Youth – Page 12 – Tobacco Free North Dakota

Letter: Tobacco taxes should be raised

August 12, 2014

“Hey! I have a great idea! Let’s raise a tax on something,” said no North Dakota legislator ever.

Wow! Raising a tax on anything, with North Dakota being so flush from oil money, just doesn’t make any sense at all.

And yet, taxes (or fees if you want a more politically correct term) do continue to inch up here and there.

During the 2013 legislative session, North Dakota lawmakers passed a bill that increased fees for many hunting and fishing licenses.

A tax is generally imposed to gain funds to pay for specific services or products: “It is a compulsory contribution to state revenue, levied by the government on workers’ income and business profits or added to the cost of some goods, services, and transactions.”

As said, to raise a tax in North Dakota today just doesn’t seem to make any sense, unless it’s a tax to protect the health of our residents, prevent disease and thwart kids from starting a path of extremely unhealthy behavior.

OK, I’ve beat around the bush long enough. I have read a lot about the idea of increasing the tobacco tax in North Dakota, and I am totally in favor of such an action. Here’s why:

The tobacco tax in North Dakota is one of the lowest in the nation (we are 46th at 44 cents per pack of 20 cigarettes), the lower-than-us states include: Missouri at 17 cents; Louisiana at 36 cents; Georgia at 37 cents and Alabama at 42 cents.

Our tobacco tax hasn’t increased since 1993.

The effects of North Dakotans’ tobacco use also affects the wallets of those who don’t use tobacco. North Dakota’s annual health care costs directly caused by smoking are $326 million. The portion covered by state Medicaid is $47 million.

But the most important reason is that a higher tobacco tax encourages people to quit and discourages younger folks from starting. According to the Tobacco Free Kids organization, “tobacco tax increases are one of the most effective ways to reduce smoking and other tobacco use, especially among kids. Every 10 percent increase in cigarette prices reduces youth smoking by about seven percent and total cigarette consumption by about four percent.”

For all the work being done by public health and health advocacy organizations, raising the tobacco tax is win-win.

I think it’s about time the North Dakota legislators started having a serious talk about this rather serious idea.

http://www.westfargopioneer.com/content/letter-tobacco-taxes-should-be-raised

Tobacco Companies Have Made 9 Changes To Cigarettes, And They're All Scary Bad

July 30, 2014

Eric March, UPWORTHY
After the tobacco companies lost that major lawsuit in the ’90s, I always assumed they just sort of quietly went away. But nope. Turns out, they just laid low for a while, rebranded, and poured tons of money into figuring out these diabolical new ways to get and keep people addicted to cigarettes.

ABOUT: This graph was compiled by the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. You can read their full report on the increasing danger of cigarettes, which is as massive in scope as it is infuriating,right here. You can also follow the campaign on Twitter and track them on Facebook.Thumbnail image posted to Flickr by user Javier Ignacio Acuña Ditzel, used under Creative Commons license.
http://www.upworthy.com/tobacco-companies-have-made-9-changes-to-cigarettes-and-theyre-all-scary-bad?c=hpstream

Taxes on cigarettes help reduce number of smokers

July 28, 2014

By Matthew L. Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids
The Hill
Science and experience have demonstrated conclusively that cigarette tax increases are highly effective at reducing smoking, especially among kids. Thus, the conclusions in a Gallup poll The Hill recently wrote about (“High cigarette prices aren’t stopping smokers,” July 18) are inconsistent with what happens in the real world every time cigarette taxes are increased.

The most recent surgeon general’s report on tobacco concludes that “raising prices on cigarettes is one of the most effective tobacco control interventions.” The report called for additional cigarette tax increases “to prevent youth from starting smoking and encouraging smokers to quit.” The Congressional Budget Office has also reviewed the evidence and concluded that an increase in the federal cigarette tax would significantly reduce the number of adult smokers.

