smoking law Archives - |

Category Archives: smoking law

FDA should get tough on e-cigarettes

The Food and Drug Administration’s weak rules on electronic cigarettes came under a new round of criticism last week when 29 state attorneys general wrote the agency to say its current proposal to regulate them “fails to address matters of particular concern.”

The 29 officials, including Massachusetts’ Martha Coakley, are right on target. In April, the FDA had said it wanted to ban sales of e-cigarettes to minors. Yet it proposed to give manufacturers complete freedom to market a product that could addict a new generation of users to nicotine, expose users to many potentially dangerous chemicals, and still be a gateway back to tobacco.

The FDA would still allow manufacturers to sell electronic cigarettes with the very candy, cake, spice, and fruit flavors that were banned in 2009 for tobacco because they were luring youth into smoking. In another head scratcher, the FDA would also allow e-cigarette companies to advertise in media banned for tobacco, such as television and magazines. According to a study published last month in the journal Pediatrics, youth exposure to e-cigarette television advertising increased 256 percent from 2011 to 2013.

That figure was cited by the attorneys general in their letter, in which they urged the FDA to ban candy flavors, place the same marketing restrictions on e-cigs as for cigarettes, and strengthen health warnings. Noting studies that link adolescent nicotine use to adult memory loss, impulse control, and depression, the attorneys general suggest labeling that makes it crystal clear that nicotine “is a harmful and addictive chemical.”

The harm has become obvious as child poisonings from playing with or accidentally swallowing liquid e-cigarette flavorings have skyrocketed. They have reached such a level that a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report in April said, “developing strategies to monitor and prevent future poisonings is critical.”

The saga of e-cigarette regulation took a particularly mysterious turn this summer when Reuters reported that a key reason for the tameness of the FDA’s rules was because the Obama administration’s Office of Management and Budget significantly weakened the FDA drafts. OMB deleted language voicing concern for the safety of e-cigarettes, a proposal to review cartridges for harmful levels of toxic chemicals, and language that could have led to a ban on online sales. In a parallel revision, OMB also weakened proposed new rules for cigars and deleted FDA estimates of how many lives and how much money would be saved with reductions in cigar smoking.

OMB has not said why it weakened the rules, but the unspoken reason probably is that tobacco companies remain big players on Capitol Hill. The industry has spent $132 million in lobbying since 2009, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

That lobbying clearly has muted the cry for tough, proactive regulation. To be sure, e-cigarettes do not contain the carcinogens of burnt tobacco. E-cigarettes, with proper medical supervision, may help people stop smoking. But the fact that companies are using celebrities to market them as a way of being cool strongly suggests that the overriding goal of the industry is to get millions of people around the world hooked.

Besides the attorneys general, the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the National Association of County & City Health Officials all want to ban candy flavors and subject e-cigarettes to the same restrictions as tobacco.

When President Obama signed the 2009 Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, he made it clear he was disturbed that children were assaulted with an “insidious barrage of advertising” for tobacco and flavors that “make it even more tempting.”

In the five years since, the barrage of advertising and the exploding use of e-cigarettes among young people make it imperative for Obama and the FDA to listen to the pleas of the top medical societies, public health associations, and, now, the majority of state attorneys general. Without strong action by the administration, e-cigarettes will become a temptation young people cannot resist.

By Derrick Z. Jackson,

Health officials congratulate Davis stores for not selling tobacco to minors

Ninety Davis County tobacco retailers are now recognized throughout the say “no” to underage teenagers trying to buy tobacco products over the 2012-13 fiscal.

story-davis-county-new-cmyk-221405.jpgTobacco compliance checks carried out in the last fiscal year are part of a program the Devis County Health Department, in partnership with local law enforcement agencies, has been running since 1989.

The Department of Health recognizing 90 tobacco retailers in the country , because according to the tests. The program is designed to reduce the access of minors to tobacco products.

Special recognition went to Sinclair Main Street Service Layton for being in line for 25 years and Saigon Market Set for being in compliance for 20 years, health officials said Davis.

15 -year-old award under dostalas7 -Eleven store on Main Street Kaysville author.

From July 2012 to June 2013, the juvenile buyers, led by local law enforcement, tried to buy tobacco products 431 times, said Lewis R. Garrett, Davis, and Director of the Department of Health.

“Of these, 431 attempts, 14 resulted in an illegal sale of tobacco to minors at a speed of county buy 3.2 per cent,” he said.

“I am pleased with the continued downward trend from buying rate of last year when he was 4 percent. We have significantly reduced our High of 14 percent, we have seen in the July 2006 -June 2007 period.

“We are a very active program aimed at educating tobacco retailers how to train their employees to identify underage buyers, and it still shows good results.

“I extend my congratulations and appreciation to the management and employees of those retailers who are working hard to keep tobacco products to minors.”

The sales of cigarettes to a person under the age of 19, is a class misdemeanor for a first offense. Clerks are issued citations at the time of the violation.

In addition, store owners may be civil penalties for selling tobacco products to minor’s buyer. Shops fined for the first two violations and have their tobacco license suspended for 30 days for a third.

The store’s license of the sale of tobacco responds to the fourth violation within a 12- month period.

The fine may be reduced if the store has a documented training program and proof that the employee was trained.

Australian law challenged under trade agreements

In one, Philip Morris Asia Australia accused of violating the 1993 bilateral trade agreement between Hong Kong and Australia. Such agreements, known as investor-state contracts allow foreign investors to bring themselves to arbitration for damages against a country.

images (1)The case is pending arbitration of the UN Commission on International Trade Law.

In the other, Ukraine, Honduras and the Dominican Republic at the beginning of this year have brought their problems facing the World Trade Organization.

The complaint in March in Ukraine was a striking paradox. His Department of Commerce filed a challenge within hours of the President of Ukraine’s president signing a ban on tobacco advertising, and its parliament voting to ban smoking in public places – revolutionary approaches in chain smoking Eastern Europe. Trade officials have accepted; in spite of the actions of Ukraine do not have tobacco exports to Australia, and therefore no obvious interest in its anti-smoking policies.

“We are pleased to support countries that, like us, feel plain packaging could have a negative impact on trade,” said British American spokesman Jem Maidment.

It is not uncommon in trade disputes for corporations to give legal assistance to governments with mutual interested. In this case, however, the three countries appear to have little, if any, are directly interested in Australian politics Tobacco Control.

While tobacco exports from Ukraine to Australia, there are no exports from Honduras and the Dominican Republic in the last three years, an average of $ 65,000 (U.S.) and $ 807,000, respectively, according to the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.

In response to a request in April, Ukrainian journalists in the country, the country’s Ministry of Economic Development and Trade said it was a “policy of support for Ukrainian producers and protect their interests in the domestic and foreign markets.” In this case, the ministry said it had “received concerns” about the law of Australia from the Ukrainian Association of Tobacco Growers, consisting of the top multinational tobacco, and from the Union of wholesalers and manufacturers of alcohol and tobacco Association.

Constantine Krasovksy, formal tobacco control official in Ukraine’s Ministry of Health, told FairWarning country allowed them to be used. “Honduras, Dominican Republic and Ukraine have agreed to be a prostitute,” he said.

Honduran officials, with the April release of the press, the Act” Australia” contrary to its trade obligations. He noted that the tobacco industry “employs hundreds of thousands of people, directly or indirectly through the supply chain in Honduras.”

The Dominican Republic, a major exporter of cigars, also said the plain packaging “will have a significant impact on our economy.” In a written statement FairWarning, Katrina Naut, Director General for foreign trade with the country’s Ministry of Industry and Commerce, said that if other countries join Australia for the adoption of plain packaging, it will lead to a drop in the price of branded tobacco products and “an increase – rather than decrease -.

FDA announces first decisions on new tobacco products

In March, I became the director of the FDA’s Center for Tobacco Products (CTP), after spending more than three decades working on FDA-related issues, including a seven-year stint at FDA from 1993-2000. From 1997-2000 I was the first director of the agency’s office of tobacco programs. Since I returned FDA, CTP has made significant progress on many fronts. I look forward to discussing my strategic goals and priorities for the future blog post, but today I want to share some information about priority-review decisions regarding tobacco products.

tobacco_iconToday, for the first time since received FDA authority to regulate tobacco products identified, the agency authorized the marketing of two new tobacco products through substantial equivalence (SE) pathway, while denying the marketing of the four other new products.

These actions are unprecedented and mark the beginning of other upcoming decisions related to the marketing of new tobacco products. Substantial equivalence is one way manufacturers can use to market new tobacco product. To do this, the manufacturer must prove that their product has the same characteristics as the actual formerly marketed tobacco products, which we call the predicate product, or if the new product has different characteristics that it does not raise different questions of public health.

SE representations require careful study. FDA is responsible for protecting public health, and to do that, we are working to ensure that any new tobacco product brought to market by the way does not introduce more harm to public health than the actual product predicate specified by the manufacturer.

Today’s SE orders allow the marketing of two new Lorillard Tobacco Company Tobacco Newport Non-Menthol gold box 100s and Newport Non-Menthol gold box. The agency has found these two products are substantially equivalent to the predicate products based on materials of the company and other readily available science and information to demonstrate that each product will not pose more harm to public health than the predicate.

