.

Evidence of the potential dangers is already emerging. Toxicologists warn that e-liquids pose a significant risk to public health, particularly to children, who may be drawn to their bright colors and fragrant flavorings like cherry, chocolate and bubble gum.

Photo

The liquid stimulant used in e-cigarettes, when ingested or absorbed through the skin, can cause vomiting, seizures or death. CreditFrank Franklin II/Associated Press

“It’s not a matter of if a child will be seriously poisoned or killed,” said Lee Cantrell, director of the San Diego division of the California Poison Control System and a professor of pharmacy at the University of California, San Francisco. “It’s a matter of when.”

Reports of accidental poisonings, notably among children, are soaring. Since 2011, there appears to have been one death in the United States, a suicide by an adult who injected nicotine. But less serious cases have led to a surge in calls to poison control centers. Nationwide, the number of cases linked to e-liquids jumped to 1,351 in 2013, a 300 percent increase from 2012, and the number is on pace to double this year, according to information from the National Poison Data System. Of the cases in 2013, 365 were referred to hospitals, triple the previous year’s number.

Examples come from across the country. Last month, a 2-year-old girl in Oklahoma City drank a small bottle of a parent’s nicotine liquid, started vomiting and was rushed to an emergency room.

That case and age group is considered typical. Of the 74 e-cigarette and nicotine poisoning cases called into Minnesota poison control in 2013, 29 involved children age 2 and under. In Oklahoma, all but two of the 25 cases in the first two months of this year involved children age 4 and under.

In terms of the immediate poison risk, e-liquids are far more dangerous than tobacco, because the liquid is absorbed more quickly, even in diluted concentrations.

“This is one of the most potent naturally occurring toxins we have,” Mr. Cantrell said of nicotine. But e-liquids are now available almost everywhere. “It is sold all over the place. It is ubiquitous in society.”

The surge in poisonings reflects not only the growth of e-cigarettes but also a shift in technology. Initially, many e-cigarettes were disposable devices that looked like conventional cigarettes. Increasingly, however, they are larger, reusable gadgets that can be refilled with liquid, generally a combination of nicotine, flavorings and solvents. In Kentucky, where about 40 percent of cases involved adults, one woman was admitted to the hospital with cardiac problems after her e-cigarette broke in her bed, spilling the e-liquid, which was then absorbed through her skin.

The problems with adults, like those with children, owe to carelessness and lack of understanding of the risks. In the cases of exposure in children, “a lot of parents didn’t realize it was toxic until the kid started vomiting,” said Ashley Webb, director of the Kentucky Regional Poison Control Center at Kosair Children’s Hospital.

Photo

Nicotine solutions at Volt Vapes in Boise, Idaho. The “e-liquid” comes in colors and flavors that experts say may entice children. CreditKatherine Jones/The Idaho Statesman, via Associated Press

The increased use of liquid nicotine has, in effect, created a new kind of recreational drug category, and a controversial one. For advocates of e-cigarettes, liquid nicotine represents the fuel of a technology that might prompt people to quit smoking, and there is anecdotal evidence that is happening. But there are no long-term studies about whether e-cigarettes will be better than nicotine gum or patches at helping people quit. Nor are there studies about the long-term effects of inhaling vaporized nicotine.

 Unlike nicotine gums and patches, e-cigarettes and their ingredients are not regulated. The Food and Drug Administration has said it plans to regulate e-cigarettes but has not disclosed how it will approach the issue. Many e-cigarette companies hope there will be limited regulation.

“It’s the wild, wild west right now,” said Chip Paul, chief executive officer of Palm Beach Vapors, a company based in Tulsa, Okla., that operates 13 e-cigarette franchises nationwide and plans to open 50 more this year. “Everybody fears F.D.A. regulation, but honestly, we kind of welcome some kind of rules and regulations around this liquid.”

Mr. Paul estimated that this year in the United States there will be sales of one million to two million liters of liquid used to refill e-cigarettes, and it is widely available on the Internet. Liquid Nicotine Wholesalers, based in Peoria, Ariz., charges $110 for a liter with 10 percent nicotine concentration. The company says on its website that it also offers a 55 gallon size. Vaporworld.biz sells a gallon at 10 percent concentrations for $195.

Photo

The website of Liquid Nicotine Wholesalers. The Food and Drug Administration has yet to impose rules on e-liquids’ sale.

Mr. Paul said he was worried that some manufacturers outside the United States — China is a major center of e-cigarette production — were not always delivering the concentrations and purity of nicotine they promise. Some retailers, Mr. Paul said, “are selling liquid and they don’t have a clue what is in it.”

 Cynthia Cabrera, executive director of Smoke Free Alternatives Trade Association, said she would also favor regulations, including those that would include childproof bottles and warning labels, and also manufacturing standards. But she said many companies already were doing that voluntarily, and that parents also needed to take some responsibility.