In the year after a 62-cent increase in the federal cigarette tax in 2009, cigarette sales declined by a historic 11.1 percent. Adult and youth smoking rates also declined. “This single legislative act — increasing the price of cigarettes — is projected to have reduced the number of middle and high school students who smoke by over 220,000 and the number using smokeless tobacco products by over 135,000,” the surgeon general’s report noted.

Even the poll The Hill wrote about reported that more than a quarter of adult smokers surveyed said they smoked less due to tax increases. As there are 42 million smokers in the United States, this translates into millions of smokers whose behavior is affected by cigarette tax increases. And this survey of current smokers would not have included former smokers who have already quit due to increased tobacco taxes.
Tobacco tax increases don’t have to cause every smoker or even a majority of smokers to quit or cut back in order to have a big impact on public health. As the scientific evidence and even the new Gallup poll show, such tax increases will impact the behavior of large numbers of smokers, saving many from a premature death.
From Matthew L. Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, Washington, D.C.

Read more: http://thehill.com/opinion/letters/213571-taxes-on-cigarettes-help-reduce-number-of-smokers#ixzz38sdK91IE
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

The young and poor are keeping big American tobacco alive

July 16, 2014

By Roberto A. Ferdman, The Washington Post

Big American tobacco wants to get bigger in America.

Reynolds American Inc., which sells both Camel and Pall Mall cigarettes, has agreed to acquire rival and Newport menthol-maker Lorillard for an estimated $27.4 billion. If approved, the deal will effectively combine the portfolios of two of the country’s largest cigarette companies—as of last year, Reynolds and Lorillard controlled roughly 26 percent and 14 percent of the U.S. market, respectively—and send a number of brands to the smaller but still significant player Imperial Tobacco Group.

“The deal strengthens Reynolds position in the US, supplying them with Newport’s excellent brand equity and establishes Imperial as a viable third force in the world’s third largest cigarette market by volume,” Shane MacGuill, Tobacco analyst at Euromonitor International, said in an interview.

The shuffle atop American tobacco is a sign that consolidation might be the industry’s best way to cope with the country’s growing disinterest in cigarettes. It also nods to a few areas of potential growth, most notably menthol cigarettes, for which sales have proven comparatively resilient—Newports, a menthol brand, is second only to Marlboro in U.S. sales.

But the deal is also a surprising indication of optimism surrounding the U.S. industry.
“The U.S. is a key growth market for us,” Alison Cooper, Chief Executive for Imperial Tobacco Group, said in a call with reporters. “We’re hugely excited about the opportunities that lie ahead.”
Why? Because the American tobacco market, while challenged, is still more attractive than many of its international counterparts. The U.S. tobacco market contracted by four percent last year, according to the Food and Drug Administration, but cigarette sales in Europe are falling even faster—they are now nearly half what they were in 2000—and other markets are difficult to penetrate. China’s, while growing, is dominated by local player China National Tobacco Corp.
Make no mistake, cigarette consumption has long been in decline in the United States. Americans adults, on average, smoke fewer than 1,300 cigarettes per year, according to a report (pdf) released earlier this year by the Surgeon General. By comparison, that number was upwards of 4,200 in 1963–three times the current figure.

But some states and demographics still seem to be clinging on to the habit–and keeping American tobacco companies afloat.

“Approximately one in five U.S. adults smoke cigarettes, and certain population groups have a higher prevalence of smoking,” the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) noted in a report from earlier this year.

On a state-by-state level, that certainly appears to be true. Take Kentucky and West Virginia, for instance, which each sport smoking rates well above the national average, according to the CDC’s report. More than 28 percent of Kentucky’s and West Virginia’s adult population were regular or frequent smokers as of 2012. In Utah, smokers made up barely more than 10 percent of the population; in California, just over 12 percent; and in New York, just over 16 percent. The national smoking rate was just above 18 percent.

Smoking, as it happens, also appears to be highly correlated with both poverty and education levels in the United States: 27.9 percent of American adults living below the poverty line are smokers, while just 17 percent of those living above it are, according to the CDC; 24.7 percent of American adults without a high school diploma are smokers, while 23.1 percent of those with one are. Only 9.1 percent of those with an undergraduate degree, and 5.9 percent of those with a graduate degree are smokers.

