Nicotine in third-hand smoke, the residue from tobacco smoke that clings to virtually all surfaces long after a cigarette has been extinguished, reacts with the common indoor air pollutant nitrous acid to produce dangerous carcinogens. This new potential health hazard was revealed in a multi-institutional study led by researchers with the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab).

In tests at Berkeley Lab of cellulose surfaces contaminated with nicotine residues from third-hand smoke, levels of newly formed TSNAs rose 10 times following a three hour exposure to nitrous acid. TSNAs are potent carcinogens. (Photo by Roy Kaltschmidt, Berkeley Lab Public Affairs)

“The burning of tobacco releases nicotine in the form of a vapor that adsorbs strongly onto indoor surfaces, such as walls, floors, carpeting, drapes and furniture. Nicotine can persist on those materials for days, weeks and even months. Our study shows that when this residual nicotine reacts with ambient nitrous acid it forms carcinogenic tobacco-specific nitrosamines or TSNAs,” says Hugo Destaillats, a chemist with the Indoor Environment Department of Berkeley Lab’s Environmental Energy Technologies Division. “TSNAs are among the most broadly acting and potent carcinogens present in unburned tobacco and tobacco smoke.”

Destaillats is the corresponding author of a paper published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) titled “Formation of carcinogens indoors by surface-mediated reactions of nicotine with nitrous acid, leading to potential third-hand smoke hazards.”

Co-authoring the PNAS paper with Destaillats were Mohamad Sleiman, Lara Gundel and Brett Singer, all with Berkeley Lab’s Indoor Environment Department, plus James Pankow with Portland State University, and Peyton Jacob with the University of California, San Francisco.

The authors report that in laboratory tests using cellulose as a model indoor material exposed to smoke, levels of newly formed TSNAs detected on cellulose surfaces were 10 times higher than those originally present in the sample following exposure for three hours to a “high but reasonable” concentration of nitrous acid (60 parts per billion by volume). Unvented gas appliances are the main source of nitrous acid indoors. Since most vehicle engines emit some nitrous acid that can infiltrate the passenger compartments, tests were also conducted on surfaces inside the truck of a heavy smoker, including the surface of a stainless steel glove compartment. These measurements also showed substantial levels of TSNAs. In both cases, one of the major products found was a TSNA that is absent in freshly emitted tobacco smoke – the nitrosamine known as NNA. The potent carcinogens NNN and NNK were also formed in this reaction.

“Time-course measurements revealed fast TSNA formation, up to 0.4 percent conversion of nicotine within the first hour,” says lead author Sleiman. “Given the rapid sorption and persistence of high levels of nicotine on indoor surfaces, including clothing and human skin, our findings indicate that third-hand smoke represents an unappreciated health hazard through dermal exposure, dust inhalation and ingestion.”

Since the most likely human exposure to these TSNAs is through either inhalation of dust or the contact of skin with carpet or clothes, third-hand smoke would seem to pose the greatest hazard to infants and toddlers. The study’s findings indicate that opening a window or deploying a fan to ventilate the room while a cigarette burns does not eliminate the hazard of third-hand smoke. Smoking outdoors is not much of an improvement, as co-author Gundel explains.

Berkeley Lab chemists Lara Gundel and Hugo Destaillats led a research team that revealed the potential health hazards posed by residual nicotine in third-hand smoke when it reacts with ambient nitrous acid. (Photo by Roy Kaltschmidt, Berkeley Lab Public Affairs)

“Smoking outside is better than smoking indoors but nicotine residues will stick to a smoker’s skin and clothing,” she says. “Those residues follow a smoker back inside and get spread everywhere. The biggest risk is to young children. Dermal uptake of the nicotine through a child’s skin is likely to occur when the smoker returns and if nitrous acid is in the air, which it usually is, then TSNAs will be formed.”

The dangers of mainstream and secondhand tobacco smoke have been well documented as a cause of cancer, cardiovascular disease and stroke, pulmonary disease and birth defects. Only recently, however, has the general public been made aware of the threats posed by third-hand smoke. The term was coined in a study that appeared in the January 2009 edition of the journal “Pediatrics,” in which it was reported that only 65 percent of non-smokers and 43 percent of smokers surveyed agreed with the statement that “Breathing air in a room today where people smoked yesterday can harm the health of infants and children.”

Anyone who has entered a confined space – a room, an elevator, a vehicle, etc. – where someone recently smoked, knows that the scent lingers for an extended period of time. Scientists have been aware for several years that tobacco smoke is adsorbed on surfaces where semi-volatile and non-volatile chemical constituents can undergo reactions, but reactions of residual smoke constituents with atmospheric molecules such as nitrous acid have been overlooked as a source of harmful pollutants. This is the first study to quantify the reactions of third-hand smoke with nitrous acid, according to the authors.

Mohamad Sleiman was the lead author of a paper titled “Formation of carcinogens indoors by surface-mediated reactions of nicotine with nitrous acid, leading to potential third-hand smoke hazards.” (Photo by Roy Kaltschmidt, Berkeley Lab Public Affairs)

“Whereas the sidestream smoke of one cigarette contains at least 100 nanograms equivalent total TSNAs, our results indicate that several hundred nanograms per square meter of nitrosamines may be formed on indoor surfaces in the presence of nitrous acid,” says lead-author Sleiman.

Co-author James Pankow points out that the results of this study should raise concerns about the purported safety of electronic cigarettes. Also known as “e-cigarettes,” electronic cigarettes claim to provide the “smoking experience,” but without the risks of cancer. A battery-powered vaporizer inside the tube of a plastic cigarette turns a solution of nicotine into a smoky mist that can be inhaled and exhaled like tobacco smoke. Since no flame is required to ignite the e-cigarette and there is no tobacco or combustion, e-cigarettes are not restricted by anti-smoking laws.

“Nicotine, the addictive substance in tobacco smoke, has until now been considered to be non-toxic in the strictest sense of the term,” says Kamlesh Asotra of the University of California’s Tobacco-Related Disease Research Program, which funded this study. “What we see in this study is that the reactions of residual nicotine with nitrous acid at surface interfaces are a potential cancer hazard, and these results may be just the tip of the iceberg.”