It is important to emphasize that the decision does not in itself mean that the Agency considers the product to be safe, and its not-FDA approved. SE decision only means that the new product does not cause various public health issues, compared to the predicate product.

The FDA has also released the first non-equivalent, or NSE, orders denying marketing of four new tobacco products after discovering that the products have different characteristics from their products predicate and that the applicant does not fully show that the new products did not raise different questions of public health.

FDA had been working diligently to address all the pending SE submissions. We know it took some time, but expect that the process will move more quickly in the future all the participants get more experience. FDA proposed to feedback from the industry about the requirements for substantial equivalence, and will continue to provide such feedback. We also created a new Web page that tracks SE decision on the date and provides general information on how the FDA to market new tobacco products. Our goal is to work through the remaining SE submissions in a consistent, transparent and predictable manner.

FDA graphic health warnings

When the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) imposes new graphic health warnings for tobacco products, they can survive First Amendment challenge if they depict the health consequences and their effectiveness is confirmed by adequate scientific data, says Georgetown University Medical Center, an expert on public Health and counsel.

imagesGraphic tobacco warning labels that combine images with health warnings, a widely used tool for reducing tobacco use in other countries, but the tobacco industry claims that they are unconstitutional in the United States.

In the analysis of the legal and scientific issues for graphic health warnings published in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine, John Kremer, JD, MPH, defines how the courts are likely to analyze the graphic warnings and determine what health evidence must be presented in order to survive legal challenge. Kramer is an assistant professor of health systems administration at Georgetown University School of Nursing and Medical Research, and a member of the O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law.

Despite the fact that smoking kills 443,00 Americans each year, Kramer says, “The United States has some of the weakest tobacco warning labels in the world, and they have not been updated in nearly 30 years.”

In 2009, Congress passed the Family Smoking Prevention and Control Act requiring graphic warning labels on tobacco products, giving the FDA authority to specify the images and text that should be included. FDA released nine graphic warnings in June 2011, but withdrew them after two federal appeals courts have come to opposite conclusions about their constitutionality.

Although there is ambiguity over what constitutional rule will be applied in a lawsuit to labels, Kramer argues that it is possible for the FDA to address the two most likely standards of rational basis review and an interim review, with the right scientific data.

Kremer says the label is likely that, in accordance with a rational basis review, and will almost certainly prevail “if the court will issue a warning against deception past the industry.” He says that some courts have applied this review to be unquestionable, factual warnings such as information intended to help consumers make healthier decisions.

The second possibility is an interim review, which requires a strong public interest and greater confidence that the warning labels are effective.

“Under this review, the FDA, could probably win, but it will turn on how well the government will be able to convince the courts of some empirical evidence”, explains Kramer. “Providing clear evidence of graphic warning labels impact on smokers themselves or for a causal mechanism by which they reduce smoking will meet the test of the court.”

He adds that the FDA should also take care to avoid images that can be interpreted as an opinion and not the facts or do not show the negative health consequences of smoking, such as images previously received FDA, which depicted a man with no – smoking sign on his shirt.

Raise taxes on tobacco is reasoned

The desire of the legislator and the possibility to increase the tax on tobacco products throughout the state as part of putting together the budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1, legislation that would once again allow their dooms Oregon counties levy taxes tobacco.

part2-2-taxesIn so far failed budget negotiations between Democrats and Republicans legislative leaders the issue of raising taxes on cigarettes Oregon $ 1.18 per pack from 10 to 50 cents.

For the states, the increase will be part of a package of fixed-¬ nebulous increase personal, corporate, and “sin” taxes are designed to provide at least $ 200 million over the next two years combined. The new money, most of which the Democrats want in exchange for the introduction of curbs to public employee pension costs are deep, will increase funding for public K-12 education, colleges and youth mental health services.

Such a deal, if materialized, would it mean the end for House Bill 2870, a bill favored by Lane county officials, who will lift the ban on the county state tobacco tax, lawmakers recognize.

“It’s fair to say that if a user (tobacco tax) increase occurs, the county will not pass the bill,” Sen said. Ginny Burdick, Portland Democrat and chairman of the Senate Committee on Finance and Revenue Committee, WHERE HB 2870 was assigned.

Some county political leaders – including financial difficulties Lane County – lobbied for HB 2870 this session as a new “tool” for potentially raise funds.

Under the bill, county commissioners could levy a tax- which may not exceed the amount of tax on tobacco state. At least 40% of the revenue would have to go to tobacco prevention programs, mental health programs, or services to drug and alcohol abuse.

For both the state and counties, tobacco tax increases on tobacco can produce a healthy amount of income.

A 50-cent-per-pack increase in the state tax would generate more than $50 million a year. In Lane County, a 50-cent tax would generate around $8.5 million annually.

However, a significant increase in major states may tax the tobacco industry to seek voter referendum to change. In 2007, voters easily defeated a proposed 84.5 cents per pack increase, after a multi-million dollar campaign to which tobacco Interests exhausted opponents 3-to-1.

Lane County lobbyist said Alex Cuyler environment is that HB 2870 Effective policy in more than a slight increase in staff.

“District of view 10 cent tax on tobacco products as a victory for the tobacco industry,” he said. “It will not take up a large income, and it will not do anything to curb teen smoking.”

Unlike many other tax-related bills, HB 2870 does not require the support of 60 percent of the legislature to become law.

However, the House of Representatives passed a bill in early April on 31-29 vote.

Should a bipartisan budget deal completely fall through and the state tobacco tax remain flat, Burdick said, can it still be a “challenge” to pass HB 2870 through the Senate, where Democrats hold narrow 16-14 edge.

In 2009, the same bill passed the House but died in the Senate.

David Cameron stubs out plan for cigarettes in simple packages

David Cameron has ditched plans to force tobacco companies to sell cigarettes in plain packets because of concerns about restrictions on personal liberty, senior Tory sources revealed last night.

ZigarettenpackungHealth ministers have considered the motion for a year after the campaign argues that flexible packaging will make smoking less attractive.

But in a move that has delighted civil liberties groups, the Prime Minister said that they would forget to prevent other extension of the “nanny state”.

After rumors last week that the proposed legislation to enforce the ban, was scrubbed from the Queen speech Wednesday, Downing Street source confirmed that the politicians really were completely eliminated.

Tory ministers have determined that the coalition will not repeat the mistakes of the previous government’s labor and the risk is seen as overbearing and restriction of personal freedom.

The source said: “This sentence is not going to be in the Queen’s Speech and the government does not see this as a priority. It’s not going to be continued.”

Anti-smoking campaign would ban based on previous measures to reduce smoking, including a ban on smoking in public places.

They argue that the attractive branding is one of the elements that can make smoking appear glamorous, especially among children and adolescents.

Cameron had originally been willing to consider packing a prohibition on health grounds alone.

But he was convinced that this measure could cost jobs in the packaging industry, and could lead to a £ 3 billion in lost tax revenue.

The Prime Minister also sought to shed limiting questions from the governments programmed to concentrate on their core Tory messages on issues such as economic growth, immigration and welfare.

In a similar move earlier this year, it has revised its plans for the introduction of a minimum price for alcohol as a result of fears that responsible consumers feel that they have been penalized for the misbehavior of a small number of hardened binge drinkers.

The ban on cigarette packaging has been tested in Australia, but the authorities have recognized, there is little evidence of measures have reduced smoking rates

Electronic cigarettes are a new solution for smoking

The electronic cigarettes, also known by its nickname the “e-cigarette”, is changing the way people smoke. Except, there is no smoke involved.

e-cigarette-replicationEric Adel, a senior from Olathe, electronic cigarettes took three months ago, in his efforts to quit smoking.

“I started using the electronic cigarette as a way to quit smoking. I’ve tried other things before, but so far this is the only method that has been really effective for me,” says Adele.

The electronic cigarette was first invented in 1960, but did not make a full appearance on the market before 2008. Number of people using electronic cigarettes has grown steadily over the past few years. Request to the electronic cigarette is that it does not contain harmful chemicals, which include regular cigarettes, and it emits water vapor instead of toxic smoke.

The main problem, however, is that there is very limited research available that display what the exact impact on the health of electronic cigarettes. Doctors and consumers cannot tell for sure if the electronic cigarette is safer than any regular cigarettes.

In December, FDA held a public hearing on nicotine replacement therapy, and one of the main focuses was on electronic cigarettes. Dr. Gilbert Ross of the American Council on Science and Health spoke at the hearing in support of electronic cigarettes. Dr. Ross is sure that the electronic cigarette is safer than regular cigarettes.

“The substances that are available in electronic cigarettes, water, glycerin or propylene glycol, nicotine is vaporized and in different dosages, it is benign and, in the worst case, it is much less harmful than the products of combustion of tobacco,” Dr. Ross said at the hearing.

Dr. Ross explains that electronic cigarettes should be praised, not punished, because they do not emit harmful fumes and chemicals like regular cigarettes.

“Electronic cigarettes are certainly not cigarettes,” Dr. Ross said. “They are nicotine delivery systems.”

Nicotine craving is a major problem faced by smokers when they decide to quit. Adel said that the electronic cigarette helps them to reduce their intake of nicotine significantly.