It ranges considerably by race, too. The CDC found that Americans of mixed race were the biggest smokers, with 26.1 percent still smoking cigarettes in 2012. Next were Native Americans, with 21.8 percent smoking. By comparison, only 10.7 of Asians smoked in 2012, according to the survey.
And cigarettes are most popular among those adults between the ages of 25 and 44 years old: 21.6 percent of the age group smokes, more than any other.

If the big tobacco deal is approved, Reynolds will suddenly find itself with more than 30 percent of the American market, and Imperial will find itself with more than 10 percent (Altria Group, which owns Marlboro, controls nearly 50 percent). Don’t be surprised if both turn to those Americans who have been slowest at kicking their respective cigarette habits for help.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/07/16/the-young-and-poor-are-keeping-the-u-s-tobacco-industry-alive/

PLAYERS MAY CONSIDER TOBACCO BAN DISCUSSION IN '16

July 15, 2014

By RONALD BLUM, Associated Press

MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — Major League Baseball players say they may consider whether to discuss a possible ban on chewing tobacco when they negotiate their next labor contract in two years. For now, they hope individuals decide on their own to stop dipping.

Players’ union head Tony Clark said Monday that several of his members have quit cold turkey following the death of Hall of Famer Tony Gwynn on June 16 from oral cancer.

While the use of smokeless tobacco was banned for players with minor league contacts in 1993, it is permitted for players with major league deals. The labor agreement covering 2012-16 says players may not carry tobacco packages and tins in their back pockets when fans are permitted in ballparks, and they may not use tobacco during pregame and postgame interviews and at team functions.

“I think what we have been doing thus far has been a positive, and although I’m not going to offer you a bargaining proposal today on chewing tobacco, we could have that conversation,” Clark said Tuesday before the All-Star game.

“Then we will see where the guys are and continue the education and their appreciation for or against, or what the many considerations that need to be made in the area even look like, and we’ll have that conversation with Major League Baseball,” he said.

Baseball Commissioner Bud Selig, who plans to retire in January, promised “it will be a subject that they’ll discuss at the next collective bargaining” but acknowledged “I understand that individuals have the right to make their own decisions.”

Gwynn, 54 at his death, attributed his cancer to years of chewing tobacco.

“We believe that the numbers suggest that the usage has declined significantly, declined in the minor leagues, declined in the majors,” Clark said during a question-and-answer session with the Baseball Writers’ Association of America. “Our hope is that we continue to educate guys on that the damage that dipping can do, that they will continue to decide not to dip and chew.”

Clark, a former All-Star first baseman who never dipped, said Gwynn’s death “really smacks you between the eyes, and it’s unfortunate sometimes, that an event like that brings that decision instead of that decision being made beforehand.”

No change is planned during the current labor contract.

“We give the players the opportunity to make the decision that they’re going to make against the backdrop of it being legal,” Clark said. “We don’t condone it. They know we don’t condone it. … So at the end of the day, yes, we will continue to educate guys, and yes, the players will continue to have a decision that they make in that area.”

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/players-may-consider-tobacco-ban-discussion-16

Tony Gwynn's death renews call for MLB to ban chewing tobacco

July 15, 2014

(CNN) – At Tuesday’s All-Star game in Minnesota, it will be hard not to think of Padre great Tony Gwynn.

He was an all star 15 times, a man who lived to play and teach and talk baseball, and a man who died way too early because of a habit associated with it – chewing tobacco, a known cause of cancer.

Now, after more than 100 years, there’s a renewed push to get rid of it on the field.

Gwynn died last month of cancer in his salivary gland, a diagnosis the hall of famer blamed on chewing tobacco.

Baseball great Babe Ruth, also a longtime tobacco chewer, died of oral cancer

Now nine major public health organizations are pushing Major League Baseball to ban all tobacco use by players and staff at games, and on camera, to honor Gwynn’s memory

They sent a letter to MLB Commissioner Bud Selig and Players Association chief Tony Clark, calling on them to “set the right example for America’s kids.”