The Berkeley Lab researchers are now investigating the long-term stability in an indoor environment of the TSNAs produced as a result of third-hand smoke interactions with nitrous acid. The authors are also looking into the development of biomarkers to track exposures to these TSNAs. In addition, they are conducting studies to gain a better understanding of the chemistry behind the formation of these TSNAs and to find out more about other chemicals that are being produced when third-hand smoke reacts with nitrous acid.

“We know that these residual levels of nicotine may build up over time after several smoking cycles, and we know that through the process of aging, third-hand smoke can become more toxic over time,” says Destaillats. “Our work highlights the importance of third-hand smoke reactions at indoor interfaces, particularly the production of nitrosamines with potential health impacts.”

In the PNAS paper, Destaillats and his co-authors suggest various ways to limit the impact of the third hand smoke health hazard, starting with the implementation of 100 percent smoke-free environments in public places and self-restrictions in residences and automobiles. In buildings where substantial smoking has occurred, replacing nicotine-laden furnishings, carpets and wallboard might significantly reduce exposures.

Berkeley Lab is a U.S. Department of Energy national laboratory located in Berkeley, California. It conducts unclassified scientific research for DOE’s Office of Science and is managed by the University of California.
www.lbl.gov

Additional Information

For more information about Berkeley Lab’s Indoor Environment Department and its researchers visit the Website at http://eetd.lbl.gov/r-indoor.html

For more information on the research of James Pankow visit the Website at http://www.pdx.edu/chem/profile/dr-james-f-pankow

For more information on the research of Peyton Jacob visit the Website at http://cancer.ucsf.edu/people/jacob_peyton.php

For more information on the University of California’s Tobacco-Related Disease Research Program (TRDRP) visit the Website at http://www.trdrp.org

For a list of health experts who may be able to provide comments and quotes, contact Kamlesh Asotra at kamlesh.asotra@ucop.edu or 510-287-3366.

DUBAI – The country is likely to revise the minimum age limit set in the federal law for sale of tobacco products from the current 18 to 20, according to health officials.

While announcing details of the National Anti-Tobacco Law that has already come into force, a senior health official said that though the law has set the minimum age limit for sale of tobacco products at 18, it was likely that the limit will be changed in future to 20 as is being followed by Dubai.

“Though the age has been set at 18, we prefer 20 and we may push for a change in the future,” said Dr Wedad Al Maidoor, Head of the National Tobacco Control Committee at the health ministry.

Officials also said that as per the law, cafes or restaurants offering shisha had been given two years from now to shift from residential areas.

“The law has been announced but we are still detailing the by-laws and will announce health policies in this regard soon,” said Salem Al Darmaki, Acting Director General of the Ministry of Health.

Al Darmaki also said that all private companies will also be required to provide smoking rooms to their employees. “Different authorities will be mobilised soon to enforce the law,” he said.

Nearly all countries in the GCC, including Kuwait, Oman, Qatar and Yemen have similar laws except Saudi Arabia that has a tobacco control programme.

Egypt, Jordan and Syria are expected to come up with similar laws soon.

The ministry is also planning intensive educational campaigns regarding the implementation of the law. “The ministry will continue carrying out activities and awareness programmes to publicise the harm of tobacco, while explaining the law and its regulations,” said Dr Mahmoud Fikri, Executive Director of Health Policies at the ministry.

Quoting statistics from a health survey held in 2003, Dr Fikri said that

24 per cent people in the country die to cardiovascular disease caused by tobacco.

Al Darmaki said that currently, 10,330 people were registered in the six smoking cessation clinics affiliated to the ministry while several had already quit the habit after registering.

AT A GLANCE

Penalties

· Those smoking in public places, public transport or in a car with children under 12 will be slapped with an on spot fine of Dh500

· If the fine is not settled on the spot, the case will be referred to the criminal court and the violator will be liable to pay a fine of not less than Dh3,000 and not more than Dh10,000

· Individuals/companies that import tobacco products without graphic warnings, will be served a jail term of up to a year and fined up to Dh100,000 and not more than Dh1,000,000. In case of repetition, the jail term will be two years and a fine of Dh1,000,000 will be imposed

· If imported or locally manufactured tobacco products are not in compliance with the UAE set standards, they will be destroyed immediately while a fine of not less than Dh50,000 and up to Dh200,000 will be levied. If the offence is repeated, a jail term of one year and a fine of Dh200,000 will be levied

· Sale of tobacco to less than 18-year-olds, tobacco cultivation for commercial purposes, import of candy, and games that are similar to tobacco/tobacco products will also entail a jail term of up to a year and a fine of up to Dh1,000,000. Repeat offence will double the jail term and fine

· In case of advertisement of tobacco products, the company/individual will be convicted, publicity materials seized and the facility will be closed

New Year’s is by far the biggest stop smoking day of the year. Although we expect pharmaceutical industry holiday season creativity in marketing quitting products, this year the University of Wisconsin (UW) is leading the charge. Recipient of millions of dollars in industry funding, it’s payback time and media manipulation is the order of the day.

The opening line of a December 14 press release by the UW’s Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention (UW-CTRI) reads in part, “smokers trying to quit smoking for the holidays have the best chance for success if they take the nicotine lozenge in combination with either bupropion (a pill) or the nicotine patch.”

It’s the one line GlaxoSmithKline — maker of the Commit nicotine lozenge, Nicoderm nicotine patch, and Zyban (bupropion) — hopes health journalists will seize upon in writing this year’s batch of “how to quit smoking” articles.

The press release briefly reviews a UW-CTRI study published in the December 14 issue of Archives of Internal Medicine entitled, “Comparative Effectiveness of 5 Smoking Cessation Pharmacotherapies in Primary Care Clinics.” Primary care patients motivated to quit smoking were randomized to one of five quitting product groups while also receiving counseling via a telephone quit line.