“I think the e-cigarette as effective quit smoking, because they mimic the behavior of smoking while satisfying the need for nicotine, but at the same time, you can deliberately reduce the amount of nicotine that you consume,” Adel said. “This is a way to outsmart your addiction.”

Ryan Hughes, a sophomore from Redlands, California also smokes electronic cigarettes, and says that, in general, the electronic cigarette is best for smokers.

“The electronic cigarettes are always longer than regular cigarettes,” Hughes said. “There’s not so much nicotine in electronic cigarettes, so that you can mimic lighter, less rich sensation of smoking, in contrast to the conventional cigarette.”

Adele says that they are cheaper.

“The set originally cost me about $ 40 and come with a battery and a bottle of liquid nicotine,” Adel said. “I spend about $ 10 a week for flavored liquid nicotine. You can buy cheap stuff, but I think it does worth it to spend a little more for a higher quality brand, and you will get the best selection of flavors. Compared to a pack of smokes day, electronic cigarettes are much cheaper. “

Adele says that nicotine addiction is not something that can be easily stopped, but the electronic cigarette is making progress for eliminate its dependence.

“Most people do not realize how powerful nicotine addiction is,” said Adele. “It completely destroys any rational decision-making. It does not matter that you know is going to give you cancer, or that it is unattractive, or that it makes you smell offensive. Psychologically, you just have to have it. Since I began using an electronic cigarette, I drastically reduced the amount of nicotine that I use, and we hope that by using only flavored liquid with zero nicotine over the next month. “

Richard Carmona joining electronic cigarette cards

Former U.S. Surgeon General Richard Carmona, who stressed the danger of secondhand smoke and support a ban on all tobacco products, joins the board of directors for NJOY, the leading electronic cigarette companies in the country, a move that may increase the legitimacy of electronic cigarettes as a viable alternative to traditional cigarettes.

electronic cigaretteSenior public health official in the country under President George W. Bush from 2002 to 2006 will advise the Arizona-based company in the field of public health and regulatory issues. He will also supervise their studies with battery-operated devices that heat a liquid nicotine solution and create steam, which breathes users. Flagship private company NJOY King Product is the best selling electronic cigarettes.

Carmona, 63, is president of the health and welfare nonprofit Canyon Ranch Institute in Tucson and is a professor of public health at the University of Arizona.

In 2006, he published a comprehensive report, which concluded that breathing any amount of someone else’s tobacco smoke harms nonsmokers, and played an important role in smoking bans across the country. In testimony to Congress Committee in 2003, Carmona was critical about the possibility of a safe alternative to smoking tobacco.

“Definitely there is an argument that can be done to reduce the damage, but, obviously, more research needs to be done,” Carmona told the Associated Press. “I probably will [us] the biggest critic …. I still look at his work as a doctor of people, and I will look at the science…. If we can find an alternative that gave us harm reduction as people refuse to nicotine, I’m happy to participate in that science, and see if we can do it. “

There are two approaches to regulating tobacco use: one that says there is no safe way to use tobacco and pushes people to quit above all. Others support safer alternatives like smokeless tobacco and other nicotine delivery systems like gum or even electronic cigarettes, and methods to improve overall health.

Devotees insist e-cigarettes address both addiction and the behavioral aspects of smoking. Smokers get the nicotine without the more than 4,000 substances in cigarettes. And they get to keep a cigarette while puffing in and out something that looks like smoke. More than 45 million Americans smoke cigarettes, and about half of smokers try to quit each year, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

“When he came on board, it is very difficult for anti-smoking people who consider themselves health campaigns to simply speak out against electronic cigarettes. They have to deal with the fact that one of the leaders of the community not only supports e-cigarettes, but is willing to be board of directors of the largest electronic cigarette company, “said David Sweanor, a Canadian law professor and tobacco expert who consults with companies and others on industry issues.

In an interview with AP, NJOY General Manager Craig Weiss said of Carmona to its board “is a very powerful step forward” in its mission to “stale cigarettes.”

The company does not disclose how much was to be compensated Carmona his new role.

The market of electronic cigarettes has grown to thousands of users in 2006 to several million worldwide.

Some of the largest tobacco companies in the country have moved to capture some of the growing revenue in the electronic cigarette market. Reynolds American, the second-largest U.S. cigarette manufacturer, began limited distribution of its first electronic cigarette brand Vuse. Lorillard Tobacco, the third-largest tobacco company in the country, has acquired the electronic cigarette maker Blu Ecigs last April. Some e-cigarettes are made to look like a cigarette with a tiny light on the tip that glows like the real thing.

E-cigarettes can be more regulated in the near future. Recent CDC study found that one in five smokers reported using an electronic cigarette, the evidence, and the agency says that more control is needed. And the Food and Drug Administration is expected to approve the regulatory body for the electronic cigarette later in the year, to treat them in the same way as traditional cigarettes and other tobacco products.

“We still have a one in five people in America smoke; … there is still a lot of work to do,” said Carmona. “Dismiss [electronic cigarettes] and do not even think … would be a disservice to the public who are looking for alternatives.”

Use of smokeless tobacco is increasing among children

As the leader of the Boy Scouts and coach several sports, Lower Franklin Township resident Todd Deihl sees himself as a role model for the children in their community.

06710121056_hd-tobacco-smokingChewing tobacco does not fit into that image, he understood.

“The boy saw me out one night to chew and I knew then I had to leave,” said Deihl, 48, who began using smokeless tobacco at 18.

Deihl was so uncomfortable with his 30-year-old habit; he always tried to hide it from their children. When his son Lee was 13, he knew that he wanted to create the best example.

“This is a bad habit, you stick your dirty fingers into the jar, and then put them in his mouth,” said Deihl, who will go through the week, the two banks in their prime. “I tried to be clean and neat about it. I always brush your teeth after chewing, and I went to the dentist regularly, but let’s face, it’s dirty.”

While teens across the country heard and accepted “no smoking” message – smoking among teens has dropped by more than 45 percent since 1997 – they do not seem to equate the danger of nicotine and other toxins in smokeless tobacco.

About 20 percent of adolescents and 2 percent of teenage girls use smokeless tobacco, according to the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Deihl said it is peer pressure, teen got it started using chewing tobacco and drug addiction kept him to do so. Although he remembers his mother warning him that he lost his teeth, or worse, Deihl said he always pushed the idea of harmful results are far from his mind. When his friends started losing teeth, it was a wake-up call.

“I think I was lucky, I did not have these problems, but I do not want them either,” said Deihl, who joined the class of smoking cessation in the Sadler Health Center in Carlisle last fall. Because he threw a few times before and relapsed, he came with a friend, so that the two can support each other in their weak moments.

“This is it. I do not want to do that. I have that thought”, Deihl said. “I want to tell the kids not to start, you cannot even pick up. Chew on a toothpick. Do not give in to peer pressure.”

Spreading the message that no tobacco is safe

 “When people think of smoking, they think of lung cancer. Because they have not smoked a cigarette and inhaling, the children seem to think that it is safe to chew, but the same toxins are still getting into your system, but different, “said Shannon Mason, patient / community nurse educator and tobacco specialist with Pinnacle Health System in Harrisburg.

Smokeless tobacco includes chewing tobacco sold in pads that chew and spit, and snuff, which is freely available in soluble tablets or strips, or small pouches like tea bags.

Smokeless tobacco can cause cancer of the mouth, pharynx, larynx, esophagus, stomach and pancreas. According to the CDC, about 30,000 Americans are diagnosed with mouth and throat cancer each year, and about 8,000 die.

Other consequences of smokeless tobacco include gum disease and receding gums, which can lead to tooth loss and heart palpitations, increased blood pressure and irregular heartbeat, which lead to an increased risk of heart attacks.

“There’s no such thing as a safe tobacco,” said Marguerite Ferrara, Deputy Director for Education at the Susan P. Byrnes Health Education Center in York. She travels to schools throughout central Pennsylvania to talk about the dangers of tobacco.

Ferrara hears the same attitude all the time with a teenager: “How can it be bad for me, when I breathe?”

She said the large number of blood vessels in the mouth, which give access to the bloodstream, where the toxins take up residence. She speaks about gum disease, which result as a pack of tobacco is juicy against the gums. She is talking about cancer risk.

Visual warnings aid

It until it is released from the photos that start moaning.

“Children visually. You have to show them what is happening, and then all of them dirty,” said Ferrara. “I tell them:” Who would want to kiss that mouth? “

 Ugly pictures are necessary to compensate for the positive media reports that children see all the time – “cool” in the baseball dugout chewing or teens in films that chew and spit, Mason.

Studies have shown that exposure to pro-tobacco marketing and media more than doubles the chances of children and young people from tobacco.

To be fair, some sports players accepted the latest posts; chewing tobacco is dangerous and switched to chewing and spitting out the seeds.

For those who want to chew unnoticed, there is an alternative to spit – small packets of tobacco made for sucking, which do not require spitting. Spitless tobacco is also packed in the little round cans to look like candy into thin strips similar to strips of fresh breath.

But this type of tobacco is no less dangerous.