“You wouldn’t leave a bottle of Ajax out,” she said. Advocates of e-cigarettes sometimes draw comparisons between nicotine and caffeine, characterizing both as recreational stimulants that carry few risks. But that argument is not established by science, and many health advocates take issue with the comparison.

“There’s no risk to a barista no matter how much caffeine they spill on themselves,” said Dr. Neal L. Benowitz, a professor at the University of California, San Francisco, who specializes in nicotine research. “Nicotine is different.”

Without proper precautions, like wearing gloves while mixing e-liquids, these products “represents a serious workplace hazard,” he said.

The nicotine levels in e-liquids varies. Most range between 1.8 percent and 2.4 percent, concentrations that can cause sickness, but rarely death, in children. But higher concentrations, like 10 percent or even 7.2 percent, are widely available on the Internet. A lethal dose at such levels would take “less than a tablespoon,” according to Dr. Cantrell, from the poison control system in California. “Not just a kid. One tablespoon could kill an adult,” he said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/24/business/selling-a-poison-by-the-barrel-liquid-nicotine-for-e-cigarettes.html?_r=0

19th Annual Kick Butts Day used to promote a tobacco-free lifestyle

By Sun Staff , Jamestown Sun
The 19th annual Kick Butts Day, a national day when youths are encouraged to stand up and speak out against tobacco companies, is Wednesday.
Central Valley Health District and the North Dakota Center for Tobacco Prevention and Control Policy are using this occasion to educate youth about the dangers of tobacco.
Research shows that 600 North Dakota youths under the age of 18 become new daily smokers every year, and 14,000 youths will die prematurely from smoking. In addition, 1.9 million packs of cigarettes are bought or smoked each year by youth younger than 18.
Tobacco companies are spending millions in North Dakota each year to get the youth smoking rates up, according to Jeanne Prom, executive director for the Center. Prom said that some of the tactics tobacco companies use to attract youth are candy- and fruit-flavored tobacco products, providing discounts and sales that make their products affordable and paying retailers to prominently display tobacco products in high-traffic areas.
Julie Hoeckle with Central Valley Health District said that Kick Butts Day is a great way to educate youths in the community on the importance of remaining tobacco-free and to inform everyone about the harmful marketing schemes tobacco companies are using to trap youths into using tobacco.
“It’s essential that we continue to educate our youth about tobacco marketing practices so they can identify those tactics and avoid being lured into tobacco use,” Hoeckle said. “Education is key in tobacco prevention.”
Another effective way to reduce youth smoking rates is to increase the cost of tobacco, Hoeckle said. Research supported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the American Lung Association shows that increasing North Dakota’s tobacco tax from 44 cents to $2 would reduce youth smoking rates by 25 percent.
“By making tobacco less affordable, kids are less likely to try using tobacco,” Prom said. “North Dakota projections show us that a $2 cigarette tax has the potential to prevent nearly 8,000 kids from ever starting to use tobacco and can save millions of dollars in health care costs.”
To learn about tobacco prevention, contact Hoeckle or Nancy Neary at 252-8130 or visit www.breathend.com.
http://www.jamestownsun.com/content/19th-annual-kick-butts-day-used-promote-tobacco-free-lifestyle

Letter: Commending CVS for tobacco policy

By: Keely Ihry, Moorhead, INFORUM
As a public health agency we are always educating on the harms of tobacco-use and exposure. We know that smoking kills nearly 500,000 Americans each year, and costs $289 billion in health care costs. Even with the dangers of tobacco use being well documented, the pharmacy industry has continued to sell tobacco products, and as a health care organization this has started to raise some ethical questions. Pharmacies are seen by people as places they go to get better when sick, and to stay healthy during the year, not as a place that should be profiting off products that are the leading cause of preventable death in the U.S.
This is why we truly commend CVS for taking one of the strongest actions any business has ever taken to address the public health problems caused by tobacco use. CVS recognized that selling tobacco products did not align with their commitment to improving the health and wellness of its customers. It should also be noted that CVS chooses not to sell e-cigarettes because they are not FDA approved.
This came at a great time with the momentum of the 50th anniversary of the first ever surgeon general’s warning on smoking and health. In the release the surgeon general called for continued work towards encouraging smokers to quit and preventing youth from starting to use tobacco. We know that nearly 90 percent of youth start smoking before the age of 18. CVS’ decision to stop selling tobacco is a huge statement to Americans, especially youth that tobacco use is harmful to their health.
We hope that this will encourage other pharmacies who are selling tobacco to take notice and take similar action. Removing the sale of tobacco products from a healthcare organization just makes good sense.
Ihry is PartnerSHIP 4 Health tobacco coordinator, Clay County Public Health.
http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/429362/group/Opinion/