The study and press release boast six-month quitting rates of 29.9% in a group that combined use of both the nicotine lozenge and bupropion, 26.9% in a group using both the nicotine lozenge and patch, 19.9% in a group using the nicotine lozenge alone, 17.7% in a group using the patch alone, and 16.8% among those using bupropion alone.

Both UW-CTRI and GlaxoSmithKline also hope health journalists include the press release zinger that, “the clear message here is that combining the lozenge with the nicotine patch or bupropion gives smokers the best chance to quit.” But is it true?

What the UW-CTRI press release does not tell journalists is that neither this study nor its November 2009 clinical companion presents any evidence that any study participant actually broke nicotine’s grip upon their mind and life. None. Imagine pronouncing those using multiple avenues to stimulate brain dopamine pathways as having been most successful, when blood, saliva and urine were not examined to determine if stimulation by quitting products actually ended.

What percentage of this study’s successful quitters remain hooked on nicotine lozenges today? Doesn’t informed consent scream that smokers be told?

What we do know is that a 2003 study found that up to 7% of nicotine gum quitters and 37% of all current gum users remain persistent long-term users for at least 6 months, twice as long as the use period approved by the FDA.

Combination treatment clearly has potential to generate the highest blood serum nicotine levels ever documented in quitting studies. It is highly irresponsible for the University of Wisconsin to strongly advocate combination quitting product use while ignoring evaluation of chronic long-term chemical dependency upon NRT and/or Zyban.

“The clear message here is that combining the lozenge with the nicotine patch or bupropion gives smokers the best chance to quit.” Again, is it true? Were any smokers actually able to arrest their chemical dependency upon nicotine? Additionally, is this “clear message” honest when counseling, and not combination therapy, may account for nearly all of the differences seen?

There is consensus among experts that counseling and support are highly effective at helping smokers quit. Common sense suggests that the more we stimulate the quitter’s dopamine reward pathways, and the more comfortable we make them, the longer and more benefit they are able to receive from ongoing counseling. Obviously, participants have no need for counseling once they relapse to smoking.

The study arranged telephone counseling through the Wisconsin Tobacco Quit Line (WTQL). Although told that the percentage of each quitting product group actually speaking with WTQL counselors was similar (a low of 35% for bupropion group, to a high of 46% for the bupropion plus nicotine lozenge group), the study fails to disclose the total amount of counseling time received by each group.

Instead, readers are told that:

“These results showed that there was not a linear increase in abstinence rates with more minutes of counseling but, instead, users with fewer than 90 minutes of counseling (n=316 had an abstinence rate of 19.6% that was nearly the same as the rate for nonusers of the WTQL (n=801; abstinence rate, 19.5%. In contrast, WTQL users who had more than 90 minutes of counseling had a 6-month abstinence rate of 35.8%.”

Shouldn’t the “clear message” from this study have been the value of more than 90 minutes of counseling? In that the UW-CTRI press release does tell readers the actual value of receiving more than 90 minutes of counseling, it appears to be more interested in helping GlaxoSmithKline make money than it is in being honest with smokers.

UW-CTRI wants this study to be known as a “real-world” effectiveness evaluation. Frankly, it has very little to do with how smokers quit under “real-world” conditions. How many “real-world” smokers are randomly assigned to one of five quitting groups, are given free quitting products, are able to afford the purchase of combination quitting products, and receive a telephone call from a telephone quit line? Here in the real world the vast majority of all successful quitters do not engage in weeks or months of nicotine weaning but quit cold turkey.

In stark contrast to UW-CTRI’s artificial manipulation and control, a true “real-world” study was published in the April 2006 edition of Addictive Behaviors. It simply followed Australian primary care smoking patients and reported on their quitting attempts, methods used and outcomes.

It found that the success rate for cold turkey quitters was twice as high as the rates for those using the nicotine patch, nicotine gum, nicotine inhaler or Zyban (bupropion). Even more impressive, it found that cold turkey quitters accounted for 1,942 of 2,207 former smokers, a whopping 88% of all success stories.

UW-CTRI refuses to document real patient quitting outcomes of Wisconsin primary care physicians. Why? Because even in Wisconsin cold turkey is king and there would be nothing to sell.

UW-CTRI has already played a key role in redefining “quitting.” By its definition we should totally ignore chemical dependency upon nicotine and instead focus only upon success in ending use of just one form of nicotine delivery, the cigarette.

Now it seeks to redefine “real-world” quitting, in asking us to ignore and hide how real-world quitters actually succeed, and how quitting rates among those using quitting products are almost always lower than rates achieved by those quitting without them.

Amazingly, the University of Wisconsin press release does not alert media to the authors’ pharmaceutical industry financial ties. It should. The study’s financial disclosure states:

“Dr Smith has received research support from Elan Corporation plc. Dr Jorenby has received research support from Pfizer Inc, Sanofi-Synthelabo, and Nabi Biopharmaceuticals and has received consulting fees from Nabi Biopharmaceuticals. Dr Fiore has received honoraria from Pfizer Inc and has served as an investigator on research studies at the University of Wisconsin that were funded by Pfizer Inc, Sanofi- Synthelabo, and Nabi Biopharmaceuticals. In 1998, the University of Wisconsin (UW) appointed Dr Fiore to a named Chair funded by an unrestricted gift to UW from Glaxo Wellcome. Dr Baker has served as an investigator on research projects sponsored by pharmaceutical companies including Sanofi-Synthelabo, Pfizer Inc, and Nabi Biopharmaceuticals.”

Will health reporters eventually awaken to researcher study games and industry marketing tactics? Maybe not. It’s much easier to simply regurgitate a study press release than to look behind its words to the truth beyond.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Pennsylvania has cut state funding for tobacco prevention programs by 45 percent in the past year, dropping from 26th to 34th in the nation in funding programs to prevent kids from smoking and help smokers quit, according to a national report released Dec. 9 by a coalition of public health organizations.

Pennsylvania spends $19.0 million a year on tobacco prevention and cessation programs, including $17.7 million in state funds and the rest from a federal grant. This total is just 12.2 percent of the $155.5 million recommended by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Last year, Pennsylvania ranked 26th, spending $33.2 million on tobacco prevention.

