LAS VEGAS — Nearly a year after Congress passed and the president signed a historic increase in the federal excise tax (FET) on tobacco to fund an expansion of children’s healthcare benefits, convenience store and tobacco outlet retailers joined here at the Tobacco Plus Expo from March 3-4, to discover the opportunities in the category, learn the latest trends, see new products and more.

Ahead of the conference, Convenience Store News held its annual Tobacco Roundtable March 2, where a panel of retailers and manufacturers met to discuss best practices in the category, as well as hear the latest tobacco retailing data presented by CSNews.

One retailer at the event noted the past year was spent “adapting to trends.” One of which included bringing in loose pipe tobacco into stores as a lower-cost alternative to roll-your-own (RYO) cigarette tobacco, which was subject of a 1,200 percent tax hike under the FET increase.

Similarly, retailers agreed that last year’s predictions that RYO tobacco would die as a result of the FET increase were false. One attendee said the segment “suffered the worst” due to the combined effects of the FET and lower-priced pipe tobacco entering the arena, but the “value of RYO is sill there. … [New] consumers will enter this category and not know anything about last year and the increases in price.”

The success of two- and three-count foil packs of cigars was also noted at the roundtable. Another winning product in the other tobacco products (OTP) category is moist snuff, which is seeing high single-digit growth, according to one roundtable attendee.

Another opportunity for retailers is the increasing incidence of tobacco users overlapping segments, such as cigarette smokers using moist snuff or cigars. “Customers buying OTP are smokers. That will get bigger and overlap, and OTP will become more important as retailers realize that,” said one roundtable manufacturer attendee.

And on the legislative front, one large c-store chain noted its positive efforts fighting state taxation issues. The retailer said being active in legislative matters “never has been a focus” for the company, but recent success with in-store petitions is making a case for more involvement.

There were discussions at the roundtable, however, on the challenges in the tobacco category. Most attendees at the roundtable voiced concerns over restrictive contracts by the major cigarette companies that make it harder for retailers to take advantage of all the promotional incentives available.

“Contracts hinder us,” said one retail chain attendee. “Contracts that reward for margins are restrictive. And out-of-stock [automated] ordering is so tight and close-managed that it leaves no room for error.”

“It’s more important now more than ever to be a student of the category,” said one supplier at the roundtable. “It is more important to manage the category and space allocations between cigarettes and OTP.”

Attendees at the roundtable included representatives from such retailers as 7-Eleven, Smoker Friendly and TravelCenters of America. For more on the roundtable, watch for the April 12 issue of CSNews. The roundtable was sponsored by McLane Co. Inc. and Republic Tobacco.

Meanwhile, the Tobacco Plus Expo focused on targeting untapped opportunities in a session called “El Elefante in Your Isles,” which was presented by Juan Tornoe, consultant at Hispanic Trending.

“Everyone is aware of the growth of the Latino market. But oftentimes, businesses think they are doing OK, so they don’t go after Latinos,” he told attendees.

Contrasting the Hispanic growth in the U.S. to the European immigrants of the 1800s, Tornoe said: “many expected the Hispanic market to become part of the big melting pot [of the U.S.] but the Hispanic community has stayed [separate].”

This is due in part to continued Hispanic immigration into the U.S., along with a higher birth rate among Hispanic women compared to other U.S. women. By July 2050, 30 percent of the U.S. population will be Hispanic, equating to one of every three customers, he said.

Other reasons for the lack of assimilation is current technology allows Latinos to stay connected to families in their home countries, and as a result, keeping them connected with their culture.

Tornoe said retailers should create marketing messages that cater to the Hispanic customers’ demographics in their region. Factors that influence messages include:

– Country of origin/heritage
– Language of preference
– Place of residence
– Generation
– Socio-cultural level
– Assimilation/Acculturation level

“By combining these factors, you will be able to tell how to talk to a group of people and how to reach out to them,” he said.

And to connect with Latinos, retailers have to understand their culture and societal norms, some of which are:

– A high degree of intimacy
– Less personal space
– A respect for power and authority
– High importance of families in the decision-making process
– Bigger families and later instances of “empty nests”
– A desire to keep traditions
– A desire for social harmony
– Social flexibility between Hispanic backgrounds and U.S. environments
– Respect for women
– A higher importance on food
– Trends toward retro-acculturation, where heritage is being adopted to pass onto the next generation.

At the least, Tornoe stressed retailers should adopt bi-lingual signage, ensuring that the translations are grammatically and contextually accurate.

Another way to catch Latinos’ attention is to use Hispanic cultural elements in general market messages, such as inserting a phrase in Spanish or Latin music.
“Don’t overtly appeal to both cultures. One should be more subtle and complement the other,” he said.

He concluded: “Reach out to Latinos and face them headfirst.”

Meanwhile, the show floor of the Tobacco Plus Expo had an unexpectedly upbeat buzz compared to last year when retailers, wholesalers and manufacturers were anxious about the new federal excise tax and what impact it would have on their business. This year, retailers, wholesalers and distributors filled the Las Vegas Convention Center hall to view the latest new products from vendors and manufacturers spanning cigarettes, smokeless tobacco, cigars and more.

A proposal to ban smoking in Japanese workplaces would herald a big political shift in the world’s fourth-biggest cigarette market and accelerate the decline of its giant tobacco lobby, industry experts say.

It would also bring Japan into line with much of the developed world, where prohibitions on smoking at work have been widespread for years.

A health ministry panel is expected to finalise a report by April that will recommend smoking be banned in offices and factories or, as an alternative, confined to separate rooms, Japanese media has reported.

The report would pave the way for the ministry to submit a bill to parliament as early as next year.

If passed, it would be a dramatic step for a country where smoking is still permitted in parts of hospitals and schools, and where the atmosphere in restaurants, cafes and bars is often thick with smoke.

In April Kanagawa will become the first of Japan’s 47 prefectures to regulate smoking in public places – but it will exempt small hotels and restaurants.

The proportion of the population that smokes has fallen a long way since 1965, when roughly 82 per cent of men indulged the habit. But it remains high for the industrialised world: last year 25 per cent of adults counted themselves as smokers.

Professor Manabu Sakuta, of the Japan Society for Tobacco Control, said that ”it’s late coming and could take up to four years to go through, but legislation would signal a big change in the political landscape”.

Japan had lagged a long way behind most of the developed world ”because of politics and money”, he said. ”There’s traditionally been a cosy connection between the Liberal Democratic Party [removed from power last September after more than half a century of near-uninterrupted rule], tobacco growers and cigarette sellers.

”Then you have the Smoking Research Foundation, which spends ¥5 billion a year selling its message that smoking is not necessarily harmful for you.”

Cigarettes are cheap at ¥300 ($3.77) a pack of 20 and are widely available in the country’s 570,000 tobacco vending machines.

But the government, which owns 50.01 per cent of Japan Tobacco, will introduce a tax increase of ¥3.5 a cigarette from October.

Japan Tobacco said it expects the government eventually to sell its stake in the company to raise funds to reduce the country’s soaring public debt.

A spokeswoman said ”Japan Tobacco recognises that certain illnesses are caused by tobacco. But to protect smokers’ rights, we would hope that the government allows smoking rooms in workplaces and does not enforce a total ban.”

JUSTIN NORRIE
February 27, 2010

Many public departments and organisations working in the federal capital have no proper mechanism to enforce anti-tobacco laws and any check on violation during duty hours within their premises.

Thousands of people who do not smoked, become victims of second hand smoke as smokers openly smoke cigarettes in government offices which is a clear violation of concerned laws, causing harmful effects on health of non-smokers, citizens complained.

Cognizant of deleterious impact of tobacco, legislation was undertaken by the

Ministry of Health and ‘Prohibition of Smoking and Protection of Non-Smokers Health Ordinance 2002’ was promulgated.

Later, through an SRO the government disallowed designated areas in offices for smokers, which were earlier allowed in the ordinance and totally banned smoking in any public place or office to protect the health of non-smokers.

Prior to issuance of the SRO, all public and private offices were allowed to allocate a separate place for smokers like smokers’ corner within office premises with adequate arrangements.

The citizens demanded that after promulgation of the laws all public and work places have become smoke free therefore smokers should not be allowed to use tobacco in their offices or at public places.

“Why such laws are not being implemented in true spirit and violators are not being stopped to do so. It seems no one is serious to enforce such laws,” Muhammad Aftab, a citizen of federal capital questioned. He added complete implementation of the law and strict action against violators will help to protect health of non-smokers particularly in public offices.