“They are sold in the” fun “taste like grape and cherry. Message” You can take it to be used anywhere, “Mason said. This makes it easy for teens to hide their tobacco use from their parents, she said.

In college, spotless tobacco is becoming more popular among women, said Dawn Vioral, health education coordinator and a certified specialist in the treatment of tobacco Sadler.

“The cost of the minimum – $ 3 to $ 5 can be compared with the price of a pack of cigarettes by $ 5 to $ 8, so many are switching to smokeless tobacco. Additionally, coupons for new types of smokeless tobacco are more affordable than they are for cigarettes,” said she said.

Disturbing combination

Some young people are becoming dependent twice – for cigarettes and smokeless tobacco. From 12 to 14 million Americans who use smokeless tobacco, a third of them under the age of 21 and more than half of them formed the habit before they were 13 years old, CDC reports.

“Smokeless tobacco is more powerful. A cord banks provide three to five times the amount of nicotine in one cigarette,” said Mason.

Experts are also concerned about the increasing use of electronic cigarette, a battery-powered device that delivers nicotine through vapor, not smoke. Long-term effects are still unknown.

“This is very attractive to young people,” Vioral said.” They use it in places where there is no smoking allowed. “

International Conference on Management of Tobacco in the 21st century

Imagine for a moment that the plague devastated the developed world, but has not yet established its control over developing countries. If the world’s leaders in the field of public health come together for two days at Harvard to outline the campaign to prevent the spread of the plague, unless you do not want to cover this meeting?

imagesFebruary 26 and 27, under the auspices of the World Health Organization and Harvard University, representatives from more than two dozen countries, the African Union, the European Union and many other public health and international organizations will meet at Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study in Cambridge, Mass., to develop a framework to prevent one billion projected deaths by the end of this century – all caused by the spread of tobacco use in developing countries.

The main purpose of the conference is to prevent the global tobacco industry from using his wealth and power to prevent the passage of laws based on (WHO), the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) in developing countries. Industry undermines national laws on trade issues or complaints to the World Trade Organization (WTO), arguing that they violate trade agreements.

Julio Frenk, Dean of Harvard School of Public Health and former Minister of Health of Mexico, said that “by the end of the tobacco epidemic once and for all, we must clearly present the facts that tobacco is detrimental to both public health and the economic health and development of nations. This meeting is a huge opportunity for the prevention of smoking plague raging in developing countries, as it has been raging over the developed countries.”

And Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma: Chairman of the African Union called for a conference of leaders “to prevent the global tobacco industry from the transfer of the burden of tobacco-caused death and disease in developed countries in Africa.”

“Thanks to the tobacco industry, tobacco killed 100 million people last century,” said John R. Seffrin, Ph.D., Executive Director of the American Cancer Society. “If we do not become more aggressive with respect to the industry, they will require a billion people this century; we know how to stop this pandemic. – With good science, good governance, and the political will question whether we will take the necessary. Steps in this direction? “

In addition to Frank, Dlamini-Zuma and Seffrin, leading to the two-day conference will include Dr. Margaret Chan, Director General of the World Health Organization, Vesile Kulaçoğlu, director of trade and the environment, the World Trade Organization, and Nicola Roxon, Member Parliament, former Attorney General and Minister of Health of Australia, as well as leading scientists, public health officials, and the anti-tobacco campaign of Russia, India, Kenya, Canada, Chile, Thailand and other nations.

A new tax on tobacco products in BC Budget led to the departure

A $ 2 per carton of cigarettes will increase taxes, the statement was made on Tuesday, the head of the Canadian Cancer Society Sun, who wants $ 3 for tax increases boxes. A pack of cigarettes costs about $ 10 in British Columbia, and should be up to nearly 20 percent.

imagesKathryn Seely, chief counsel for the nonprofit healthy public policy, said that the increase of BC “He sits in the middle” of the Canadian provinces in terms of how it taxes cigarettes. “Studies show that increasing the price of tobacco products cause some smokers to quit,” said Seeley. “In particular, young people who are sensitive to price – this can lead to them not to take up the habit.”

Kathryn Seely, chief counsel for the nonprofit healthy public policy, said the increase means BC “sits in the middle” of the Canadian provinces in terms of how it taxes cigarettes. “Studies have noted that growth in the price of tobacco products will lead some smokers to quit.

Seeley said the company would like BC, which will receive $ 44.60 in the box with the new tax increase, ultimately, tax cigarettes as hard as the leaders of the Northwest Territories and Manitoba, which is getting more than $ 56 per box. Quebec and Ontario, the province’s tax cigarettes least as raising less than $ 30 per carton in taxes. In Ontario, the package can cost as little as $ 6.50.

“I understand that it is difficult for smokers to quit,” said Seeley. “But now there is a summer BC smoking cessation program that provides smokers with 1-888-QUIT line (through) that they can get advice and subsidized nicotine replacement therapy.” These supports are currently available to smokers who want to try to quit. “Budget also announced the maximum tax on cigars will also increase from $ 6 to $ 7 per cigar.

Some smokers have approached The Sun Tuesday agreed with the new tax, saying it could be an additional incentive for them to kick their habit. Accountant Megan McDonald, 33, was smoking at school and spends about $ 3,600 a year on her half pack a day habit. “I do not think that’s such a bad idea, because the soaking really not that good for you,” said McDonald. “If this is what is going to help people quit smoking, then hit in the pocket.

If they can not quit for their health, I’m sure they can go, because they could go on holiday somewhere. Vladimir Sychev, 27 years of business analyst who has been smoking for 10 years, said he believes that the new tax is a cash seizure and will support medical institution research.

Tobacco Australia Plain Packaging Law

In less than two weeks and only because of tobacco products in Australia plain packaging law will face a test of the effectiveness and credibility as the company launches its marketing stickers smell labels on cigarette packs.

In Anthony Rosario, General Manager Box Wrap, label Production Company, said that they were created with the smell of stickers based on the perception of smokers that their rights have been self respect the law.

“People feel that they have the choice to rip them,” Mr. Do Rosario said.

Tobacco inAustraliaplain packaging law, which came into force on December 1, ruled that the bags or boxes of tobacco, regardless of the brand or manufacturer, must be packaged in a simple olive green and contains visible health warnings without individual trademarks.

Based at Yatala, dramatic innovations from Gold Coast were seen by many as a complete disregard for existing law.

“We are just a sticker company, which is no different from a cigarette case,” Mr. Do Rosario said.

Australian Medical Association (AMA) has called on the Australian federal government to immediately put an end to the company and its marketing blitz because its ultimate goal is to hide the health warnings on tobacco boxes, which defeats the purpose of the law, which is to educate the people of the negative effects of smoking.

“Those graphic health warnings are there for a very important reason. More than a million Australians have died because they smoked, but I think that hiding these warnings, I think that the federal government will act very quickly, and to ban those products,” Steve Hambleton, AMA president, said.

“It’s morally wrong for a business to profit from the sale of goods in respect of goods which are deadly when used as the manufacturer intended.”

Federal Health Minister Tatyana Plibersek, in turn, said that she believes that the law is effective.

“The fact that they make stickers proves that we do with tobacco packaging simple law comes into force,” she told reporters inMelbourneon Wednesday.

However, she said that she has asked lawyers to investigate, if the production and sale of stickers violate laws tobacco plain packaging.

“I think it is important for Australians to have the freedom of choice,” Mr. Rosario Do arguing.

But such arguments around plain packaging legislation.

“That there is a very good reason. We believe that it will reduce smoking inAustralia, another notch, so we do not want to see anything that can really get around the law,” said Dr Hambleton.

Mr. Do Rosario said their package labels will be sold in the online store for $ 8.75. Plans to expand them physically for sale in stores in early 2013 conducted.

Big Tobacco accused in a new smoke screen

Tobacco companies have been struck down for the second time for their failure to comply with the new plain packaging rules for a few days before the entry into force of the law.

Health Minister Tatyana Plibersek requires two industry giants – Imperial Tobacco and British American Tobacco (BAT) – surrounded remove watermarks from their cigarette papers, which appear to make it look more sophisticated.

The new rules require regular paper.

And she also said BAT, to stop inserting the obvious links tourist destination in the party coding on their cigarettes.

Coding for cigarettes read LDN, NY, AUS or OZ so, said the minister was designed smokers to think about “the glamour of travel.”

“There is a clear set of rules about what is allowed and if we allow changes, the tobacco companies will push the boundaries,” she told News Limited.

Its just one of a number of methods tobacco companies are already using to undermine the new rules, which on Saturday demanding that all cigarettes will be sold in a package with a gray health warnings cover 75 percent of the front panel.

Ms Plibersek attacked tobacco companies in September for making “joke” when they began issuing new simple packages that claimed, “It’s what’s inside that counts.”

Meanwhile, the anti-tobacco lobby group Action on Smoking and Health, said Imperial Tobacco was released this month, roll your own smokers with free cans stamped with the old original packaging as “Champion”.

But two weeks before the start of plain packaging, a new brand of cigarettes was launched under the name “Ice” – the name of the drug trafficking, according to ASH CEO Anne Jones.