Other key findings for Pennsylvania include:

• In the past year, Pennsylvania has cut state funding for its tobacco prevention program by 45 percent, from $32.1 million to $17.7 million. This is one of the largest cuts of any state.

• Pennsylvania this year will collect $1.43 billion from the 1998 tobacco settlement and tobacco taxes, but will spend just 1.3 percent of it on tobacco prevention programs.

• The tobacco companies spend $533.9 million a year to market their products in Pennsylvania. This is 28 times what the state spends on tobacco prevention.

The annual report on states’ funding of tobacco prevention programs, “A Broken Promise to Our Children: The 1998 State Tobacco Settlement 11 Years Later,” was released by the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, American Heart Association, American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, American Lung Association and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

“Pennsylvania has taken a big step backward this year and is one of the most disappointing states when it comes to funding programs to protect kids from tobacco,” said Matthew L. Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. “Pennsylvania’s leaders need to step up the fight against tobacco by increasing the tobacco tax and restoring funding for tobacco prevention. Even in these difficult budget times, tobacco prevention is a smart investment that reduces smoking, saves lives and saves money by reducing tobacco-related health care costs.”

In Pennsylvania, 17.5 percent of high school students smoke, and 16,100 more kids become regular smokers every year. Each year, tobacco claims 20,000 lives and costs the state $5.2 billion in health care bills.

Eleven years after the 1998 state tobacco settlement, the new report finds that the states this year are collecting record amounts of revenue from the tobacco industry, but are spending less of it on tobacco prevention.

Key national findings of the report include:

• The states this year will collect $25.1 billion from the tobacco settlement and tobacco taxes, but will spend just 2.3 percent of it — $567.5 million — on tobacco prevention programs. It would take less than 15 percent of their tobacco revenue to fund tobacco prevention programs in every state at CDC-recommended levels.

• In the past year, states have cut funding for tobacco prevention programs by more than 15 percent, or $103.4 million.

• Only one state — North Dakota — currently funds a tobacco prevention program at the CDC-recommended level.

• Only nine other states fund prevention programs at even half the CDC-recommended amount, while 31 states and DC are providing less than a quarter of the recommended funding.

The report warns that the nation’s progress in reducing smoking is at risk unless states increase funding for programs to prevent kids from smoking and help smokers quit.

The United States has significantly reduced smoking among both youth and adults, but the CDC’s most recent survey showed that smoking declines among adults have stalled.

Currently 20 percent of high school students and 20.6 percent of adults smoke. Tobacco use is the leading preventable cause of death in the U.S., killing more than 400,000 people and costing $96 billion in health care bills each year. Every day, another 1,000 kids become regular smokers — one-third of them will die prematurely as a result.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Some of your patients or their at-risk family members who are having a hard time quitting smoking may ask you whether electronic cigarettes are a safer alternative. According to a recent laboratory analysis conducted by the FDA, the answer is, “Probably not.”

Electronic cigarettes, also called “ecigarettes,” are battery-operated devices that generally contain cartridges filled with nicotine, flavor, and other chemicals. These ingredients are turned into a vapor that is then inhaled by the user.

The agency’s Division of Pharmaceutical Analysis evaluated samples taken from the cartridges of 2 brands of electronic cigarettes. The researchers found that one sample contained diethylene glycol—a toxic chemical used in antifreeze. Several other samples revealed the presence of carcinogens, including nitrosamines. According to the FDA’s Division of Drug Information, these tests indicate that these products contained detectable levels of known carcinogens and toxic chemicals to which users could potentially be exposed. The results of this limited testing are the only information the FDA has to go on regarding the levels of nicotine or the amounts or kinds of other chemicals in ecigarettes, because the devices have not been submitted to the FDA for evaluation or approval.

In other smoking-related news from the FDA, the agency has officially established the Tobacco Products Scientific Advisory Committee (TPSAC) as part of the implementation of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act—the legislation that gave the FDA regulatory control over the manufacturing, marketing, and distribution of tobacco products. The 12-member TPSAC will consider such matters as the impact of the use of menthol cigarettes on public health and the effects of altered nicotine yields from tobacco products.

Delicia Yard
November 23, 2009

NEW DELHI: What’s common between Mark Twain and Anbumani Ramadoss? Both their efforts went up in smoke. Quite literally. Twain said smoking was
the easiest habit to give up because he had done it a thousand times.

On the other hand, Ramadoss, the former Union minister of health and family welfare, tried to help Indians kick the butt through stringent controls on tobacco sales and advertisements. But strangely, after the ban on public smoking in October last year and the much-touted pictorial warnings on cigarette packs from May 31 this year, Indians seem to be smoking more!

Most of the major tobacco companies posted continuous sales growth during the past two quarters, April-June and July-September 2009. The largest domestic tobacco company, ITC, with cigarette brands such as India Kings, Classic, Gold Flake, Navy Cut, Bristol, Scissors, Capstan and Flake, registered sales growth of over 20% in the tobacco business in both the quarters ending June and September this year.

During the first quarter of FY10, in terms of sales, the tobacco business grew by 23%, whereas, during the second quarter of FY10, the cigarette business went up by 21% to Rs 2199.69 cr compared to a year ago.

One of the major reasons for the continued growth in cigarette consumption is that the pictorial warnings on tobacco products are ineffective, according to a recent study by Mumbai-based health research organisation Healis.

Respondents deciphered the indistinct back and white x-ray picture of diseased lungs on cigarette packets in various ways during the two-month long study. Some took it to be a waterfall between two mountains while others thought that it denoted hazy shadows of two people talking to each other.

But Kurush Grant, divisional chief executive at ITC’s tobacco division, told SundayET that the graphic and text health warnings on tobacco products have been notified by the government and the rules are very clear on the specific warnings to be depicted on different types of tobacco packets.