“Kids see their heroes on the field, and they want to emulate and be just like their favorite slugger, or their favorite pitcher,” said Erika Sward, with the American Lung Association.

A June CDC report found that while smoking rates for high school students have fallen by more than half since 1999, smokeless tobacco use by students has held steady.

Groups have been waging this battle over baseball and health for years. Similar letters in 2011 and 2012 pushed the league to act, as did a tobacco-free kids PSA ad.

Selig pushed for a total ban in 2011, but the players union instead called for restrictions, opting to let players keep their habit, as long as it was out of the public’s eye.

The 2011 labor contract bans smokeless tobacco use during TV interviews and club appearances, orders players and staff to hide tobacco products when fans are around, and bans carrying them in their uniforms or on their bodies.

“You can’t go through a three-hour game, and not see players with a big wad of chaw in their jaws,” said Sward. “It’s clear that the 2011 agreement did not go far enough ,and what we really need to have with the agreement starting in 2017 is an end of smokeless tobacco use in general on the field.”

Advocates are hoping that if they build awareness for it, their dream of tobacco free fields comes true.

Washington Post: Raise the smoking age

July 10, 2014

The Washington Post

New Jersey’s Senate approved a raise in the legal smoking age from 19 to 21 last week, pushing the groundbreaking experiment in public health one step closer to fruition. The bill, which the General Assembly will consider in the fall, would make New Jersey the first state to prohibit the sale of tobacco products, including e-cigarettes, to anyone younger than 21. It is designed to cut teenage exposure to tobacco, since about 90 percent of regular smokers have their first cigarette before turning 18. A few localities, such as New York City and the island of Hawaii, already raised the age.

Raising the smoking age eventually could cause a decline of 30 percent in adult smokers, according to one estimate, but whether it will have such a large effect in New Jersey remains to be seen. New Jersey’s current smoking age already prohibits virtually all high schoolers from buying cigarettes. Very few extensive case studies exist now, but the Food and Drug Administration is due to release a report on the effect of a 21- or 25-year-old smoking age next year.

There is no harm in trying. The experiment’s success could spur on the District of Columbia, which has a similar bill in committee, and other states that are contemplating the move. The only way the measure can hurt is if it distracts policymakers from implementing more proven prevention strategies, such as higher taxes.

Despite New Jersey’s campaign against smoking, some key areas still need work. E-cigarettes, many of which contain known carcinogens and whose popularity has skyrocketed, are taxed at a low rate. The cigarette tax has not been raised in five years; New Jersey’s $2.70-per-pack tax lags behind that of eight states. Most troubling, none of the revenue from the tobacco tax goes to tobacco prevention efforts. One good start would be to pass a bill that would equalize the tax between tobacco products.

In early June, when the smoking-age bill was still in committee, state Sen. Ronald Rice Sr., D, cast one of only two votes against it. “I’m getting tired of folk trying to tell adults what to do,” he said. But cigarettes, unlike some alcoholic drinks, have no health benefits and are destructive even in small doses. Exactly what New Jersey would be depriving its citizens of, besides a slow poison, is unclear.

Mr. Rice also argued that it was unfair to ban smoking for 19- and 20-year-olds who “can buy real estate, pay state and sales taxes” and join the military. There he has a point; there is no societal consensus about when a citizen reaches adulthood. Yet when urgent practical needs are balanced with theoretical inconsistencies, initiatives that save lives should take precedence. As New Jersey and other states battle their smoking crises, they should undertake initiatives both innovative and tested.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/opinion/58169701-82/smoking-age-jersey-tobacco.html.csp

Increasing popularity of smokeless tobacco poses cancer risk to young men

July 2, 2014

By Amanda Woerner, FoxNews.com

Though rates of cigarette smoking in America continue to decline, smokeless tobacco use remains popular, especially among young men — and with potentially dangerous health consequences.

A recent report from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) revealed that the use of smokeless tobacco among workers in the U.S. has held steady since 2005 – with rates of smokeless tobacco use being highest among males ages 25 – 44.