Imperial Tobacco denied JPS Ice was a drug reference, with a representative saying that “its mint flavored cigarettes and the term ‘Ice’ is a common descriptor used by industry to distinguish similarly flavored cigarettes.”

The minister also accused Philip Morris of “deliberately trying to create chaos” around the introduction of plain packaging, refusing to exchange branded packets belonging to small businesses to easily packed bags.

Domenico Greco of combined and multimodal Business Association said the company was not a replacement package if small business is purchased less than 4,000 cigarettes a week.

That would leave a lot of businesses with $ 2,000 – $ 20,000 worth of dead stock “in the busiest time of the year,” and he called on the government to allow enterprises to eight weeks to sell the old original packaging.

The company did not address accusations Association head, but spokeman Chris Argent said:” Philip Morris is working with the federal government and retailers to ensure a smooth transition to plain packaging”

The Minister said that its main purpose is tobacco companies, and that small business of shopkeepers who break new cigarette pack just laws, which will come into effect on Saturday, is likely to be “educated” than fined up to $ 1 million in sales branded tobacco.

“If we had a large chain of deliberately flouting the rules of tobacco imported from abroad with all the wrong labels, then we would go for the maximum sentence,” she said.

“If we have a small mom and dad shopkeeper who got some old stock they sold two days after the due date, we will take education as a first step,” she said.

Companies spend less on cigarettes, smokeless tobacco promotion

Tobacco business leaders spent less money on advertising and promotion of cigarettes and smokeless tobacco products in recent years, according to the latest data from the Federal Trade Commission.

Numbers released Friday show marketing of cigarettes fell by more than 5% to $ 8.05 billion in 2010, the latest year available, from a year earlier. Meanwhile, cigarette sales fell by about 3% to 281.6 billion cigarettes in the same period.

As in previous years, most of the money spent on cigarettes of about 81%, or $ 6.49 billion, was paid for discount retail and wholesale reduce cigarette prices to consumers, the average price for a pack continued to grow to $ 5, 73 in 2010. Consequence of the rise in prices of major federal tax increase on tobacco products in 2009, in conjunction with various state tax increases.

In 2009, the Food and Drug Administration have also been given the authority to regulate the industry, which include additional marketing restrictions, including a ban on tobacco companies sponsoring athletic, social and cultural events or offering free samples or branded merchandise. Several other changes in tobacco marketing is being challenged in federal court.

According to the latest figures, the money spent on marketing smokeless tobacco products fell by almost 10% to $ 444.2 million from 2009 to 2010, sales increased by 6.5%. The company has spent about 19%, or $ 95 million, a discount to wholesalers and retailers to reduce prices for consumers in 2010.

Advertising and promotion of smokeless tobacco have reached all-time high of $ 547.9 million in 2008, tobacco companies seek cigarette alternatives for sales growth as tax hikes, smoking bans, health problems and social stigma make the cigarette business tougher.

The share of Americans who smoke has fallen dramatically since 1970, from nearly 40 percent to 20%, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. But the decline has stopped around 2004, about 46 million adults in the U.S. smoke cigarettes. It is not clear why he did not move, but some experts have led tobacco companies discount coupons on cigarettes and lack of funding for programs to smoking or to help smokers quit.

According to the latest federal data, about 3.5% of American adults use smokeless tobacco.

The Federal Trade Commission released a report on cigarette marketing in 1967, and similar reports of smokeless tobacco in 1987. He looks at the data from the top of the tobacco companies, including: Richmond, Virginia-based Altria Group, parent company of Matlboro online Philip Morris USA, Winston-Salem, North Carolina-based Reynolds American Inc.; Lorillard Inc, based in Greensboro, North Carolina, and Commonwealth Brands Inc, Bowling Green, Kentucky, a subsidiary of the British tobacco company Imperial.

Ttobacco tax increases affect peoples’ behavior

U.S.A President Barack Obama and other liberals believe raising taxes will not change the behavior of citizens and harming the national economy. Consumer response to cigarette taxes means that they are wrong.

Oklahoma tax on cigarettes was increased by 80 cents to $ 1.03 per pack in 2004, but the compacts allowed almost five tribal smoke shops to collect only six cents per pack in tax. This has led to a price advantage of up to $ 10 for a box on non tribal retailers and led to a massive shift in consumer buying habits. Although there were fewer than 200 tribal smoke shops and about 4500 points breeding not to sell tobacco, Native American smoke shops will soon account for nearly 50% of cigarette sales in Oklahoma and as much as 70%t of the market Tulsa. By 2006, according to Oklahoma government loses about $ 48 million a year in tobacco taxes collections because of the shift.

Such a blatant price / tax differences and create a black market for tobacco products, as highlighted again last week, when the federal government seized more than $ 266,000 from the bank accounts of the tobacco company owned by the Seneca-Cayuga Tribe of Oklahoma, and detained tobacco wholesaler in New York. A multi-state investigation centers on alleged trafficking of cigarettes Oklahoma to New York, where the cigarette tax is $ 4.35 per pack.

Obviously, there is a difference between choosing to legally buy cigarettes in lower tax certain network and operating the black market. However, the message is clear: The tax rates influence behavior. This is what President Obama and Washington liberals do not seem to understand.

If the president and Congress to act quickly, we are now less than 100 days of what some call “Taxmageddon”, the date that the Bush-era tax cuts to expire. If that happens as planned, Americans at all income levels will be a hit. The income tax rate would jump from 35 to 39.6% for the top staff (which includes countless small business owners), while in the lowest income will have their tax rate increased by 50%.

The marriage penalty will be restored, the Child Tax Credit will be cut in half, the death rate tax will reach 55%, the capital gains tax rate will rise from 15% to 23.8%, and the top tax dividend rate will increase from 15 percent to 43 , 4%. In addition, payroll Obamacare Medicare tax increase comes into effect on 1 January, up from 2.9% to 3.8% for those with incomes exceeding $ 200,000 (or $ 250,000 for married couples).

The cumulative affect of all taxes, scheduled in January, nearly $ 500 billion. The Congressional Budget Office predicts the decline will occur as a result.

Obama and Democrats in Congress say they want to prevent a tax increase for low-income families and only want to “tax the rich.” That would make a bad situation a little less scary. Hiking taxes on the upper income, capital gains and dividends will clog job creators. Perverse incentives Obama’s tax policy will cause many employers to limit their exposure. The end result will be fewer jobs and fewer opportunities for all.

To avoid paying a few dollars more for cigarettes, smokers are significantly change their behavior. I think that the president, rational entrepreneurs will do when faced billions of dollars in new taxes?

Tobacco farmers hit Palace over sin taxes

Filipino tobacco farmers are alarmed at how Malacañang takes on their plight after a high palace official argued that the introduction of excessively high taxes on cigarettes will not adversely affect tobacco farmers.

The Palace seems to be “ignorant, if not indifferent” about us, said the 20,000-strong Philippine Tobacco Growers Association (PTGA), adding that Malacañang should listen to the valid concerns the farmers group that had raised before the Senate. The Ministry of Finance plans to increase excise taxes on cigarettes by as much as 1,000%.

PTGA represents tobacco growers for the provinces of Pangasinan, La Union, Ilocos Sur, Ilocos Norte, Abra, Isabela, Cagayan and Occidental Mindoro.

Distor was refering to Secretary Ricky Carandang of the President Communications Development and Strategic Planning has been quoted as saying that “the bill will not have a negative impact on our farmers.”

“Maaring sila ay walang Alam, kung hindi man walang pakialam, SA kalagayan naming magsasaka ng Tabako”, said distortion.

Distortion asked how Malacañang can claim that tobacco growers will not be affected FD offer low-grade cigarette tax by as much as 1,000 percent, with 60 percent of their products are sold and used to make these available brands.

The DOF’s assurance that tobacco farmers would receive a significant share of the proceeds from the tax increase was highly doubtful, especially since experience has shows that government aid to them had often been slow and inadequate, Distor said.

He said that even the Senate President Enrile and Sen. Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. pointed it at one of the hearings in the Senate tax proposal when they cited the example of Republic Act 7171.

RA 7171 promotes the development of farmers in the state of Virginia tobacco production provinces, giving them a share of the revenues from excise taxes on locally produced Virginia type cigarettes.

Enrile referred RA 7171 as “RA seven-awan seven-awan” (awan is Ilocano word for nothing), who said Marcos means that, despite the law, benefits to the compensation to tobacco farmers is not something a regular basis. ‘

He said tobacco farmers do not need any form of alms from the government, “because we are not beggars.”

“We are honest, hard-working citizens who contribute to the growth of our economy,” said distortion.

Besides hundreds of thousands of tobacco farmers, said the local distortion (CSI) based on tobacco as their main source of income will also suffer under the tax proposal in the Federal District.

Distortions lead as an example Ilocos Sur, one of the tobacco-producing provinces in the country, which was the first class of LSU, because revenue it generated and continues to generate from tobacco.

Tobacco farmers, Distor said, are not stubborn for they have complied because they made the previous government’s initiative to plant crops other than tobacco as corn. But they regretted their decision and returned to the planting of tobacco, because they earn less from planting other crops.

In addition, the climate in their regions and the land they till is best suited for growing tobacco, Distor noted.