“ITC conforms to all the requirements notified by the government. Unfortunately the illegal and smuggled sector which has grown dramatically over the last few years does not comply with these rules, apart from evading excise and VAT. In addition most cigarettes sold in duty free shops do not comply with the rules. This should be taken up most strictly,” he adds.

Tobacco companies in the business of manufacturing cigarettes also contend that in India consumption of tobacco in cigarette form is just 15% of the total tobacco market while globally, on average, cigarettes account for nearly 90% of tobacco consumption.

But it’s not only ITC that has seen its tobacco business grow after the pictorial warnings rule was implemented. K K Modi group company Godfrey Phillips India, with cigarette brands such as Stellar Slims, Four Square, Red & White and Cavanders posted sales growth of around 17% in its tobacco business to Rs 288 cr during quarter ending September 2009.

Also, during the previous quarter the tobacco business of the company grew by a whopping 47%. Godfrey Phillips could not be contacted for comments.

Other companies in this segment such as Golden Tobacco and RDB Industries also recorded healthy growth in their tobacco business during quarter July-September, 2009. While the tobacco business of Golden Tobacco grew by 7%, RDB Industries showed a growth of 36%.

Though India is one of the 18 countries in the world to have introduced graphic health warnings on tobacco products, experts feel that the number of smokers here is increasing while in the west the numbers are on a steady decline. Reportedly there are around 120 million tobacco users in the country and smoking is predicted to cause around 1 million deaths a year.

15 Nov 2009, John Sarkar & Anand Rawani, Indiatimes

Canadian provinces, seeking more than C$80 billion ($76 billion) from tobacco companies for treatment of smoking-related illnesses, are attempting to improperly use the bankruptcy process to force Japan Tobacco Inc.’s JTI-MacDonald unit to settle, a company lawyer said.

“The strategy is to force JTI into an expedited settlement,” David Scott, a lawyer for the tobacco company, told Superior Court Judge Peter Cumming in Toronto today. “It’s a lever to force JTI to settle these health-care claims.”

JTI-MacDonald, the maker of Export A cigarettes in Canada, filed for bankruptcy protection in 2004, after a Quebec judge ordered the company to pay C$1.4 billion that the province claims it lost in taxes when tobacco companies exported cigarettes to the U.S. in the 1990s, knowing they would be smuggled back into Canada for resale on the black market.

British Columbia, Ontario and New Brunswick today asked Cumming to put a time limit on new lawsuits seeking to recoup health-care costs from JTI-MacDonald and allow their claims to be included in the company’s restructuring process. The request put the provinces at odds with the federal government, which sided with the tobacco company and urged the judge to either dismiss it or put it on hold indefinitely.

JTI has assets of C$1.81 billion and liabilities of C$1.8 billion, according to its filings, said Laura Donaldson, an attorney for British Columbia. All the liabilities are owed to companies related to Japan Tobacco, having been imposed on JTI during a 1999 restructuring in a bid to make the Canadian unit judgment-proof, Donaldson said.

‘No Improper Motive’

The provinces will seek access to that money to settle the lawsuits under the bankruptcy process, called the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act, she said.

“There’s no improper motive whatsoever” behind the province’s request for a time limit on the lawsuits and inclusion as creditors in the JTI bankruptcy, Donaldson said. “It’s improper for the company to try and exclude those claims.”

Such an order, if granted, would be unconstitutional because a judge overseeing a bankruptcy can’t prohibit governments from passing laws that can be used to pursue such lawsuits, Ronald Slaght, a lawyer for the federal government, told Cumming.

“It’s an attempt to twist the CCAA,” Slaght said, giving the provinces “a leg up” on all other plaintiffs.

The tobacco companies have been sued by groups of Canadians in class-action lawsuits, which also are health claims, and “nobody has given them notice,” Slaght said.

Billions in Damages

Ernst and Young Inc., the accounting firm appointed by the court to oversee JTI’s operations while under bankruptcy protection, also urged the judge to reject the provinces’ request.

British Columbia in 2001 sued tobacco manufacturers, including JTI, British American Tobacco Plc and Rothmans Inc., to recoup the government-funded health-care system’s costs of treating smokers for cancer and other tobacco-related illnesses. The province is seeking unspecified damages which will likely be in the billions of dollars, Donaldson said.

Ontario sued in September, seeking C$50 billion. Quebec has said it will also sue and will likely seek about C$30 billion, Donaldson said.

Imperial Tobacco Canada Ltd. and Rothmans agreed last year to pay about C$1.15 billion in fines and penalties to settle the smuggling case.

JTI hasn’t settled, although Scott said if the company does it will allow it to exit bankruptcy.

The hearing on the provinces’ request will resume tomorrow, Cumming said.

The case is Between JTI-MacDonald and the Attorney General of Canada, 04-cl-5530, Ontario Superior Court of Justice (Toronto)

By Joe Schneider in Toronto at jschneider5@bloomberg.net.
October 20, 2009

The tobacco industry spends more than $533 million a year marketing its products to Pennsylvanians. Yet, our lawmakers are proposing to cut the tobacco prevention and cessation budget by 50 percent – to $16.1 million.

Thrown into this spittoon is the fact that the tobacco industry gets a warm welcome from some of Pennsylvania’s legislators. According to the National Institute on Money in State Politics, in 2008 the tobacco industry contributed $415,950 to Pennsylvania candidates and committees – 81 percent of those takers were Republicans. It has to make you wonder.

What makes the prevention and cessation budget cut to $16.1 million so difficult to accept is that the state receives around $700 million a year from the tobacco industry’s Master Settlement Agreement for tobacco prevention and cessation programs. What is the Legislature doing with the other $684 million?

No one can argue with the proof – tobacco control programs play a crucial role in the prevention of many chronic diseases such as lung cancer, heart disease, emphysema and other respiratory illnesses. We also know that comprehensive tobacco prevention and cessation programs prevent children from starting to smoke, help adults quit and educates the public and lawmakers about the dangers and costs of tobacco.