It is pertinent to mention here that Pakistan had signed and ratified multisectoral and multidimensional Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) on May 18, 2004 and November 3,2004 respectively. Under provisions of FCTC, the country is required to bring its laws and policies in line with the global convention.

Dr. Arif Azad, executive director of The Network for Consumer Protection said that tobacco was the main cause of numerous hazards to human health, adding that all national and international obligations should be followed by the concerned authorities in this regard to check on use of tobacco particularly in offices.

He said smoking causes many diseases and ailments including heart attack, cancer of lungs, oral cavity, esophagus, larynx and diseases like chronic bronchitis and emphysema. He said the organisation is working to raise the level of awareness of policy makers on the issue for making effective policies for tobacco control in the country.

According to health experts, the use of tobacco continues to be a major public health challenge in Pakistan where 100,000 annual deaths occur due to tobacco related diseases.

They added tobacco consumption in the country is increasing manifold as a result of aggressive marketing and promotion of tobacco products by the tobacco industry including multinationals. When contacted an official of Tobacco Control Cell, Ministry of Health said that SRO withdrawal on designated areas for smokers will help cell to have strictly check on law violators with the help of public and concerned departments.

He said a strategic plan of action has been made by the cell with focus on awareness programme for health officials, professionals, teachers, decision makers, administrative staffs etc.

One of the central intended consequences of the landmark Cigarette Restitution Fund was to reduce smoking in the general population. Cancer research, substance abuse programs and other efforts to deal with the health and financial effects of smoking on individuals and states were also part of the plan.

According to a recent Capital News Service story, however, those consequences are working at cross-purposes to some extent here in Maryland.

Officially named the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement, the contract was struck in 1998 between the nation’s four largest tobacco companies and the attorneys general of 46 states. The amount of money involved was huge, with the participating companies agreeing to pay a minimum of $206 billion over the first 25 years of the agreement.

Maryland is among the participating states, and has since 2001 been awarded in excess of $1 billion of the $4.4 billion it was allotted in the settlement.

In many states, substantial portions of settlement money has been diverted to purposes other than the smoking-related research and programs originally identified for funding. Some argue that has been and is taking place in Maryland, too.

The fly in the ointment of the restitution fund is that the amount of money the participating tobacco companies are required to pay is based primarily on the number of cigarettes they sell. The bottom line is that that number and the payments that correspond to it have been on the decline since the settlement was struck.

In Maryland, as elsewhere, that means less funding is available to fight smoking, conduct scientific research, and help pay the medical bills resulting from treating those who have smoked. That is a big bill.

In Maryland, fund money has been going into a number of projects, including crop conversion, cancer research and substance abuse prevention. But these programs are now being squeezed by the ever-smaller amounts of funding they are receiving from the settlement.

As might be expected, there is some disagreement over how the money is being spent. In Maryland, some of it has gone to Medicaid, legal fees and other state agencies and programs. That has riled those who believe it should go strictly to preventing smoking, and treating its effects.

Is all this good news or bad news? On balance, we’d say good. Cancer mortality rates have dropped and the prevalence of smoking in both adults and youth has declined appreciably.

A smoke-free society is the ultimate goal, as it would mean a healthier, more productive, less medically expensive population. The long-term trend toward less smoking is the one most important statistic in this story. If that means fewer tobacco settlement dollars for Maryland and other states, it should be worth the price — especially in the long run.

Many smokers and former smokers will tell you, it`s not easy to kick the tobacco habit, but some tobacco prevention advocates say there`s a sure-fire way to make it easier; raise the tax on tobacco products.

The report shows voters across the country say raising the tobacco tax by a dollar per pack of cigarettes is their preferred way to address state budget deficits.

North Dakota isn`t exactly strapped for cash, but the report released by a number of tobacco prevention groups like the American Lung Association and the Campaign for Tobacco-Free kids shows increasing the tax on tobacco products by one dollar will bring $28 million of revenue to the state.

“While we`re not in a budget deficit, there`s still really good health programs that are going unfunded and this is a good way to generate new revenue to cover those health programs,” said Center for Tobacco Prevention and Control Policy Executive Director Jeanne Prom.

Tobacco Prevention advocates say the best part about the increase is that the report shows it will keep 4,900 kids in North Dakota from becoming smokers, and will spur 3,200 current adult smokers to quit. The Center For Tobacco Prevention and Control Policy says price is everything when it comes to tobacco use.

“We need to raise the tax so it`s hard to start and easy to quit and when we raise the tax, more people will quit and those who do continue will probably smoke less and that`s all meaning a better health outcome for our state,” said Prom.

While prevention advocates call it a progressive tax, others call it regressive because most smokers are middle and lower class, and raising the cost of cigarettes won`t make them kick the habit, instead it will just hurt their pocketbooks even more.

“It just hurts the lower, middle class and poor people the most and the state quite frankly doesn`t need the revenue and so it seems to me like it`s a solution in search of a problem,” said Narloch.

But tobacco prevention groups say smoking in North Dakota is a problem and when people are faced with the choice between cigarettes and food, they`ll make the choice to quit their tobacco habit.

The Center for Tobacco Prevention and Control Policy says it`s confident a price hike will urge people to quit because about a year ago when the federal tax was raised by about 60 cents, the Quitline saw a big increase in the number of callers asking for help to stop smoking.

The first month of a statewide smoking ban in restaurants and bars has been pretty much a nonevent, local business operators said yesterday.

Most longtime customers who smoke have either adapted to the restrictions, which went into effect Jan. 2, or chosen to brave the cold weather before or after a meal, the operators say.

On the other hand, the operators say they haven’t seen a sizable uptick in business from nonsmokers either, although that could be weather-related as well.

“We may be turning the tables around more quickly since the ban went into place,” said Steven Hondos, the owner of the Jimmy the Greek restaurant off University Parkway. The restaurant was successful for years in striking a balance between smokers and nonsmokers.

“The people who smoke, who love our food, are still coming in. They understand this was not our decision, so I haven’t sensed any kind of backlash against us.

“We’re noticing more people coming in who didn’t before because of the smoke,” Hondos said. “But it hasn’t been that many so far.”

There hasn’t been a rash of complaints about noncompliance with the ban regarding individuals, restaurants and bars.

Anyone caught smoking in a restaurant or bar could get a $50 fine. Restaurants or bars that repeatedly fail to enforce the smoking ban could get a $250 fine.

As of Jan. 24, there have been 147 formal complaints filed regarding Triad bars and restaurants with the N.C. Tobacco Prevention and Control Branch.

Guilford County has the bulk of those complaints at 94, followed by Forsyth County with 17. There have been no complaints filed in Alleghany, Davie, Watauga and Yadkin counties.

There have been some instances of confusion with patrons using an electronic cigarette, or e-cigarette. The cigarette, which isn’t affected by the statewide smoking ban, is battery-operated and contains cartridges of nicotine. A heater converts the chemical into a vapor.

Customers still can smoke in an outdoor seating area or patio, and some restaurant and bar owners said that they are taking steps to make those areas more comfortable.

Local health departments are responsible for enforcing the law, investigating complaints and issuing the fines.

Dr. Tim Monroe, the Forsyth County health director, said his department has a policy of investigating all complaints. Inspectors will check for compliance with the no-smoking law during their quarterly inspections of restaurants. Monroe does not foresee an aggressive campaign to send inspectors out with the sole intention of catching smoking violations.

Gayle Anderson, the president and chief executive of the Winston-Salem Chamber of Commerce, said she has not received a complaint about a bar or restaurant being out of compliance with the ban.

“With the economy down, the bad weather the past few weeks, etc. it would be hard to compare business with January 2009,” Anderson said.

Anderson said she expects bars and restaurants will gain business over time based on the experience of those groups that already took the nonsmoking plunge.

“Over the past several years, a number of restaurants here have consulted with us before going non-smoking,” Anderson said.

“When we’ve checked back with them several months after they made that decision, they’ve told us it really had not affected their business after the first couple of weeks.”

John Cahoon, the co-owner of Finnegan’s Wake in the Downtown Arts District, said that the smoking ban has made his establishment “a little busier” in the short term.

“The ban hasn’t hurt us even though 20 percent to 25 percent of our business has traditionally been with smokers,” Cahoon said.