He recalled that PTGA is not against an increase in cigarette taxes on cigarettes, but against the radical measures that would make the cost low-quality cigarettes from the market and leave them unemployed, which are inevitable consequences of 1,000% planned increase.

Distor also disputed the claim of finance officials that tobacco growers will continue to survive, even at high tax rates in response to growing demand in the local tobacco in foreign markets. Distor noted that not all farmers grow and sell for export quality tobacco.

Plain packaging reduce smoking appeal

A new study by the tobacco industry discredited assertion that there is no proof plain packaging on cigarette packs reduces the appeal of smoking.

Scientists from Canada, the United States and Brazil conducted a study of 640 young Brazilian women to determine the cigarettes were the same treatment when presented in a plain packaging. “The women in this study rated branded packs as more appealing, more stylish and sophisticated than the plain packs,” said study leader David Hammond of the University of Waterloo, Canada.

“They also believed that the cigarettes in the branded bags will be better tasting and smooth. Proposal package in the test, participants were three times more likely to choose branded packaged as a gift.”

British American Tobacco New Zealand (BATNZ) last month launched a print, television and radio campaign costing hundreds of thousands of dollars in response to the plan of the Government of New Zealand strip all branding from cigarette packs to make them less attractive to smokers.

BATNZ general manager Steve Rush said plain packaging creates “a disturbing precedent” for other industries, adding that the British government is considering a similar proposal on alcohol.

He said New Zealand should not “blindly follow the example of Australia” policy in his words, not proven to help curb smoking.

But the latest study adds to the mounting criticism of such claims.

Professor Alistair Woodward, head of department at the University of Auckland public health, said the findings fit into what is observed in other places – that tobacco packaging influences the opinions and behavior of smokers.

“The tobacco industry knows very well the value of brand packaging. That is why they have invested so heavily in design and illustration in the past, and why the industry is opposed to plain packaging so hard, “he said.

Janet Hoek of Otego University Department of Marketing said that the paper adds to the growing evidence base to support plain packaging measures.

“Overall, this study confirms earlier work showing how plain packaging will reduce smoking and reduce the perception of the benefits of smoking is perceived to deliver.

“In addition, New Zealand research has shown that plain packaging affects not only perception, but also affects their choice of behavior – much smaller then” just smokers’ package -., And the likely decision to quit smoking, “Health Minister Tony Ryal last month said BATNZ was “wasting their money” for his campaign.

He believes New Zealanders are turning against the tobacco companies and their marketing strategies.

“New Zealanders have moved from under the influence in this way. There is a lot of support for what the government does in tobacco.”

The Ministry of Health has issued a discussion paper on plain packaging and expects to report the results in October. The Government has agreed to support a change in policy in principle.

Mexican industrial group accuses cigarette smuggling in the tax

Mexican industrial group said Tuesday, increasing the cigarette tax, which came into force in 2011 led to the proliferation and smuggling of illegal cigarettes, which now accounts for about 17% of cigarettes sold in the country.

Confederation of Industrial Chambers or Concamin, said tobacco use has not declined in the year-and-a-half since the higher tobacco tax took effect, although sales of illegal cigarettes has reached record levels.

Congress approved the higher tax on cigarettes at the end of 2010, despite protests from the country’s cigarette makers – local unit of Philip Morris International, Inc (PM) and British American Tobacco PLC (BTI, BATS.LN) – and from the tobacco manufacturers.

Finance Ministry data show that the government collected MXN16.5 billion ($ 1.25 billion) from the tax on tobacco products in the first six months of this year, about 9% more than in the first half of 2011 and a little more than it has collected on alcoholic beverages, including beer.

Excise taxes on cigarettes, alcohol, telecommunications, and other goods and services, helped partially offset the financial subsidies for gasoline in the first six months of the year in the state oil monopoly Petroleos Mexicanos fuel sold for less than it cost to import it.

Concamin said his research showed most of the contraband cigarette sales are on the open market and informal institutions, and buyers are mostly men with low-income populations. The highest rates of consumption of contraband cigarettes were in the north-west and south.

The group says that the majority of the more than 5,000 respondents across the country believe that the price of legal cigarettes, which averages 35.50 pesos per pack of 20, was high, and the price of smuggled brands MXN20.50 packaging was fair.

Concamin said the tax would distort the internal market of tobacco, and called for measures to limit the sale of illegal cigarettes. Finance Ministry officials were not immediately available for comment.

Plain packaging of cigarettes is planning an attack

Minister of Health Andrew Lansley was warned that he might have to pay billions of pounds of taxpayers’ money in compensation if he goes ahead with plans to deprive the brand marks of cigarette packs.

Ministers consult on proposals to require cigarettes for sale in a simple package in an attempt to reduce the number of young people taking up smoking.
But the tobacco giant Philip Morris said it plans violated national and international law and could leave the taxpayer facing a massive bill for compensation.
In its submission to the consultation, which closes on Friday, the company referred to the legal opinion of Lord Hoffmann QC, that the removal of the brand’s distinctive marks constitutes “expropriation” of intellectual property industry. He noted that the Big Four tobacco companies have already established a legal challenge to such proposals in Australia – the only country so far to announce that it intends to go ahead with a simple package – and offered to pay compensation in this case in the UK will work to “billions”.

Start consultation in April last year, Mr Lansley said ministers of health across the UK have been obliged to consider any initiative that may encourage smokers to quit and stop young people start smoking in the first place.
However, the course bayonets tobacco companies who claim that it will not reduce smoking levels and may simply lead to an increase in counterfeiting and smuggling.
In his legal opinion, Lord Hoffmann said that the company had invested a “very large sums of money” to create distinctive brand image for their products.

“The ban on the use of a mark in my opinion, a complete deprivation of property rights in this mark, despite the fact that the owner could select your product by using some other mark,” he said. “I see no reason why anyone would deprive him of ownership of the trademark for tobacco products (as it may be in the public interest to do so) must be fundamentally different from any other deprivations that require compensation.”
The representative of Philip Morris said: “Plain packaging will not achieve the goal, Mr. Lansley hopes It will mean an increase in counterfeiting and smuggling, and crime rates are often associated with terrorism, which run with the addition, the attack … the marks that violate national and international law.”

Department of Health said no decision has been made on whether to go ahead with the proposals. Health Minister Anne Milton said: “We have not analyzed all the answers, but has already received a significant number of preconceptions we have on this issue and decide on any further action after we looked at the answers given and.

Cigarette law forces shop owners

Owners of tobacco Victoria Ave had to spend $ 8600 under the new law a cigarette – but they do not believe the law will stub out smoking in the country.

Prospect selection of dairy and joined the many shops around Wanganui and the country in line with the new law requiring stores to cover their tobacco products.

The law came into force yesterday, and a ban on the mention of cigarettes of the signs or posters in stores. As a result, Avenue choices had to stop using the name of the prospect of tobacco, in which it has been known for over 20 years.

The name change means replacing the old mark last Friday, which cost them $ 8600.

The new name was chosen by competition, some 100 participants from the customers.

New offices have to hide cigarettes, which customers called “the morgue’s office,” were paid for by tobacco companies.

Prospect selection of co-owner of Valery Spies was dubious about how effective the law is.

“Crime will go up, the black market will grow,” she said. “I do not think this will stop people from smoking – if they want, they will.”

In tobacco, she was sure how the business will be affected in the long run.

She thought that regular customers will continue to shop there, but the name change can make a place hard to find people who were not there before.

Ms. Spies and her partner Alois Muller owned the business since February 2010, and before that it was tobacco and hairdressing for over 20 years.

Visit six Wanganui dairies shows seem to fulfill the law, housing, cigarettes in large gray or white cabinets.

Alma Rd Dairy Manager Lin Fan said that it is installed Office the night before and was not sure how this will affect the law on smoking, or it was a good thing.

“I think that smokers health, maybe it’s good, but for some people they smoke 30 to 40 years, so it’s hard to stop them.”

Yan Lin Abbot Street Dairy said the changes were a step on the way to stop people smoking. “On the whole, may be a slight decrease,” he said. “It may just stop the younger.”

All dairy products, bright lighters, cigarette papers and filters are still on display.

These changes are taking place under the Smoke-free Environments Amendment Act 2011, which was adopted in July last year.

Stores that do not hide their cigarette displays, face fines of up to $ 10,000.

Federal Law attached to the tax roll of NH’s

When it comes to roll your own cigarette machines, federal law finally caught up with the law of New Hampshire, making it impossible for shops to use the machines avoid tobacco taxes.

Greater Nashua heard about this issue since 2009, when the Tobacco Haven in Brookline, at the state border, got into a legal battle with New Hampshire on what is usually called RYO machines. Customers buy sacks of tobacco-free and poured them into the machine, which enabled them to pipe smoking paper.

As a result of cigarettes may not live up to industry standards – Telegraph three employees, who have tried them at the time said they were too weak to be a good smoke – but much cheaper because they avoid many taxes, including payments in escrow account established in 1998 after 46 countries have settled the health benefits, with the major cigarette manufacturers.

RYO machines spread nationally in 2009, after Congress increased the tax on various tobacco products, which leads to a complex situation in which using the so-called “pipe tobacco” cigarettes in the car was much cheaper than using the free “cigarette tobacco” although the difference between the two has been difficult to track.