Cutting the prevention and cessation budget means more people will get sick and die, and more young people will start to smoke. Policy makers need to continue to invest in programs to protect our children from the tobacco companies’ efforts to addict them, and give would-be quitters a fighting chance to be smoke-free. That’s what the MSA is there for – to help combat the horrendous costs of tobacco. Stop redirecting the MSA funds. Save Pennsylvania lives.

Lean Camara
Regional Tobacco
Control Director
Health Promotion Council
Philadelphia

TORY Westminster candidate Peter Duncan provoked a political storm when he claimed the pending tobacco display ban will cripple businesses.

He was immediately accused of putting profit before people’s health and scaremongering.

Mr Duncan said the ban, due to come into force in 2011, would have a “devastating impact” on newsagents and corner shops.

He claimed a recent survey carried out across Scotland by the Conservative Party found 96 per cent of small and medium businesses opposed the SNP Scottish Government plans to ban the display of tobacco products in shops.

The candidate also claimed that Canadian research found convenience stores closes at “an alarming date” in the wake of a similar ban.

In a letter to retailers, Mr Duncan said: “I’m astonished that the government are pressing ahead with this ban when the evidence shows that it cripples businesses and does very little to curb smoking. We need a government that are off retailers’ backs and out of their pockets.”

Mr Duncan believes that, along with planned minimum pricing for alcohol, the ban is another nail in the coffin of small businesses.

“It is another unnecessary ban which will not deal with the problem,” he said. “I have written to those who will be affected and have outlined how the conservatives would help small businesses, not punish them.”

However, South of Scotland MSP Alasdair Morgan leapt to the defence of the ban.

“Peter Duncan seems to have taken leave of his senses if he is really supporting tobacco advertising,” he said. “His recent comment on the issue is Tory scaremongering at its worst.

“The intention of the Bill is to ban displays of tobacco in shops in line with the existing bans on advertising on billboards, in magazines and at sporting events.

“No-one intends to stop shopkeepers from selling tobacco or charge them more for the privilege than the Treasury already gets from duty in tobacco.

“It is the intention of the Bill, however, to remove from sight the attractive rows of tobacco products that children find interesting and appealing.

“Unfortunately, thanks to the aggressive techniques of tobacco lobbyists, I am aware that many shopkeepers are concerned about the effects this legislation will have on their business.

“I feel it is important that they also know that so many of their customers support this legislation, and claims that they will suffer are totally unfounded. The footfall trade they rely on won’t be affected, since existing tobacco displays aren’t visible from outside the shop.

“With smoking rates in decline in this country, this could be a great opportunity for retailers to prepare for a much healthier future.

“Peter Duncan should perhaps be putting people’s health first, instead of profit.”

Copyright © Sep 17 2009 Icdumfries

Beneath a shady grove of trees in the heart of Tacoma’s Wright Park, Eugene Clark sucked the butt of a hand-rolled cigarette and exhaled his opinions about a pending City Council proposal.

“It’s way overstepping people’s rights,” said Clark, punctuating his words with a wispy blue-gray stream.

“I don’t think they’ll be able to stop us,” he added. “The park is an open, public area, and smokers are as much a part of the public as the people who hate smoking.”

Moments later and several hundred yards away in a sun-drenched park playground, Athena Nation threw her hands behind her tottering 3-year-old, Tanner, and her support behind a park smoking ban.

“Absolutely, I think it’s a good idea,” said Nation, as her son wriggled atop a jungle gym.

“I don’t care if you smoke, but you shouldn’t smoke around children,” she added. “And I’m sorry, but parks are places where children convene.”

The City Council’s public safety committee voted 3-1 late last month to back a proposal to ban smoking anywhere in any city park. The committee sent the measure to the full council, which is set to decide on it next month.

Supporters say the ordinance isn’t about punishment, but awareness of public health and safety.

“The whole idea behind this has always been … an opportunity to again help educate folks about the dangers of tobacco and second-hand smoke,” said City Councilman Rick Talbert, who also chairs the Tacoma-Pierce County Board of Health. “It has never been to be punitive.”

Committee members had considered a ban on smoking only near playgrounds or other areas where children frequent, but most instead backed the all-inclusive prohibition. Banning smoking in only designated areas would be too difficult to enforce, supporters reasoned, possibly requiring more regulatory signs and increased costs.

“The whole concept of trying to manage the smoking ban in piecemeal, it almost starts not to make sense,” Councilwoman Marilyn Strickland said.

TACOMA WOULDN’T BE ALONE

Nationwide, at least 429 municipalities impose bans on smoking at public parks and beaches, according to the American Nonsmokers’ Rights Foundation in Berkeley, Calif.

In Pierce County, Puyallup and Gig Harbor already have such bans. Other Washington cities, including Seattle, Spokane and Wenatchee, are considering similar measures.

Many cities with park smoking bans have imposed much harsher penalties than what Tacoma is proposing.

Puyallup sets punishment at a $1,000 fine or up to 90 days in jail. In San Francisco, violators face a $100 fine for the first offense, $200 for the second, and $500 for each ensuing offense.

“This is happening all over the country (but) there’s been very minimal controversy,” said Dan Pritchard of the Tacoma-Pierce County Health Department.

Pritchard, who noted that about 1,000 local deaths are attributed each year to tobacco, said he sees the ban as another way to reduce the number of smokers over time.

“We support as many smoke-free environments as possible,” he said. “We think that this is the beginning.”

When controversy has flared over smoking bans, it primarily has centered on individual rights versus the public benefit.

“This is just utter nonsense,” said Gary Nolan, when told about Tacoma’s proposal.

Nolan, a national spokesman for The Smoking Club, a New Hampshire-based property rights group that opposes government-imposed smoking prohibitions, said such ordinances primarily are based on fear-mongering with little scientific evidence to support them.

There’s no evidence, he contends, that second-hand smoke, particularly in an outdoor environment, causes health problems.

“When it’s outside, it’s really diluted,” Nolan said. “So there is no plausible argument to be made for banning smoking in a park.”

If any Tacoma council member is willing to debate the issue, Nolan added, he would travel to Tacoma on his own dime “in a New York minute.”

The City Council already has its own detractor to the proposal – at least in its present form.