“We believe we’re getting new customers because, previously, the separation between smoking and nonsmoking wasn’t enough for some people.”
By Richard Craver
February 2, 2010

SALT LAKE CITY — Lawmakers’ ongoing “anti-tobacco nicky fit,” as Utah smokers affectionately call the spate of prohibitions on almost anything with nicotine, will continue this week after stalling momentarily when a House committee realized that two bills are targeting the same nicotine-drenched product.

Electronic cigarettes, which look like normal cigarettes but are smokeless and run on batteries that heat a capsule of nicotine in the mouthpiece into a vapor, are targeted directly by HB88 and also would be covered indirectly by a new “Nicotine Product Restriction Act” proposed by HB71.

The former was approved and sent to the House consent calendar. But the bill would be redundant under the broader nicotine-product and flavored smokeless tobacco restrictions in HB71.

The sponsor of HB71, Rep. Paul Ray, R-Clearfield, said the redundant language is easily fixed and is a sign that other lawmakers are as eager as he is to keep tabs on tobacco products, particularly new ones that look and taste like candy or breath mints and are targeted at teens.

“If I had my way, I would outlaw tobacco altogether,” Ray told committee members.

He will get as close as he can this year between his new restrictions act and sponsorship of an increase in the state tax on tobacco to $2 per pack of cigarettes, from 69.5 cents per pack now.
Story continues below

Some Utahns who fully endorse the effort to prohibit the sale of products containing nicotine that most kids can’t tell from regular candy and mints say lawmakers ought to take a breath before restricting e-cigarettes.

Mark Livingston, a private citizen who said he detests smoking, said e-cigarettes have been able to help family members get off regular cigarettes. “It would be a shame to include them, because I’ve seen them help people who already have a nicotine problem. At least they and people around them aren’t inhaling smoke.”

Studies by various anti-smoking organizations show that tobacco smoke contains upwards of 300 carcinogenic or toxic compounds.

Other lawmakers said they wonder: If the smoking-cessation benefits of e-cigarettes, which are widely available on the Internet, become part of the discussion, should all products, such as nicotine-laced gum, be covered by the bill, as well?

Nicotine in any form is toxic to humans, Ray said, noting that most of the new breath-mint-type tobacco products have two and three times the nicotine found in a regular cigarette.

E-cigarettes also might do as much harm as good. A new study announced Friday by the Korea Food and Drug Administration shows that although they have less nicotine than ordinary cigarettes, the vaporized solution from them can cause a host of immediate physical reactions, including lung cancer, if used for two years or longer.

Members of the House Health and Human Services Committee plan to clear the air on the topic during their meeting scheduled Tuesday.

By James Thalman
Deseret News

CIGARETTE firms are to be forced to sell every brand in plain GREY packets to make them less attractive to kids.

They will all have to be in identical boxes, with the brand name shown in just plain text above a big health warning, under new government plans.

Ministers want to ditch the glitzy packaging when laws forcing shopkeepers to keep smokes under the counter come in later this year.

And parents could also be banned from lighting up at home or in their cars when travelling with children.

Health Secretary Andy Burnham will unveil the crackdown tomorrow. A Health Department source said: “We want to do everything possible to stop children from starting to smoke.

“We’re going to look to see if getting rid of jazzy cigarette packs will take away the lure of smoking.”

Mr Burnham is to start talks with shops and manufacturers after a study showed children believe cigs in attractive packets are less harmful.

Britain has already seen the toughest ever crackdown on cigarettes – including a ban on smoking at work.

And new laws will soon come into force banning vending machines and cigarettes on open display in stores.

But Mr Burnham plans to go even further by declaring his vision of a “smoke-free future” where kids are protected from the scourge of tobacco.

In a speech tomorrow he will say: “I believe we are right to take tough action – and that we should be unapologetic about it.

“I make no apology for taking a hard line when it comes to protecting children and given them the best start in life. I want to see a smoke-free future, a future where people lead healthier and longer lives because they don’t smoke.” His new purge on tobacco will guarantee NHS help for every smoker who wants to quit, including free nicotine patches or gum.

Seven out of ten smokers say they want to stop and 2.4 million have quit since the “Smoking Kills” campaign was launched in 1998.

An insider added: “Every smoker will get support, including nicotine replacement therapy. It’s much better to be on patches than inhale all the toxic chemicals in cigarettes.”

Treating patients for smoke- induced lung and heart disease costs the NHS £2.7 billion a year.

Last night the new clampdown was welcomed by Labour MP Ian McCartney, who has campaigned tirelessly to protect kids from smoking.

He said: “This will be another big step towards preventing another generation of young people being damaged and injured by tobacco.”

LONDON, ENGLAND – A ban on the display of tobacco in stores across Scotland is expected to pass this week, a move that is part of a wide-ranging campaign aimed at reducing smoking, the BBC and The Scotsman report.

The ban, part of the Tobacco and Primary Medical Services Bill, would also prohibit cigarette vending machines while introducing a registration plan for retailers.

The Tobacco Retailers Alliance opposes the legislation, warning that a vending machine ban will lead to job losses. The National Association of Cigarette Machine Operators has proposed digitally operated machines that require an ID check prior to use rather than an outright ban.

If passed, the move to ban cigarette displays will affect supermarkets starting in 2011 and small stores in 2013.

In Canada, the marketing of tobacco products is “dark” at retail, forcing convenience stores to essentially hide product behind curtains or in drawers out of sight to customers. For more on tobacco issues, see the November 2008 NACS Magazine feature, “Tobacco Road.”

Smokers have plenty to worry about: cancer and other health risks, societal disapproval, the costs of feeding their addiction. Many worry about trying to quit.

But how many of the 46 million smokers in the U.S. ever think about what’s been added to tobacco?

Companies have acknowledged using cocoa, coffee, menthol and other additives to make tobacco taste better. Some of those additives might be making cigarettes more addictive.

“Tobacco products today are really the only human-consumed product that we don’t know what’s in them,” Dr. Lawrence R. Deyton, the director of the Food and Drug Administration’s new Center for Tobacco Products, said recently.

That veil of secrecy will soon be lifting. A new law will require cigarette makers to disclose to the FDA what’s in their products. It’s no secret that tobacco and its smoke contain more than 60 carcinogens.

The information on other ingredients should help the FDA determine which ingredients might also make tobacco more harmful or addictive.

The agency is being asked to use the data to develop standards for tobacco products or to ban some ingredients or combinations.

The FDA should make sure it uses this new information to protect smokers who can’t or won’t stop smoking to protect themselves.

The Daily Record
1/25/2010

SPANIARDS ARE born anarchists who seem to believe that rules and regulations, be they double parking, speeding or smoking, are made to be ignored.

A law banning smoking in places of work or leisure was introduced three years ago but it has had little effect.

The sales of cigarettes fell slightly during the first few months, but they are now back to 2006 levels and the numbers of smokers remain the same.

Someone described the 2006 law as having as many holes “as a leaking bucket”.

The law banning smoking in the workplace seems to be respected and it is a common sight to see groups of people puffing away in the streets outside their offices.

But when the draft Bill was first presented in parliament, the catering trade – who feared they would lose business – were up in arms.

Using their powerful clout, they succeeded in diluting the Bill to allow smoking in the majority of establishments.

In theory, if the premises is less than 100sq m, the owner can choose whether to allow smoking.

But 100sq m in Madrid seems to be pretty elastic, and it is up to the bosses to measure their own premises – which allows them to ignore the space behind the bar – or between the tables and so on.

In larger establishments, smoking is officially permitted only if the premises is physically divided into two areas – and not by merely putting up a removable screen – with separate extractor fans installed for each zone.

But it is estimated that less than 1 per cent of Madrid’s bars and restaurants have invested in new air conditioners or partition walls.

Many simply have some tables for smokers and others for non-smokers.

Another loophole is at private functions. Handing round a box of cigars is a tradition at Spanish weddings, baptisms and family events.

Owners of restaurants and other function-hosting establishments fought to open another hole in the law: the father of the bride can still offer his Havana cigars to his guests.

A report issued last week by the ministry of health showed the frightening statistics of the results of smoking. It is estimated that 50,000 deaths from cancer of the lungs, throat and oesophagus, among others, are caused by tobacco; and 1,400 of these deaths are of passive smokers who have been exposed to tobacco smoke.

It is the non-smoker who has trouble finding a smoke-free bar or cafe in Madrid. Pop into virtually any one, and you are forced to view the scene through a haze of tobacco smoke.

Not surprisingly the passive smoking staff are feeling the consequences.

Dublin-born Morys, who has been in the bar and restaurant trade for more than 30 years, is one of the sufferers.