RYO the company argued that when clients have created their own smokes in the store, they were not “cigarette manufacturers,” and therefore not subject to payments. Many governments, including New Hampshire, do not agree.

In 2010, the roll of own box of tobacco Haven worth about $ 26, $ 7 less than the discount brands, and as much as $ 20 less than name-brand cartons.

The money from the so-called Master Settlement Agreement is collected, a tax of not less than 42 cents per pack of cigarettes. Each year, cigarette manufacturers a total pot of about $ 7 billion, about $ 50 million, which is in New Hampshire. It is used to pay for various health care and anti-smoking initiatives.

The court fight in New Hampshire ended earlier this year when the tobacco Haven agreed to pay “five-figure” amount of the deposit of the state. Shop is closed RYO machines.

On Friday, U.S. President Barack Obama signed a two-year transportation funding bill that included a small fragment, which mainly codified this agreement in the federal law.

All retailers who have a roll of their own cars to cigarettes that are sold to the general public will be treated as manufacturers of tobacco products.

The move was not unexpected. According to media reports, RYO Machine LLC, which made the popular RYO filling stations have closed and the automatic reboot option does not issue any refunds to reset the board, and will not buy cars from stores.

Up in smoke

One of the problems of costs provided for the vote initiatives is the difficulty in making midcourse corrections. If the cost goes astray, it can not be solved as easily as the cost of the bill enacted by the Legislature. This is one of the reasons we oppose such a “ballot box budgeting.”

An example of what can go wrong, involves government initiative that raised tobacco taxes to fund, among other things, smoking cessation efforts. In 1988, the proposal 99 added 25 cents per pack of cigarettes. The official ballot summary said the money will be spent on disease research, fire safety, environmental protection and “school and community-based health education programs on tobacco.”

Office of the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst reports that the 99 proportional to raise $ 289 million per year, of which $ 50 million (17 percent) “is used to fund tobacco prevention programs.”

In 1998, Proposition 10 tobacco taxes 50 cents a pack – $ 489 million a year – for the first five programs for the financing of the state commission and district commissions devoted to “early childhood development and smoking prevention programs,” said the official summary of the voting. Eighty percent of the funds go to the county committees, which decide how to spend. The State Commission receives 20 percent.

Where does the money go?

In 1998 tobacco Master Settlement among the 46 states and cigarette manufacturers brought California $ 22 billion to spend on people who suffer from tobacco-related diseases and anti-smoking programs.

But things did not work out as planned, according to a new study by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “State tobacco revenues as compared to tobacco control appropriations -. The United States, 1998-2010”

Summary report of the Sacramento Bee stated, “In 2010, California spent about $ 79 million for tobacco control efforts, about 18 percent of what is recommended by the federal to have a significant impact on public behavior.” And the money comes only from the tobacco settlement, only a 6 percent was directed to “ban tobacco and educational programs … far below the federal spending for the effective containment of tobacco consumption.”

Now there is a proportional 29 to June 5 vote. This would increase taxes on tobacco $ 1 per pack of cigarettes, raising about $ 735 million a year. This initiative, according to the official summary of the ballot “required tax revenues deposited into a special fund for research” in cancer, heart disease and other smoking-related diseases and prevention programs.

We act for private, non-tax-funded efforts to reduce tobacco use. In addition, it is a matter of personal freedom. Despite the knowledge of health risks, many people prefer to smoke in any case.

In addition, we are not surprised by the fact that taxes are not targeted to where the voters were told that it will go.

East Ridge proposed policy on tobacco is a little extreme

East Ridge staff and the Board discussed making all the property of East Ridge Tobacco Free Initiative. The City Administration was requested to have the decree has been prepared to vote on at the next meeting on May 24.

Full disclosure, I am a cigarette smoker, but even if I was not, I think that this decision is a bit extreme. There are already rules that do not allow smoking in the building of the city and vehicles. Of course, I respect and support this policy. I respect that right to those who do not smoke, and many have health issues that are affected by passive smoking. We have employees who smoke, dip or chew and require them to leave the city property on the break to relief in some form of tobacco seems to be counterproductive. Ash containers and designated tobacco areas may be greater than the distance from the entrance to the city building.

Of course, there are areas in the city property; it makes sense to be free of tobacco, Frontier Land, baseball, softball and soccer field and bleachers. Where there is a gathering of people, especially children, the Tobacco Free is the best option. Let’s take a look at the Camp Jordan, more than 250 acres and much of the open land. If one acre of you dipping, chewing or smoking, what are your health risks?

Recreation Director Martin should be able to have the restrictions that he can control, and around the field, where children are concerned. In discussing the proposed policy at a recent meeting agenda, the City Attorney Anderson informed the Council that the decision, they may restrict tobacco use on the property and collection of post signs $ 50 fine for violation of regulations. I was very proud of director Martin when he said that he does not ask in order, just put the signs, and he lives in order.

A lot of work and money, and will continue to be used to assist the camp in Jordan. Camp Jordan has much more potential than we’ve seen. Let’s be careful not to limit myself out of business. Looking to the future of that event is now coming to the camp of Jordan and other features. The coins show, mini football, mini football, the circus, the resale of events, exhibitions, Xtreme Battle, RV’s, car dealerships, and the list goes on. As I said, you can not smoke in the building including the arena, amphitheater, and any other building in the camp in Jordan. If a judgment is not inserted into the tobacco anywhere on city property, those who hold these events and those who attend the event will not be able to enter the parking lot and smoke, dip or chew. Will this policy gives us an advantage in booking events at the arena and at Camp Jordan? It may cause some restrictions, so as not to order or visit the area?

Gentlemen, I beg you to be realistic when you vote against this decision. Do not let your personal objection to tobacco will be your motivation for the way you vote. Do you have obligations in relation to young people and those who suffer from smoking? Yes you do. However, you should not, and it’s not your responsibility to legislate a healthy lifestyle. What’s next, no caffeine products, fatty foods or too sweet or high carbohydrate to the city?

Smoking ban wrong choice for Alabama

After reading Wednesday’s doomsday letter to the editor about a campus-wide smoking ban, I almost wrote this column to say my final farewell.
In the letter to the author argued that life itself, each student is at risk if we allow people to use tobacco while on our campus.

Over the past week, several articles and columns have been published throughout the complex smoking ban for Capstone.
In favor of the smoking ban are complaining to the adverse effects of passive smoking and disadvantage to be around people smoking cigarettes while on campus.
Although I can identify with their problems, I would never advocate a ban on smoking when I can just avoid this problem by going around the smoker.
The author’s concept that equated smoking a cigarette in a public places to spraying a toxic venom is as utterly ridiculous as her claim that inhaling secondhand smoke is a violation of individual rights.

By that same logic, the thousands of air pollutants that we inhale everyday from industry in and around campus should be eliminated as well. In an open-air environment like the Quad, secondhand smoke inhalation is not a legitimate concern.
I can admit that the University’s current policy of limiting smoking to 30 feet from a campus building is not being enforced and should be. Nobody wants to walk through a cloud of smoke every morning when they try to go to the door of their dorm or educational buildings, but I do not see a problem if the rules are respected

Theoretically, the adoption of campus-wide smoking ban will force students who paid thousands of dollars to live in a dormitory in order to fully withdraw its personnel from the campus to take part in activities that are otherwise perfectly legal.
The question then turns to the control and supervision. Would UAPD be asked to take some time away from campus security to patrol the campus for smokers? Would they be asked to walk around the campus during the day to look for violators? Failure to effectively implement and maintain such a policy makes it very unenforceable and unnecessary.

Instead of trying to ban smoking all together, we must begin to learn simple ways to allow students to their legal right to use tobacco products, as well as provide other students the opportunity to not be around smoke.
In the past few months, I’ve been in conversations with student leaders and top administrators of universities around our country – some of which have recently enacted or adopted smoking bans. When asked about the smoking bans, they said that the vast majority of the ban has been completed in small steps and in close collaboration with his students.

As I’ve said many times in recent weeks, leaders on this campus, the next step in our policy on campus smoking should be left to the student body as a whole. Such a policy is more than a committee or commission; it should be a referendum on the left of the students.
Before we get ahead of ourselves calling for more regulations and policies, it is important to analyze the potential effectiveness and feasibility of our ideas. That would be almost impossible to completely eliminate tobacco use on campus.

However, by strengthening and enforcing existing rules of smoking, we could significantly reduce the undesirable effects of cigarette smoke.
Complete ban of tobacco would infringe on the rights of students to participate in officially authorized activities. In the spirit of mutual understanding and cooperation, we should explore other options to satisfy both sides.
The CW poll this week asks if you support a smoking ban. Answer it. Let your voice be heard.

Tobacco Companies Preparing for Supreme Court Review of Graphic Labels

In a new motion (PDF) filed today in Washington federal court, the cigarette manufacturers suing the Food and Drug Administration over new graphic label requirements hinted that they already have their sights set on the Supreme Court.

On Nov. 29, the agency appealed U.S. District Judge Richard Leon’s order granting a preliminary injunction to delay enforcement of the rules. The cigarette companies are now asking Leon to speed up his review of pending cross-motions for summary judgment for the sake of “judicial economy.”