Councilman Mike Lonergan, the lone committee member to oppose the measure, prefers a more “flexible” ban that would restrict smoking in only certain areas, such as near playgrounds.

“The idea that you could still walk around and smoke a cigar at Meadow Park Golf Course, I think is OK,” he said.

Most Pierce County residents – about 80 percent – do not smoke, Talbert said. While smokers might frame a ban as a trampling of their rights, “I would flip that around and say, the act of smoking next to someone who does not smoke inconveniences that person,” he said.

“It’s not about taking away people’s rights,” added Ryan Mello, a member of the MetroParks Tacoma Board of Commissioners. “All we’re asking is that when people come to a public place, come to a public park, that everybody has the opportunity to breathe fresh, clean, healthy air.”

Both the parks district and the Health Department support an ordinance for smoke-free parks.

WHAT, EXACTLY, IS A ‘PARK’?

Defining a “park” under the ban could spark further discussion. City staff noted one definition could include “all parks, squares, drives, parkways, docks, piers, moorage buoys and floats, boulevards, golf courses, zoos, beaches, playgrounds and recreation areas and facilities” that are owned or managed by the parks district or the city.

Other cities have excluded golf courses and parking lots at parks. Another possible exception to a Tacoma ban might be Cheney Stadium, according to city staff reports.

Enforcement could prove difficult as well. If the proposal passes, Tacoma police will not specifically respond to calls notifying police about potential violations, Capt. Mark Langford said. Officers patrolling the park who come across smokers likely will use “discretionary enforcement” and may give only warnings, he added.

“It’s not going to rise to the place of high-priority enforcement,” he said.

Rather, police officers more likely will work with park officials to educate the public.

“I really see this evolving somewhat along the lines of the smoking ban in restaurants and bars,” he said. “It would be phased in with a lot of education and social acceptance.”

Enforcement is a challenge, agreed Talbert. “But that alone is not a reason not to do this,” he said.

Not all smokers object to the measure, Strickland added.

“I’ve talked to people I know who are smokers, and they think this is a good idea,” she said.

Eugene Clark isn’t one of them.

During his recent visit to Wright Park, Clark, a 50-year-old Puyallup tribal member who has smoked since he was 12, said smokers are becoming an endangered species – and not for legitimate reason.

“Some people think it’s their jobs to tell everyone else how they should live,” he said. “It has almost gotten to the point where you can’t smoke anywhere outside anymore.”

Lewis Kamb: 253-597-8542

lewis.kamb@thenewstribune.com

What the proposed Smoke-free parks law says

The Tacoma City Council’s Public Safety, Human Services and Education Committee recently supported a measure that would ban smoking from public parks. The full council is expected to consider the issue Oct. 13. Here’s the proposal:

Smoking in parks prohibited

It is unlawful for any person to smoke or light cigars, cigarettes, tobacco or other smoking material within a park. The Director or City Manager shall post signs in appropriate locations prohibiting smoking in parks.

For the purposes of this section, “smoke” or “smoking” means the carrying, holding, or smoking of any kind of lighted pipe, cigar, cigarette, or any other lighted smoking equipment.

A violation of this section is a class 4 civil infraction of $25, not including statutory assessments. Such penalty is in addition to any other remedies or penalties provided by law.

Copyright © 09/15/09 Thenewstribune

A case against two tobacco companies brought by Professor Erkki Aurejärvi continues today, Monday, in the Helsinki Court of Appeals.
Originally, four women wanted compensation for harm caused to their health by “light” cigarettes. The diseases included emphysema and lung cancer. Only two them are still seeking damages from two tobacco companies – British American Tobacco Finland and Amer, the latter of which gave up the tobacco business years ago.
One of the plaintiffs died before the district court session, and the other withdrew her appeal last winter for health reasons.
The plaintiffs lost the first round in Helsinki District Court and each of them were ordered to pay EUR 250,000 in court costs.

The appeals court will have to evaluate if the women were aware of the risks that they were taking when they chose to smoke. The lower court found that they were. According to the decision, the women might not have become ill if they had stopped smoking in the mid-1970s, when they knew, according to the judgement of the court, that smoking was dangerous.
One of the women’s arguments is that they were addicted to nicotine. In their view, it is not a matter of a conscious risk if a person becomes dependent on nicotine already as a child.
The companies have emphasised that the production and sale of tobacco is a legal business.

Aurejärvi sees the case as the last tobacco trial involving individual plaintiffs. However, the case could lead to class-action suits if the women are even partially successful, Aurejärvi says.
The first product liability case against tobacco companies in Finland started in 1988 and concluded in 2001; plaintiff Pentti Aho, who died while the process was going on, lost when the Finnish Supreme Court ruled for the defendants in a split decision.
A decision in the new case ie expected early next year. Aurejärvi believes that the side that loses will probably appeal the case to the Supreme Court.
Copyright © 2.9.2009 Hs

Oregon Attorney General John Kroger on Tuesday filed a lawsuit against Smoking Everywhere, alleging that the Florida-based “electronic cigarette” company made false health claims about its nicotine delivery device and targeted children with sweet flavors such as bubblegum, chocolate and cookies ‘n’ cream.

Electronic cigarettes are not approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and some contain known carcinogens.

Oregon’s lawsuit alleges that Smoking Everywhere has marketed e-cigarettes as safe in general and safer than conventional cigarettes, alleging the company possesses no scientific evidence to support such claims.

Oregon’s lawsuit also alleges that Smoking Everywhere’s promotional efforts target adolescents and youths who may not already be addicted to nicotine. Although Smoking Everywhere claims e-cigarettes are “intended for use by adult smokers,” the lawsuit alleges that advertisements are designed to attract young people.

Oregon is the only state that has taken legal action against e-cigarette importers and retailers. Oregon recently reached legal settlements with three retailers prohibiting them from selling e-cigarettes in the state until they meet state and federal standards. Oregon also reached an agreement with another e-cigarette company, Sottera Inc., the national distributor of NJOY, which prohibits it from doing business in Oregon until local and national standards are met.