He is now in remission after treatment for throat cancer at the end of last year and is back at work as manager of an Irish pub in Madrid.

He hates the smoky atmosphere and complains that his throat and eyes trouble him every day when he ends his shift.

But he admits that the customers appreciate their freedom to light up.

“One of the first things visiting Irish and British clients welcome is that they can enjoy a cigarette at the bar and don’t have to go outside into the cold as they would do at home,” he says.

The unions say they receive many complaints from their members. “Waiters and barmen complain to us, but there is little we can do because the law is so permissive,” said a spokesman for the UGT (the general workers’ union).

Other union officials worry that many of their members could lose their jobs if employers took advantage of a stricter law to cut down on staff.

One sector you would expect to support the smoking ban is the health authorities in Madrid where the conservative Popular Party (PP) governs the autonomous government.

But they refuse to enforce the law and support the catering trade.

The PP councillor for health, Juan José Guemes, an ex-smoker, says a ban on smoking in public places would be going against the rights of the individual.

“However dangerous it might be, we are not here to impose rules and restrictions on anyone. We have to educate the people on the dangers of tobacco.

“Of course we respect the rights of non-smokers, but if they don’t want to breathe in smoke, they should find a non-smoking bar,” he told The Irish Times, ­ although the only option he gave this non-smoking writer was a singularly unattractive establishment.

A new law that went into effect Jan. 1 mandates that only “fire-safe” cigarettes — marked as FSC for “fire standard compliant” — can be sold in Texas. Fire-safe cigarettes are designed to go out when they are not being actively smoked, reducing the risk of an accidental fire.

Lawmakers passed a bill in 2007 requiring that all cigarettes sold in Texas be fire-standard compliant by Jan. 1, 2010, and Gov. Rick Perry signed it into law. Texas is one of 49 states where FSC mandates for cigarettes are in effect or pending. The Texas Department of Insurance is responsible for inspecting, certifying and enforcing the law.

Anyone manufacturing, distributing or selling cigarettes that aren’t fire safe can be fined $100 per pack. State Fire Marshal Paul Maldonado said FSC cigarettes will help prevent fires and save lives. More information about fire-safe cigarettes is available at the insurance department Web site, www.tdi.state.tx.us.

Hutchison blasts TxDOT

Shortly after filing to run for governor in the March 2 Republican primary, U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison promised to “clean up” the Texas Department of Transportation.

She said Texans are fed up with traffic congestion and blamed the “arrogance and inefficiencies” of TxDOT’s leadership.

Hutchison said, if elected governor, she would push for a high-speed rail line connecting Dallas, Houston and San Antonio.

In a campaign swing around the state, Hutchison also said the Texas Transportation Commission should be expanded from five to nine members.

Katz files for Lt. Governor

Austin restaurateur Marc Katz has filed to run for lieutenant governor in the March Democratic primary. Katz, owner of Katz’s Deli and Bar in downtown Austin, will face former Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle, who also filed to run for lieutenant governor in the Democratic primary.

Katz said he would spend millions of dollars of his own money to win the primary race against Earle.

The winner likely will face incumbent Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, who filed to run for reelection in the Republican Party primary.

Licenses for immigrants OK

A Texas appeals court has ruled that the restriction on driver’s licenses issued to immigrants is lawful.

The 3rd Court of Appeals ruled against a Dallas landscaping company that has said the Texas Department of Public Safety does not have authority to establish requirements for immigrants seeking driver’s licenses.

Under DPS rules, a driver’s license cannot be issued to someone with a visa valid for less than a year or if there is less than six months remaining on the visa. If a visa is valid for more than a year, the driver’s license says “Temporary Visitor.” Those licenses are vertical, not horizontal like standard Texas licenses.

Although the plaintiffs argued that truck drivers can’t enter certain areas with a temporary license, the court said the plaintiffs did not prove any negative effects caused by the temporary-visitor licenses.

Valley med school steps

The University of Texas System has taken the first steps toward creating a medical school in the Lower Rio Grande Valley.

State education officials said a medical school in South Texas is needed because of the area’s high poverty rate and its lack of doctors and medical facilities.

In the 2009 legislative session, lawmakers passed a measure authorizing, but not requiring, the UT Board of Regents to establish a medical school in Cameron County.

UT President William Powers Jr. said South Texas needs a medical school and a law school.

UT officials are looking at the possible cost of establishing a medical school in the Valley.

A report is under way examining the financial and faculty needs and possible hospital affiliations.

Polunsky reappointed by Perry

San Antonio attorney Allan Polunsky has been reappointed to the Texas Public Safety Commission. Perry reappointed Polunsky to a term ending 2015. The commission oversees the Texas Department of Public Safety, the state’s main law enforcement agency.

Almost all states are democratic, that’s why people have the same rights. As a smoker has a right to smoke and a non-smoker should be guaranteed the right to breathe clean and health air.

That’s why smoking was banned on most public areas by a lot of countries. Now the customers of most bars and restaurants will no longer be able to light up inside.

But not all smokers can accept this legislation. For example, Gloria Jean Bergman, owner of Jean’s Place in Havelock declared: “I think at 21 years of age, you’ve got the right to decide if you want to smoke or not. They are violating on our rights as citizens.”

Only private country clubs and private non-profit bars, such as a VFW for example, are exempt from the new law. They are above the law only just because they’ve got a golf course, a tennis court or a swimming pool

Smokers declared that over 90 percent of the people are smokers, but they can’t understand why does second-hand smoke affect people in general but it doesn’t influence people in country clubs or cigar bars?’

The new law demands that no smoking signs be raised and all interior ashtrays be removed forever.

The bar owners declared that people don’t come to restaurants or bars now only because of the smoking. In general, 90 percent of customers smoke.

Even the waitress Renee Schmucker, a smoker, doesn’t like the new legislation.

“Honestly, I think it should be left up to the owners. It’s their business and they should have a choice of whether to permit it or not. It’s not fair. Nobody’s bending your arms to smoke, and nobody’s twisting your arms not to,” she explained.

Joseph Richardson, another customer, believes the current measure in which restaurants have smoking and non-smoking sections works.

“I understand that they’re doing it for health reasons, but I think you should be able to choose on you own,” he said.

Till now were approved a lot of anti-tobacco legislations, however no one worked. For example a high cigarette taxes among the states contributed to smugglers purchasing smokes on a legal basis in states with lower taxes and then smuggling cigarettes and reselling them in areas where taxes are much heftier, making also counterfeit tax stamps and cigarettes. Smokers declared that the same situation will happened with smokers this time too. They will go to the bars and restaurant where will be allowed smoking. And in this way the bars and restaurant business will decline.

Smokers, beware. As of January 2nd, state laws have gone into effect and smoking will no longer be permitted inside North Carolina restaurants and bars. Only private clubs like the Elks Lodge in Raleigh that are non-profit and serve food and drinks can allow smoking.

For some patrons, the new ban could be viewed as a reprieve. Some restaurants hope that the ban will bring in business that diners otherwise would not set foot in before the ban was enacted. For other restaurants, perhaps well-known and embraced for their smoky bar atmosphere, the new ban on smoking indoors could prove to be bad for business. In order to prepare for the new law going into effect at the start of the new year, some restaurants have expanded or built outdoor patios and have purchased propane heat lamps to keep huddled smoking patrons warm outside.

Enforcing the new smoking law may be tough. Offenders will likely be fined due to complaints primarily from the public. Restaurants and bars can be fined up to $200 a day and smokers inside could be also slapped with a $50 fine if they do not stop smoking inside after they have been told to quit. Complaints of offenders can be routed to local health departments and officials via an online form at SmokeFree.NC.gov.

As a non-smoker, I have never been deterred from entering into a restaurant in Raleigh because of a smoky atmosphere. As a longtime Raleigh resident, I have been familiar with which restaurants and bars were smoker-friendly and if I was not a fan or did not like it, I did not choose to give them my money. I am an adult and I knew very well the adverse health risks of secondhand smoke as I stepped into places that did not prohibit smoking indoors. Even so, I am glad that from now after leaving bars and restaurants, my clothes will not be left with the lingering stench of smoke after a long night out.

For restaurants and bars that are considered “dives” by reputation, this ban could prove to be disastrous. The familiar ambiance, intentional or not, could become drastically different. There is an unspoken romantic nature of a smoke-filled room, that taken away from their regulars, may adversely affect the reputations and business of many restaurants and bars.