“In recent years there have been declines in cigarette smoking, but there’s really other tobacco products making up a large proportion of tobacco use in certain populations,” Brian King, scientific advisor at the CDC’s office of smoking and health, and lead author of the study, told FoxNews.com.
The dangers of smokeless tobacco use recently entered the national spotlight after the death of baseball hall-of-fame player Tony Gwynn, who died of salivary gland cancer after spending years dipping tobacco on the field.
According to the CDC, more than 30,000 people in the U.S are diagnosed with oral cancer every year. And every year, over 8,000 die of the disease, which has only a 50 percent five-year survival rate. A 2008 study from the World Health Organization indicated that smokeless tobacco users have an 80 percent greater chance of developing oral cancer than a non-user.
“Smokeless tobacco is a proven cause of oral cancer, including of the lips, throat and lining of the cheeks,” King said. “…With combustible tobacco the primary cancer is lung because people are inhaling, but with smokeless use, it’s primarily in the oral region, [which is] why we’re seeing a lot of cancers associated with smokeless tobacco around the oral cavity.”
In addition to being deadly, oral cancers often have devastating effects on a person’s appearance, as surgeries to remove cancerous lesions often require removal of portions of the face. Smokeless tobacco has also been associated with an increased risk of pancreatic cancer and heart disease.
The CDC’s study utilized data from the National Health Interview Survey to compare rates of smokeless tobacco use in 2005 and 2010. In 2005, 2.7 percent of U.S. workers admitted to using smokeless tobacco, compared to 3 percent in 2010.

“In terms of major findings, it primarily is that we haven’t seen any change, so that is concerning to us because obviously we’d like to see it decline over time,” King said. “So that finding is potentially a useful tool to inform strategies to start to address all forms of tobacco use, not just cigarette smoking.”
Another recent study by the CDC indicated that 2.6 percent of the population uses smokeless tobacco on some days, or every day, while 9.6 percent admitted ever having used these products, according to data from the 2012-2013 National Adult Tobacco Survey.

King said a lack of research on the effects of smokeless tobacco, combined with fewer public health initiatives geared towards this form of tobacco use, may be contributing to the steady use of these products in the U.S.
“A lot of campaigns and interventions have focused on combustible tobacco, and smoke-free policies have proliferated,” King said. “But all forms of smokeless tobacco use are really permitted in a lot of areas.”
Furthermore, loopholes in laws regulating cigarette use allow smokeless tobacco to be more accessible – and cheaper to the majority of the population.
“Cigarettes are taxed pretty uniformly in every state, but in most cases smokeless tobacco is taxed considerably lower than cigarettes in most states,” King said. “And we know increasing price is the single most effective way to reduce consumption, so the fact that these are available cheaper obviously increases the potential for people to use them.”
As the CDC continues to monitor the growing landscape of nicotine and tobacco products, they also have an eye on new products coming to the marketplace – including spit-less smokeless tobacco, tobacco sticks, orbs and strips and tobacco products featuring kid-friendly flavors.
While evidence is still emerging on the ill effects of smokeless tobacco, and how to curb its use, one thing is certain: quitting will benefit your health.
“Given the adverse health effects associated with smokeless tobacco, quitting is beneficial and since we know there’s no safe form of tobacco, if you were to quit completely that would considerably improve your health and potential for future disease and death,” King said. “There are a lot of evidence-based treatments to help people quit, and those are same as for cigarettes. The FDA has also approved seven medications including nicotine replacement therapy, and those can be used for smokeless tobacco as well.”

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/07/02/smokeless-tobacco-rates-remain-steady-in-us-as-cigarette-use-declines/

New E-Cigarette Store Opening in Mandan

June 30, 2014

By Steph Scheurer, Reporter, KX News

A new store specializing in e-cigarettes opens in Mandan tomorrow.

But there are concerns about the vaporizers.

“Tried anything, everything from the gum, the patch, chantix, nothing’s worked for me,” says Craig Russell, Owner, Borealis Vape.