The losing side on summary judgment is likely to appeal, the companies wrote, so it would be more efficient to get both appeals on the appeals court’s docket at the same time. That way, they wrote, the appellate judges could see how Leon ruled on the merits of the case and also have an opportunity to consolidate the appeals.

“Perhaps most importantly,” they added, “resolution of the merits of this dispute would provide the Court of Appeals and, potentially, the Supreme Court, with a clean vehicle to address the merits of Plaintiffs’ challenge to the new graphic warnings.”

Under the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of 2009, the FDA created nine new written warnings that feature graphic color pictures, including a side-by-side comparison of diseased and non-diseased lungs, a man with a hole in his throat and a body on an autopsy table. The new regulations were set to go into effect in September 2012.

The manufacturers – five of the largest cigarette companies in the United States – have accused the administration of running afoul of the First Amendment by forcing companies to take up the government’s anti-smoking message. The labels cross the line from fact-based warnings to unconstitutional compelled speech, they have argued.

On Nov. 7, U.S. District Judge Richard Leon gave a partial win to the cigarette companies, ordering a preliminary injunction to delay enforcement of the new regulations until 15 months after the case is resolved. Leon found that the tobacco companies were likely to succeed on the merits.

Cigarette tax cut must be repealed

The tortured logic used to justify New Hampshire House Speaker Bill O’Brien’s insistence on cutting the state’s tobacco tax by 10 cents a pack has cost the state $11 million since July, and it will continue to cost the state millions of dollars until common sense prevails and the tax cut is repealed.

You’ll recall that in June, O’Brien hijacked the state budget process, insisting that nothing would get done unless the tobacco tax cut was included. This last-minute chicanery followed O’Brien’s visit to the Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C., which receives a substantial amount of funding from the tobacco industry.


“Speaker O’Brien returned from his meetings with a big tobacco-funded special interest group and immediately fought tooth and nail for a decrease in the tobacco tax,” said Zandra Rice Hawkins, Granite State Progress director.

But it wasn’t just Democrats, progressives and anti-smoking advocates upset by O’Brien’s obvious selling out of the people of New Hampshire to the tobacco industry.

Republican state Sen. Chuck Morse, the finance committee chairman, accused O’Brien of holding the budget hostage. “I want to make it perfectly clear, the Senate is totally offended by the actions of leadership in the House,” Morse told the Concord Monitor at the time.

And Republican state Sen. Jack Barnes said, “I’ve never seen an industry twist and push our Legislature the way the tobacco industry pushed.”

O’Brien and his minions argued the tax cut was needed not to fatten the already bulging pockets of tobacco companies, but rather to help poor Mom and Pop grocers who would get more customers if the tobacco tax was lowered. O’Brien made this claim despite New Hampshire already having the lowest tobacco tax in New England. Immediately after the tax cut, all the major tobacco companies helped Mom and Pop by raising the price of cigarettes the very same 10 cents a pack.


O’Brien then said that the state would make up in volume the tobacco tax money it was throwing away amidst the worst budget crisis in a generation.

Clearly, that hasn’t happened. In fact, it’s not even close.

In November alone, the tobacco receipts were $3.5 million below the projected level and $4.3 million below November 2010.

Despite this miserable failure, House Majority Leader D.J. Bettencourt told the Grocer’s Association last week that it’s too soon to say cutting the tobacco tax was a mistake.

“The idea that the tobacco tax cut was made at the expense of other services or caused budget cuts to be deeper is ludicrous,” Bettencourt said. “Budget writers moved forward with this tax cut on the basis of several economic studies that established that cutting this tax would produce greater revenue but the worst case scenario being that it would be revenue neutral. This is important for the public to remember as critics attempt to spread misinformation about this budget.”

Mr. Bettencourt, on what planet is an $11 million shortfall “revenue neutral?” How is that misinformation? On this issue, it seems the House leaders who like to say they are fiscally responsible are either blinded by ideology or so beholden to special interests that the lies just effortlessly flow from their lips.

It’s time to repeal the tobacco tax cut and it’s also past time for House Republicans to find leadership better able to represent the interests of the people of New Hampshire rather than corporately funded ideologues.

The people of New Hampshire deserve better.

FDA acts to protect children from illegal tobacco sales

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration sent Warning Letters to more than 1,200 retailers, the majority of which respond to violations relating to selling tobacco to minors, as part of its ongoing effort to reduce tobacco use among children.

While most retail establishments inspected by the FDA have been found to be in compliance with the law, some retailers are still selling cigarettes and smokeless tobacco to minors. Warning Letters may be followed by civil money penalties if retailers continue to violate the law.

“It should worry every parent that 20 percent of U.S. high school students smoke cigarettes,” said FDA Commissioner Margaret A. Hamburg. “President Obama and the FDA are committed to preventing children from smoking. For many young people, that first cigarette or use of smokeless tobacco will lead to a lifetime of addiction, and for many, serious disease. More than 80 percent of adult smokers begin smoking before 18 years of age. Retailers are vital partners in the FDA’s efforts to prevent tobacco use among kids.”

President Obama signed the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act that gives the FDA authority to regulate tobacco products to prevent use by minors and reduce the impact on public health. One of the law’s provisions permits the FDA to contract with states and territories to conduct compliance check inspections of tobacco retailers. In 2011, the FDA awarded compliance contracts totaling more than $24 million to 38 states, including the District of Columbia, supporting the creation of at least 266 jobs.

As of today, FDA-commissioned officials have conducted more than 27,500 compliance checks. Retail inspections focus on sale and distribution restrictions, including:

  • age and ID verification
  • requirements for labeling and advertising of smokeless tobacco products
  • restrictions on the sale of single cigarettes
  • a ban on certain candy and fruit-flavored cigarettes
  • prohibited self service displays and vending machines

Full inspection results are posted on the FDA website. The site lists all retailer Warning Letters and a monthly list of inspected establishments where no violations were observed.

“Through this program, we are exercising the authority Congress and the President gave to FDA to enforce the youth access and advertising regulations that took effect in June 2010,” said Lawrence R. Deyton, director of FDA’s Center for Tobacco Products. “While we applaud the efforts made by many retail establishments to protect our kids, the fact that our nation’s youth can walk into 1,200 retail locations and still obtain access to these deadly products is 1,200 too many.”

FDA also began inspecting U.S. tobacco product manufacturers in October 2011. This is the first time tobacco product manufacturing facilities have ever been inspected by a federal public health agency. Inspections of tobacco product manufacturing facilities are required to be conducted at least once every two years.

The FDA, an agency within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, protects the public health by assuring the safety, effectiveness, and security of human and veterinary drugs, vaccines and other biological products for human use, and medical devices. The agency also is responsible for the safety and security of our nation’s food supply, cosmetics, dietary supplements, products that give off electronic radiation, and for regulating tobacco products.

Harford to ban smoking on county government property

Harford County government says it plans to impose a complete smoking ban on its properties, owned or leased, though it isn’t clear what specific properties fall into that category.

The Harford County Department of Administration will conduct a public hearing on the proposed rule and regulation requiring county government property to be tobacco-free on Dec. 5 at 2 p.m. in the second floor conference room, Harford County Government Administration Building, 220 South Main St. in Bel Air.

“There’s been an issue at the county office building, where smokers congregate down the handicapped ramp and also at a picnic table on the parking lot,” Thomas said.

The proposed tobacco-free rule and regulation states: “Smoking and use of any tobacco products is prohibited on all property owned, leased or operated by Harford County, Maryland (the ‘County’). This consists of all buildings and grounds, including exterior open spaces, parking lots and garages, driveways and recreational facilities. In addition, smoking is prohibited in any vehicle owned or leased by the County.”

Besides cigarettes, cigars and pipes, “smoking” is defined as the use of other tobacco products such as snuff and chewing tobacco, as well as, e-cigarettes.

The tobacco ban will take effect Jan. 1, 2012; however, the regulation has a provision for the county to provide a designated smoking area outside any leased county facility that is under contract to be used prior to the ban taking place.

Employees who violate this regulation are subject to disciplinary action, according to the regulation. Visitors and/or vendors who are observed violating this regulation will be required to cease the violation, or will be asked to leave the premises.

Thomas could not immediately provide specific details on the properties that will or will not be affected by the ban. He did say he had been told the libraries’ grounds would not be covered by it.

Finance Minister Rejects Tobacco Excise Revision

Finance Minister Agus Martowardojo has refused to revise the tobacco excise rate, which will be applied as of January 1 next year. He said that businesses were considered before making the decision and determining the excise.

The 15 – 16 percent rate increase was made based on the tobacco excise implementation road map. “We hope everyone understands that we must protect the public’s health and this takes commitment from all parties,” he said.

Agus said the 10 percent cigarette excise increase was the most effective measure to achieve these goals. The 16 percent increase will be applied to the second category of handmade clove cigarettes. “But there may not be a cigarette company in this category,” he added.

Indonesian Cigarette Industry Forum (Formasi) executive Heri Susianto, called on the government to postpone the new tobacco excise rate. “We also ask that the excise be lowered,” he said after a hearing with the finance commission.