There will likely be some angry chatter, lively debates and resentment from smokers having to take their smoking outside in the beginning, especially with the new law changing in the middle of a cold winter and low temperatures. By summertime, people probably will likely have become accustomed to stepping outside for a puff. In big cities like New York City, smoking outside bars and restaurants largely seems like a way of life and nightlife and dining out seems to have gone on usual without too much a huff and puff.

When France outlawed smoking in public places three years ago, residents took the news remarkably — almost shockingly — well. Almost overnight, cigarettes vanished from offices, restaurants, cafés and train stations as the French dutifully took their glowing butts outside — the only place where smoking was still permitted. But this being France, a backlash was almost certainly inevitable. According to a report released on Dec. 17 by an anti-smoking group, the initial obeisance of French smokers has now given way to people increasingly flaunting the law by lighting up indoors.

The Non-Smokers’ Rights (NSR) association says it has collected data and evidence showing that the ban on smoking in the workplace is currently being violated far more than it was when the law came into effect in 2007. Studies show that complaints by people of exposure to second-hand smoke at work, which dropped from nearly 43% in 2006 to just 9% the following year, has now gone back up to 21%, according to NSR. The reason? Widespread government enforcement of the law never materialized as expected, leaving employers and workers less worried about being fined nearly $200 per infraction. Some employees now light up at their desks or by the coffee machine instead of joining their shivering colleagues outside, and many bosses turn a blind eye to it.

“The clear lack of inspection or punishment has inspired a small minority of smokers to ignore the ban — a lead that a growing number of their co-workers are deciding to follow,” says Rémi Parola, a NSR official. “The law was effective in getting people to accept non-smoking as the legal and social norm, and that’s now being slowly eroded.”

And it’s not just happening at work. NSR says non-enforcement is giving defiant smokers the courage to light up in other public areas. Some smokers now routinely puff away in bars or cafés and self-policing owners and managers are often hesitant to tell them to stop out of fear they’ll anger paying clients. Worse still, NSR says, are the enclosed terraces proliferating outside cafes and restaurants across France. The temporary glass or plastic structures were initially set up to keep customers warm so they can enjoy an “outside” café experience in chilly weather. But when smokers were forced outside, these terraces became de facto smoking zones that other patrons now have to cross to get indoors. NSR contends that the smoke also drifts inside — it says it has conducted tests showing that the air in establishments with covered smoking terraces is three times as toxic as in restaurants and cafés without them.

Anecdotal evidence also abounds that French smokers are pushing back in ways that they previously didn’t dare. On some French train lines — all of which are officially non-smoking — smokers frequently take over certain cars, thus far escaping punishment. Butts are also turning up in greater numbers in Paris’ Metro. “I’m not bothering anyone, and if I am, they can go to another part of the platform,” says a man who identified himself only as Adel as he smoked in the Etienne Marcel station recently. “If I see a Metro official, cop or someone who looks like they’ll be a real pain, I won’t light up. But otherwise, why shouldn’t I smoke in the Metro when I want to and can get away with it? Especially because there are far worse smells in here than smoke!”

Down the street from the station, the manager of a plastic-enclosed caféterrace similarly rationalized bending the rules. “This is outside, and it’s the only place where smokers are allowed, so it’s all legal,” says the man, who, perhaps aware that his enclosed smoking terrace is not actually kosher, requested that neither his name nor the name of his establishment be identified. “We have to live together, and this is one compromise to make that happen. Do you see anyone complaining?”

Not yet, perhaps. But one look at the countless smokers bundled up outside offices in Paris suggests that the transgressors are still a relatively rare exception to the rule. If smokers become bolder about lighting up indoors, however, non-smokers may begin demanding greater action from authorities. Even Parola acknowledges that second-hand smoke levels have vastly improved since the ban went into effect, saying his group’s current campaign is only aimed at improving enforcement enough to prevent a gradual return to 2006 habits.

To ensure that the pro-smoking movement doesn’t gain any more ground, authorities may have to do just that. Even though there are costs associated with enforcement, the government will probably still come out ahead —officials estimate that the state spends about $15 billion a year treating smoking-related illnesses. Stamping out a few butts could amount to very little in comparison.

By Bruce Crumley
Paris , Dec. 26, 2009

The Iowa Wholesale Distributors Association is part of the Coalition to Stop Contraband Tobacco. The goal of the coalition is to urge Congress to pass the Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking Act of 2009 (S.1147). The House passed the PACT Act by an overwhelming bipartisan majority. All five of Iowa’s representatives voted for the act.

As distributors of tobacco products, this legislation is important to keep tobacco products out of the hands of minors and to ensure a level playing field with respect to tobacco retail sales. Remote sellers – those who most commonly sell tobacco products over the Internet – routinely circumvent tax and age verification laws.

A 2001 study by Forrester Research predicted states could lose as much as $1.4 billion in tobacco revenue in 2005. Industry analysts and the federal government estimate states are now losing as much as $5 billion a year. Further, a 2004 Journal of American Medicine study found that more than 96 percent of minors ages 15 to 16 were able to place an Internet cigarette order in less than 25 minutes, with most being able to complete those orders in seven minutes.

A new state law aimed at making cigarettes less of a fire hazard is leaving a bad taste in the mouths of many Metro Detroit smokers.

The law, effective Jan. 1, requires all cigarettes sold in Michigan to be engineered to automatically extinguish when left unattended. Most cigarette companies are using a method that involves adding two or three bands of special paper in cigarettes’ paper wrap.

As the lit end crosses over the bands, they lower the flow of oxygen through the paper to the tobacco and slow down the cigarette’s rate of burn. If left unattended, the cigarettes will put themselves out.

The law is intended to reduce the number of cigarette-ignited fires. Gov. Jennifer Granholm approved it in June, making Michigan the 49th state in the country to pass fire-safe cigarette legislation.

But some local smokers are going out of their way to avoid the new safer cigarettes, even scouting from store to store for the old version.

It’s meant daily earfuls of grousing for retailers like Joe Odisho.

“I’ve had people come in ask if I have a brand without (the fire-safe cigarettes) and then turn around and walk out when I tell them ‘no,’” said Odisho, who owns Smokers’ Planet, a cigarette, cigar and tobacco store on Gratiot Avenue at 13 Mile in Roseville.

Smoker Ashley May isn’t impressed by the fire-safe smokes.

“I don’t like them,” the 22-year-old from Roseville said after a drag from a Kool. “You have to constantly puff on them every 30 seconds or else they’re going out. And then when you try to re-light them, they taste horrible.”

Her husband, Ed May, 29, also of Roseville, is of the same mind. “I hate them,” he said as smoked his Marlboro Medium.

Fires started by smoking products are the second leading cause of home fire-related deaths and injuries in the country.

Fires ignited by cigarettes claimed 780 lives in the United States in 2006, according to the Massachussetts-based National Fire Protection Association. Smoking-material fires also injured 1,600 and destroyed $606 million in property, the association estimates.

Closer to home, fires caused by smoking-related materials in Michigan killed four people last year, but they injured 33 — including seven firefighters, according to the state’s Bureau of Fire Services. The state recorded a total of 319 fires started by cigarettes, which resulted in more than $8.4 million in destroyed property.

The new cigarettes aren’t a silver bullet for fires started by smoking materials, but they will go a long way towards lowering the numbers of deaths and injuries caused by them, said Ronald Farr, Michigan’s Fire Marshal and an early proponent of the law.

“It’s a life-safety issue,” he said. “That’s the single biggest point for them.”

Under the new law, cigarette manufacturers that want to sell their products in Michigan have to register them with the state’s Bureau of Fire Services. They also must certify their cigarettes were made with the self-extinguishing technology.

The law focuses on cigarettes instead of other tobacco products because they are the most common smoking material behind fires, Farr said.

The state will charge cigarette makers a $1,250 fee to register each family brand of their products they want sold in Michigan. The companies will also have to recertify their products every three years.

The packaging for cigarettes must carry a special mark on them — FSC for Fire Standard Complaint — as well.

Any manufacturer, distributor or retailer who continues to sell unsafe cigarettes after Jan. 1 faces fines of $100 per pack and seizure of the product, according to the law.

The nation’s largest American tobacco companies, including Philip Morris USA and R.J. Reynolds, are already complying with the state’s new law and similar legislation elsewhere. R.J. Reynolds plans to make and sell only fire-safe cigarettes by the end of this year .

In other states with FSC laws, smokers weren’t keen on the safer cigarettes at the beginning, either. But over time, they become accustomed to them and the same thing will happen in Michigan, experts say.