Until he discovered the latest trend…

“Something like this has just worked really well for me,” says Russell.

Craig is the owner of the new e-cigarette store, Borealis Vape on Main in Mandan.

With over 100 likes on Facebook in the first 48 hours of advertising his business, Craig says people are pretty excited about this type of product…

A product that he says is much safer than regular cigarettes.

“The only chemicals that are in e-juice are VG (vegetable glycerin), PG Propylenee Glycol), your flavoring, and your nicotine,” says Russell.

Craig says that e-cigarettes contain four ingredients and emit four chemicals versus a traditional cigarette which he says contains 600 ingredients and emits 7,000 chemicals.

So it may seem like the e-cigarette is the safer choice, however, they’re not FDA approved.

“There’s over 250 e-cigarette brands on the market and not a single one of them have been proven safe or effective as a cessation device to help people quit smoking,” says Kristie Wolf, Program Manager, Tobacco Control & Advocacy.

Kristie Wolf says another big concern is that this new business might lead to more young people starting up smoking e-cigarettes.

“I see quite a bit of it at school. I try not to be around it too much. But I know it’s kind of popular with the younger crowd.”

“I feel like kids nowadays, they think it’s a cool way to do stuff and they think it’s less harmful but I feel like they’d end up smoking and using the real stuff anyway.”

Although he has a business to promote, Craig says he will set the bar high…

For obeying the law.

“Any teenager could walk in here and purchase but me, as an owner, that’s high risk so we have to card. We have to card these kids, we have to tell these kids hey, why are you smoking, get out there play football, basketball, there’s other stuff to be doing than to be smoking,” says Russell.

Wolf also says e-cigarettes are included in the North Dakota smoke free law, so anywhere traditional cigarettes are not allowed, neither are e-cigarettes.

If you’re wanting to quit smoking, she urges you to try ND Quits.

For more information you can visit their website or call 1-800-QUIT-NOW.

Website: www.ndhealth.gov/ndquits

http://www.kxnet.com/story/25908937/new-e-cigarette-store-opening-in-mandan

Teens Who Prefer Menthols Are Heavier Smokers: Study

June 27, 2014

It’s a fallacy that they’re safer than other tobacco products, researcher says:

(HealthDay News) — Teens who use menthol cigarettes are heavier smokers than those who smoke non-menthols, a new study finds.

Researchers analyzed data from a 2010-11 survey of more than 4,700 Canadian high school students who smoked and found that one-third of them smoked menthol cigarettes.

Menthol cigarette users smoked an average of 43 cigarettes a week, compared with 26 per week among those who did not smoke menthol cigarettes, the researchers found.

And teens who smoked menthol cigarettes were nearly three times more likely than other teen smokers to say they intended to continue smoking in the next year.

“The appeal of menthol cigarettes among youth stems from the perception that they are less harmful than regular cigarettes,” study author Sunday Azagba, a scientist at the Propel Center for Population Health Impact at the University of Waterloo in Canada, said in a university news release. “The minty taste helps mask the noxious properties, but the reality is that they are just as dangerous as any unflavored cigarette.”

The study, published in the June issue of the journal Cancer Causes and Control, only shows an association between menthol cigarettes and heavier smoking, not a direct cause-and-effect relationship. Still, the findings are worrisome, said Azagba.

“There is a growing concern that the high popularity of menthol cigarettes among youth may hinder the recent progress in preventing other young people from smoking because many of them may experiment with menthol rather than unflavored brands,” Azagba said.

Nearly one in 10 Canadian students in grades 10 to 12 is a smoker, the researchers said.

Moving forward, Azagba said, it’s clear that new laws are needed to ban all added flavors in all tobacco products.

More information

The American Cancer Society has more about menthol cigarettes.

SOURCE: University of Waterloo, news release, June 20, 2014

— Robert Preidt

http://consumer.healthday.com/kids-health-information-23/adolescents-and-teen-health-news-719/menthol-cigarettes-linked-to-more-smoking-among-teens-689105.html

Posts