Despite having to constantly fight to keep their cigarettes lit when they smoke, Ashley and Ed May said they thinks fire-safe cigarettes are a good idea.

“I’m all for preventing house fires,” said Ashley May, who has been a smoker since she was 12. “There are neglectful people who fall asleep with their cigarettes.”

They also said their cigarettes’ new fire-safety feature isn’t enough to make them kick the habit.

“We’re still going to smoke,” she said. “Maybe we’ll switch to rolling our own. We have friends who do it. It’s not too bad and it’s a little cheaper than buying backs now.”

LANSING, Mich. — The Michigan Legislature passed a long-delayed smoking ban Thursday, with exceptions for three Detroit casinos that have to compete with tribal casinos not affected by the ban.

The Democrat-led House agreed Thursday afternoon to slight changes made by the Republican-led Senate earlier in the day. The bill now goes to Democratic Gov. Jennifer Granholm, who has said she’ll sign it.

The ban would take effect in May 2010. It applies to all bars, restaurants and work places, except for the Detroit casinos, cigar bars, tobacco specialty stores, home offices and motor vehicles.

The Senate approved a ban with no exceptions last year, but that bill failed in the House, which wanted the exceptions for the Detroit casinos. The House in May passed the bill adopted Thursday by the Senate.

With Granholm’s signature, Michigan would become the 38th state to limit smoking in public places such as government buildings and bars and restaurants, according to Sen. Ray Basham, D-Taylor, who has kept alive the push for a statewide smoking ban. He favors a total ban, but was satisfied with the progress so far.

“We’ve moved the ball down the court, and even scored a basket,” he said of Thursday’s vote. “We haven’t scored a three-pointer.”

Sen. Tupac Hunter, D-Detroit, also wanted casinos included in the ban but was pleased with the Senate vote.

“It will be a great day in this state when we are totally, 100 percent smoke free … (but) I’m very proud of what we’ve done today,” he said.

Several senators, including Senate Majority Leader Mike Bishop, R-Rochester, said they objected to the ban because it intruded on decisions bar and restaurant owners should make based on their customers’ desires.

“This is a blatant overreach by government,” Bishop said.

Among nearby states, only Indiana doesn’t have some type of smoking ban in place. Michigan lawmakers have been trying for more than a decade to pass a ban.

Some residents remain opposed to it, including Don Doze, 54, who was eating Thursday in the smoking section of a Big Boy restaurant in Detroit.

“I want to enjoy my food or drink, and enjoy my cigarette,” said Doze, a Detroit retiree who has smoked for decades. “I don’t want to walk away from my table to go outside and smoke.”

Heaven White, 35, of Detroit, who was sitting in the nonsmoking section of the same restaurant, said a ban on smoking in restaurants and the workplace is good. Still, she said smoking should be allowed in bars.

“Smoking goes with drinking,” White said. “That’s the place you go to be a bad girl, a bad boy.”

The House passed the smoking ban by a 75-30 vote Thursday. Thursday’s Senate vote was 24-13; one senator was absent.

Sen. Jim Barcia of Bay City was the only Democrat to oppose the ban in the Senate. Republicans voting against the ban were Jason Allen of Traverse City, Senate Majority Leader Mike Bishop of Rochester, Cameron Brown of Sturgis, Alan Cropsey of DeWitt, Valde Garcia of Howell, Jud Gilbert of Algonac, Mark Jansen of Grand Rapids, Wayne Kuipers of Holland, Randy Richardville of Monroe, Alan Sanborn of Richmond, Tony Stamas of Midland and Gerald Van Woerkom of Norton Shores.

Republican Bill Hardiman of Kentwood was absent.

National Assembly – Under the watchful gaze of the giant Zhabdrung Ngawang Namgyal and Guru Rinpoche thongdroel, the National Assembly yesterday endorsed the Tobacco Control Bill of the Kingdom of Bhutan.

The endorsing of the bill, with amendments, assumed a special significance at the hall, considering that Zhabdrung endorsed the first tobacco control in the 17th century. Even before that, Guru Rinpoche, in his teachings, said that tobacco grew from the blood of a demoness, personified as a menstruating woman, who had wished for an intoxicant that would obstruct spiritual practice.

Yesterday, the 21st century democratic Bhutan’s members of parliament, respecting individual rights, didn’t completely ban smoking or chewing tobacco, but ensured that tobacco is scarce, non-users are protected and violators penalised accordingly.

No Bhutanese can sell or even buy tobacco, says the bill. Any Bhutanese “selling or buying tobacco” in any form will be fined as specified by the yet to be established tobacco control board from time to time and serve imprisonment term equivalent to the fine imposed if unable to pay it.

Non-smokers will be protected by law from inhaling second hand smoke. This will be done by strictly banning smoking in public places, like commercial and recreation centres, institutions, public gatherings/spaces and public transportation. A smoker violating the rule will be fined from time to time or, failing to pay the fine, detained. A person responsible for letting someone smoke in a public place will also be penalised.

However, respecting individual rights, the tobacco board will draft rules and regulations and specify a permissible limit of tobacco to be imported. The word ‘quota’ will be removed from the bill after members debated that, by providing quota, every smoker will import, which was as good as lifting the ban.

Bhutanese found smuggling tobacco shall be guilty of smuggling and shall be penalised as per the penal code. Film makers, who use scenes depicting tobacco use, including smoking, for domestic production of video, movies and cultural shows would be booked for petty misdemeanour and penalised as per the penal code, says the bill.

The Bill, however, will be sent to the National Council, which earlier amended it and lifted the ban on the sale of tobacco and tobacco products. If the council does not agree with the Assembly’s amendments, the bill will be put to the joint legislative committee of the two houses. A joint sitting would be needed to pass the bill, if the joint committee fails to resolve differences.

The health minister, Lyonpo Zanglay Dukpa, said that the bill was drafted after consultation with many relevant agencies. “The tobacco legislation should be made practical, user-friendly. It should be strict to deter people from getting into the illegal business, while not being too harsh to infringe on rights,” said the minister. He said that tobacco-related diseases are fast picking up and are a pressure on the health system.
By Ugyen Penjore

DAMASCUS, – A much tougher anti-smoking law in Syria, signed by President Bashar al-Assad and due to come into force in early 2010, will outlaw smoking in public places, including restaurants and bars, hospitals, sports halls and cinemas.

The law covers cigarettes and cigars, as well as traditional ’shisha’ water pipes.

“The ban is timely,” said Mahmoud Etah, a Syrian doctor. “Smoking, especially of water pipes, has become more prevalent among young people and we are yet to see the full health effects.”

According to the Syrian Society for Countering Cancer, 60 percent of adult men and 23 percent of women smoke; 98 percent of people are said to be affected by passive smoking.

The more serious health effects which the measures hope to reduce include lung and mouth cancer, as well as respiratory diseases. The levels of these diseases are not documented in the country, but doctors report an increase in the number of people exhibiting symptoms associated with them.

It is for this reason that the ban has been introduced now, said Bassam Abu al-Dahab, former head of the National Programme to Combat Smoking.

The World Health Organization (WHO) does not have any statistics on Syria, but in Egypt it attributes 90 percent of lung cancer deaths to tobacco use. Globally, tobacco-related cancers as a percentage of all cancers are on the rise.

Current trends show that by the year 2020 or 2030, tobacco is likely to be the world’s leading cause of death and disability, killing more than 10 million people annually (70 percent of these deaths occurring in developing countries) and claiming more lives than HIV, tuberculosis, maternal mortality, motor vehicle accidents, suicide, and homicide combined. There are about 1.1 billion smokers in the world – about one-third of the global population aged I5 and over, according to WHO.

The Syrian government has already passed several laws regulating the tobacco industry and smoking. A 1996 decree banned tobacco advertising and in 2006 Syria banned smoking in government offices and public transport. The new law envisages a 2,000 SYP (US$44) fine on those who break it.

“Smoking awareness days”

Governmental and voluntary initiatives to raise awareness of the health risks of smoking have increased this year, say activists. “Smoking awareness days” have been held at private educational institutes such as Kalamoon University near Damascus, which has also introduced a ban on smoking in the university campus.

However, the effectiveness of the tougher legal framework is in doubt. Whilst people do not smoke in buses, it is common to see the current laws against smoking flouted in taxis and some government offices, and fines are rarely imposed, they say.

The stricter law will be even harder to enforce, say Syrian restaurant and bar owners, who have expressed dismay at the ban. Ahmad Kozoroch, the owner of Rawda, a famous coffee shop close to the Syrian parliament, said he would resist the ban in his establishment, pointing to the fact that most of his profit comes from water pipes.

“The law will hurt my business,” said Kozoroch. “I am not sure people will stop smoking. Instead they are likely to pay bribes to official inspectors to avoid the fines.”
Source: IRIN3 December 2009

A grocery chain and a pharmacy company say they’re looking at pulling cigarettes from their shelves in light of a new law to crack down on tobacco sales.

Proposed anti-tobacco legislation received first reading in the Saskatchewan legislature on Wednesday.

The law, which has yet to be passed but could take effect as early as next year, would make it illegal to smoke in a car if there are children present.

It would also put new restrictions on tobacco sales. If pharmacies and stores that have pharmacies inside — such as supermarkets — want to continue selling tobacco, they are going to have to build separate areas or kiosks, to which minors will not have access.

In response, some stores were saying Wednesday they would rather just stop selling tobacco altogether.

John Graham, Canada Safeway’s public affairs manager, said when similar legislation was introduced years ago in Ontario, Safeway decided to spend the money to revamp only two stores. In the rest, they pulled tobacco altogether, he said.

“Kiosks, though we wouldn’t rule them out, aren’t most likely the path we would choose to take,” Graham said.

Clint Mahlman, the senior vice-president of London Drugs, said his company won’t be building kiosks either.

He said the law won’t help people quit smoking: people who can’t get cigarettes at a drug store will get them elsewhere.

On the other hand, a drug store is an appropriate place to sell tobacco, because it’s where people can buy anti-smoking aids and receive advice from staff about them, Mahlman said.

“Targeting tobacco customers when they’re purchasing tobacco is the most effective way to get our smoking cessation methods across to the tobacco user,” he said.

When a tobacco ban was implemented in Alberta earlier this year, London Drugs saw the sale of stop-smoking aids drop dramatically, he said.

Health Minister Don McMorris said Wednesday that many drug stores in Saskatchewan have already stopped selling cigarettes.

The proposed law would also ban smoking on school grounds.

Saskatchewan law currently prohibits smoking in workplaces and many public enclosed areas, including bars, restaurants and curling rinks.
December 3, 2009 Cbc

It is a program that helps smokers throughout the state. Right out of Roswell Park. The New York State Smokers Quit Line.

“Last year we got nearly three hundred thousand New Yorkers to call us,” said Dr. Michael Cummings of Roswell Park.

This is part of the anti-tobacco program, rolled back in last year’s budget, from 85 million dollars in funding in 2008, to 68 million for 2009. In this deficit reduction program, it loses ten million more. Cummings called the cuts penny wise and pound foolish, saying the state tax payers pay 25 billion dollars a year, treating tobacco related diseases, and people quitting saves New York State in the long run.

“This is something that is going to trickle across the state, affect the prevention programs that occur to educate our children,” added Cummings.

Roswell Park gets about 2 million dollars for this program. Cummings thinks a third of that could be gone in this latest round of cuts. They have already seen changes. The amount of medication they can offer smokers who call in, and fewer calls because there are less ads to let people know they are there. Wiith less funding, it will affect their ability to hire people, and deliver services.

“We are heading in the wrong direction. This is a program that has been working, and our prevalence of smoking is going down,” Cummings said.

But lawmakers again add tough decisions have to be made during the fiscal crisis. State Senator Michael Ranzenhofer voted for the deficit reduction plan.

“There are many good programs, and the money is not there. The money does not grow on trees, and I favored many other cuts,” said Ranzenhofer.

LUDHIANA: Acting on complaint of a city resident regarding violation of smoking laws in Satluj Club, Punjab State Human Rights

Club member Ajay Singh Bhandari, bearing membership number 548, had, in his complaint lodged with the commission, alleged that the club authorities had converted a large part of the rummy room into a smoking zone, due to which, the elderly including women in the room were being put through a lot of trouble. Bhandari had alleged that the smoking area had not been constructed in keeping with norms of the notification issued by Union health ministry in which it had been clearly said that the smoking area should be built at a place where no other services are rendered by clubs or hotels.

Acting accordingly, the commission has said it is a case of human rights violation. Further, the commission, in its recent orders, disposed of the complaint, directing the DC, president of the club, to look into the matter.

Notably, this is not for the first time that the commission has issued directions to the DC to look into the matter. The complainant has been raising the issue over the last few months. He had lodged a complaint with the commission earlier too. The commission, in an order dated May 14, disposed of a complaint, directing the DC to look into it.

However, while no action was taken in this regard, in a letter written to the commission a few months back, Bhandari alleged that the state of affairs in the club was yet to improve. Smoking was being allowed all over the club including billiard room, bar room, club lawn and other places where people could be seen freely smoking, flouting government?s rules with impunity. He added that eatables, soft drinks and hard drinks were being served in the smoking area of the club.
By Manvinder Singh
1 December 2009, Timesofindia

A vote to send a proposal for a stronger smoking ban back to a City-County Council committee Monday night drew cheers from opponents and supporters, who both saw the move as a sign their side could prevail in the months-long fight.

Foes celebrated that, at least for now, people can still light up in Indianapolis bars, bowling alleys, private clubs and other establishments where smoking would be prohibited under the proposal.

Proponents rejoiced that the ban is still alive and has time to gain more council supporters before it goes back to the full council, most likely in the next few months.

The council’s 20-7 vote to send the measure back to committee came at the urging of its sponsors, who said it was senseless to extend the vacillation that has occurred on the issue since the ordinance was introduced Oct. 5.

The stronger ban initially received an indecisive vote and then was tabled before the council decided last month to bring it back at Monday’s meeting.

Supporters had known for days they did not have enough votes to pass the measure, and Democrat Angela Mansfield, a key sponsor of the ordinance, had to miss Monday’s meeting unexpectedly.

Ben Hunter, a Republican sponsor who made the motion to send the ordinance back to the Community Affairs Committee, said the move would provide a chance to renew discussion with fewer political fireworks and allow council members to craft a compromise.

“We’re not going to get anything done on the full council floor,” Hunter said. “We’re getting nowhere, and all it’s done is create ancillary arguments that are not advancing the debate on public policy.”

Libertarian Ed Coleman, an opponent of the ordinance, urged the council to vote against sending it back to committee and to get the issue resolved Monday.

Dozens of supporters and opponents packed the Public Assembly Room of the City-County Building anticipating the council vote. Supporters wore green shirts with the logo of the group Smoke Free Indy; opponents donned red shirts that said, “Stop the Farce.”

Instead, the debate will progress, and both sides say they’ll be lobbying to keep the issue in the public eye.

Bill Smythe, who represents Marion County for the Indiana Licensed Beverage Association, said he sees a move back to committee as the ban’s kiss of death. He said the proposal lacks enough council support to pass, and getting an endorsement from Mayor Greg Ballard, who has said he would veto the ban in its current form, will be a challenge.

“I don’t think they get it,” Smythe said of the applause from ban supporters. “They think it’s going back to committee to come back changed. It’s going to committee to die.”

But Tim Filler, a spokesman for Smoke Free Indy, said he’s optimistic about gaining the support of Ballard and a few key council Democrats whose endorsement could tip the vote in the ban’s favor.

Earlier Monday, he and other smoke-free advocates delivered a box of more than 500 letters from constituents in support of the ban to Ballard’s office. In coming months, he said, the group will continue similar efforts to engage the public and make citizens’ opinions known to city leaders.

“This is obviously a marathon and not a sprint,” Filler said. “(Monday’s vote) is not a defeat for sure. It’s a blip on the screen in terms of the big picture.”

While supporters continue their efforts, Smythe and other opponents will work to counter them. Save Indianapolis Bars, which typically disbands between fights over the smoking ban issue, will continue operating and will bring on a paid staff member.

Council members also will try to come up with a solution that’s more broadly supported.

Hunter said that likely will include amendments such as exempting retail tobacco stores and private clubs and softening the provision prohibiting smoking within 25 feet of doorways.

By Francesca Jarosz
December 1, 2009

The Coalition of Non- Governmental Organisations (NGOs) over the weekend held a meeting to put in place strategic measures towards the passage of the Tobacco Control Bill into law.

The bill, when passed into law, would mainly reduce tobacco consumption and exposure to tobacco, thereby improving the health of Ghanaians and guests.

The bill seeks to ban smoking in public places, prohibit the sale or offer for sale of tobacco products in health and educational institutions, theatres, sports stadia, and other public places.

The Tobacco Control Bill has therefore been developed to implement the provisions of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC).

Briefing the press in Accra, on the need for a strong Tobacco Control Law and Art 11 of the FCTC, the President of Vision for Alternative Development (VALD), Mr. Issah Ali, said the FCTC’s objective was to “to protect present and future generations from the devastating health, social, environmental and economic consequences of tobacco consumption and exposure to tobacco smoke.”

According to him the FCTC provisions and recommendations included large health warning labels required, text and pictorial warnings thus 30%-50%.

He said FCTC’s Article 13 states that tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship, recommends that there should be comprehensive ban on advertising, promotion and sponsorships, including donations.

He said Ghana was using directives to ban tobacco advertisement, which has been very successful.

He pointed out that certain countries had discovered the main causes of smoking tobacco, including countries like Thailand, which has discovered that smoking tobacco causes lung cancer, Egypt discovered that tobacco causes diseases of the heart, and the UK discovered that tobacco destroys the arteries.

RICHMOND – Starting tomorrow, Virginia will join dozens of other states that ban smoking in restaurants, a huge shift for a state whose tobacco habit dates to the Jamestown settlement about 400 years ago.

Strict curbs on lighting up where food and drink are sold were enacted this year by lawmakers in Richmond and in Raleigh, N.C., major tobacco capitals where cigarette makers Philip Morris and R.J. Reynolds have been accustomed to getting their way.

Restaurants in Virginia will be allowed to have a smoking area only if they segregate smokers into rooms with ventilation systems separate from those that heat and cool nonsmoking patrons.

North Carolina’s law takes effect Jan. 2 and will allow smoking on outdoor patios and in private membership clubs, as does Virginia’s law. Unlike Virginia, North Carolina law will not allow any smoking in restaurants.

Virginia restaurant industry lobbyist Tom Lisk expects only about 10 percent of the state’s restaurants to retain smoking areas. “A number of them, because of that requirement in the law to create or construct a separate room, don’t have the wherewithal to do it, so they’re just banning smoking altogether,’’ said Lisk, who last winter opposed the bill.

Some, such as Randall Plaxa, a Williamsburg nightspot owner, decided to go smoke-free well ahead of the deadline. Others, such as the Third Street Diner and the Beatles-themed Penny Lane Pub in downtown Richmond, will move patrons who smoke into upstairs quarters that already comply with the law.

The Department of Health is launching a press campaign in a bid to encourage more male smokers to give up smoking.

Set to run across major national newspapers and TalkSport’s weekly magazine in November, the ads are football-themed, with a message that “going smoke free allows you to get more out of your game”.

The straplines take the form of familiar football chants, such as: ‘We’re not smoking, we’re not smoking, we’re not smoking any more.’

There will also be a direct mail pack and locker stickers for 5-a-side venues.

A website will have a range of tools to encourage people to quit smoking, with visitors able to ‘sign’ for Smokefree United and enter a Smokefree United League, which ranks the number of quitters from each football team.

The press campaign was devised by Kitcatt Nohr Alexander Shaw. The target demographic is male smokers in England who work in routine and manual jobs, are interested in football and have children living at home.

“Male smokers provide a unique challenge as traditional health messages often don’t motivate them to quite,” says a DoH spokesperson. “This campaign demonstrates the positive, tangible benefits that quitting smoking offers football fans – be it more money in their pocket or the fitness to have a kick about with their friends and family.”

The campaign follows the TV ads launched by the DoH this month that feature real children talking about their concern for their parent’s health, and encouraging them to give up smoking.

Smoking bans have made the air healthier in bars and restaurants, but may have made the air just outside the establishments more hazardous, University of Georgia researchers have found.
300_advertisement_header.gif

Nonsmoking diners and imbibers sitting in outdoor patios or sidewalk seating areas connected to the bars or restaurants are picking up doses of secondhand smoke, the scientists found.

In fact, nonsmokers who volunteered to sit in the outdoor seating areas had levels of a tobacco byproduct in their bodies up to 162 percent higher than when they first sat down, said Luke Naeher, a professor in UGA’s environmental health science department.

Collaborating with researchers in the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Northeast Health District, Naeher and other UGA researchers measured levels of a substance called cotinine.

Naeher’s research team assigned 20 nonsmoking volunteers to spend six evening hours in one of three outdoor areas for the study – outside a downtown Athens bar, outside a restaurant near downtown or outside UGA’s main library.

“We’re looking at real-world settings,” Naeher said.

After six hours, the volunteers gave a saliva sample, which the researchers tested for cotinine, a nicotine byproduct often used as an indicator of tobacco exposure.

Volunteers who hung out where smokers gather outside a restaurant saw their cotinine levels more than double. Nonsmokers outside a bar had their cotinine increase by even more, up to 162 percent.

The study is published in this month’s issue of the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene.

Few restaurant or bar patrons are exposed to six hours of secondhand smoke at a stretch – but workers could be, Naeher said.

Cotinine unexpectedly even went up in the library group, by an average of 16 percent – possibly because one of them passed by a smoker as the volunteer walked downtown to give researchers a saliva sample, Naeher said.

Previous studies have shown that restaurant and bar smoking bans reduce the incidence of heart attacks and respiratory illness among people inside the establishments.

But researchers don’t know the health impacts of outdoor secondhand smoke.

“The question is, is it an environment that warrants concern or further study?” Naeher said. “The answer is, we don’t know yet.”

The researchers aren’t quite ready to declare outdoor cafes a new health hazard for those that may inhale secondhand smoke there – including children, restaurant and bar workers, and pregnant women and their unborn children.

But secondhand smoke contains numerous carcinogens, and scientists believe there is no safe level of exposure, Naeher said.

“We feel like it’s something we need to be taking a look at,” said Lou Kudon, one of the authors of the study. Kudon is program manager for the Athens-based Northeast Health District, which includes Clarke and nine other area counties.

Next, the researchers will measure levels of a chemical called NNAL, a known carcinogen, in nonsmokers who spend time in outdoor places where people smoke.

CHARLESTON- A compliance check Monday evening resulted in 11 retailers being found in violation of tobacco regulations for selling tobacco products to a minor.

The Charleston Police Department reported that it conducted a compliance check in which a minor was sent to all 19 tobacco retailers in town to purchase tobacco products under police supervision. The compliance check was funded by a state grant.

Hucks, Mike and Stan’s, Indio Cigar Factory, Lefty’s Holler, Murphy’s USA, Citgo, Discount Smoke Shop, The Panther Paw, Gateway Liquor, County Market, and Marathon/Mach 1 were found to be in violation for selling tobacco to the minor and the clerks were cited for city ordinance violations.

Lanman’s BP Station, Campus Liquor, Casey’s General Store, CVS Pharmacy, East Side Package, Walgreen’s Pharmacy, and Walmart all were in compliance. The Veterans of Foreign Wars post was closed to the public during the hours the compliance check was conducted.

November 18, 2009 Jg-tc

Some city landlords have begun prohibiting tenants from smoking inside their apartments, because of the dangers of second-hand smoke. A study recently found that secondhand smoke causes at least 35,000 deaths from heart disease and 3,000 deaths from lung cancer in nonsmokers nationwide each year—and New Yorkers are even more at risk because their dense urban environment. As one tobacco expert put it: “Smoke doesn’t know to stop at a doorway. It fills the full capacity of every indoor location in which the cigarette is smoked.” So at least one major real estate company is now stepping in to stop the smoke before it starts.

This month the Related Companies will ban smoking at some of its downtown apartment buildings, though the ban will only affect new tenants, who must sign an agreement promising not to smoke inside their homes. And developer Kenbar Management will ban smoking from all 298 units in its East Harlem building when it opens next month. Its smoking ban will even extend to private and shared terraces, and tenants must also agree not to smoke on any of the sidewalks that wrap around the building!

With the city contemplating a smoking ban in public parks and beaches, some smokers are outraged about a perceived ghettoization of smoking. One tenant at a Related Companies building tells the Times, “I think it’s absolutely absurd. How about a little tolerance? Smokers have become the whipping boys for everything that’s unhealthy about living in New York City.” And Audrey Silk, founder of Citizens Lobbying Against Smoker Harassment, wonders, “If we’re talking about annoying odors, where do you draw the line? What about cooking odors, from fish or curry?” It’s unclear how many deaths have been caused by second-hand fish odor inhalation.

By John Del Signore, November 16, 2009