Smoking Everywhere refused a similar settlement offer.


Copyright © August 18, 2009 Bizjournals

Darwin tobacconist Colin Thompson must display specified anti-smoking posters in his shop for three months, the Federal Court has confirmed.

The court found Thompson had breached court enforceable undertakings given to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission in April. Wednesday’s orders were made by consent.

Thompson had previously acknowledged that he breached the mandatory information standard for tobacco products by obscuring the required health warnings on anti-smoking posters with a sticker promoting his own addiction curing services.

The court has now ordered Thompson to display the specified posters for a further three months and pay ACCC court costs as agreed.

“Mandatory health warnings on cigarette packages provide continuing reminders to consumers on the health impacts of smoking, seek to dissuade people from taking up smoking and encourage them to quit,” ACCC chairman Graeme Samuel said.. “By obscuring these warnings Thompson breached an important provision of the Trade Practices Act designed to inform consumers about health risks.”

“Court enforceable undertakings usually offer a cost-effective and fast means of protecting consumers. When traders renege on the commitments made the ACCC will vigorously pursue them.”

This matter was filed in the Federal Court on July 2 2009 and resolved at its first directions hearing.


Copyright © 2009 Foodweek

The World Health Organization (WHO) verdict was blunt: After reviewing studies on UV tanning beds and skin cancer, the WHO said that teens and young adults who use tanning beds increase their risk of skin cancer by 75 per cent.

Not only that, but the International Agency for Research on Cancer officially moved tanning beds into its highest cancer risk category, determining that tanning beds are “carcinogenic to humans.”

It’s a serious status, moving tanning into the same medical area as asbestos fibres. There are, of course, plenty of other things on that list: cigarettes, for one. But also benzene, mustard gas, radium and arsenic.

The response from the tanning industry was, well, formulaic. It’s especially so if you’re old enough to remember the tobacco industry’s arguments about cigarettes causing cancer.

Here’s what MSN was told in the United States after the WHO position was announced: “Kathy Banks, chief executive of the Sunbed Association, disputed the classification of tanning beds as carcinogenic. She was quoted as saying, ‘The fact that is continuously ignored is that there is no proven link between the responsible use of sunbeds and skin cancer.”‘

In Canada, Steve Gilroy, executive director of the Joint Canadian Tanning Association, had this to say to the Toronto Star: “When you dive into the research… there is no increased risk.” (Gilroy wrote a lengthy letter to the editor to The Telegram on the topic that we printed several weeks ago, repeating Banks’ mantra that there are other studies that question whether there is a definitive cause-and-effect relationship between tanning and cancer.)

When it comes to quoting from someone else’s hymn book, the tanners certainly know all the tobacco verses. And eventually, all sorts of industries have to take a hard look at themselves in the ethical mirror.

The important thing to take from the new certification is to be sure that everyone understands the risks involved.

Tanning is not like smoking tobacco: No matter how fond you are of having a so-called healthy, tanned appearance, it’s unlikely anyone would claim to be addicted to the tanning salon.

Understanding risks means taking them into account. The harsh fact is that anyone who has had a friend or relative die as a result of malignant melanoma — skin cancer — would do almost anything to avoid the same fate. And if cutting out tanning salons could be part of the cure, you can be sure they would do it.

The job now is to carefully educate those at the greatest risk: young people who might not clearly understand the nature of the risks they are taking. The World Health Organization designation has already reinstated the argument that tanning salons need to be regulated to prevent young people from taking those risks.

It’s an argument well worth considering.

There are plenty of opposing views — that tanning with sunlight is just as dangerous, that cellphones and preserved meats have cancer risks, and on and on.

But citing other risk factors doesn’t mean you shouldn’t deal with a clear-cut hazard, especially when that hazard is primarily a cosmetic issue.


Copyright © 2009 Winnipegfreepress

Cigarettes kill; 400,000 people die prematurely every year from smoking. When we analyze the harm from drugs, there is no doubt that cigarettes are the worst.

They kill more people than cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine and all other illegal drugs combined.

More than 800,000 people are arrested every year for marijuana, the vast majority for possession, yet all the data from studies that compare the two substances show that cigarettes are more harmful to an individual’s health. If we make these other drugs illegal, shouldn’t we outlaw the leading killer?

Considering how we deal with less harmful drugs, making cigarettes illegal seems logical. Over the past decade, we have seen, in states from California to New York, increasing restrictions on when and where people can smoke — and even momentum toward tobacco prohibition.

Smoking is banned in bars and restaurants and on some university campuses. People can now be fired from their jobs because they can’t give up smoking. We have seen parents denied adoption rights if they smoke. In some cities, it is nearly impossible to smoke anywhere besides your own home.

The Drug Policy Alliance sponsored a Zogby Poll in 2006, and we were shocked to find that 45 percent of those polled supported making cigarettes illegal within the next 10 years. Among 18- to 29-year-olds, it’s more than 50 percent.

But with all of the good intentions in the world, outlawing cigarettes would be just as disastrous as the prohibition on other drugs. After all, people would still smoke, just as they still use other drugs that are prohibited, from marijuana to cocaine. But now, in addition to the harm of smoking, we would find a whole range of “collateral consequences” that come along with prohibition.

A huge number of people who smoke would continue to do so, but now they would be considered criminals. We would have parents promising their kids that they will stop smoking but still sneaking a smoke.

We would have smokers hiding their habit and smoking in alleys and dark corners, afraid of being caught using the illegal substance. We would have cops using precious time and resources to hassle and arrest cigarette smokers. Our prison overcrowding crisis would rise to an unprecedented level with “addicts” and casual cigarette smokers alike getting locked up.

We would have a black market, with outlaws taking the place of delis and supermarkets and stepping in to meet the demand and provide the desired drug.

Instead of buying your cigarettes in a legally sanctioned place, you would have to hit the streets to pick up your fix. The cigarette trade would provide big revenue to “drug dealers,” just as illegal drugs do today. There would be shootouts in the streets and killings over the right to sell the prohibited tobacco plant.

We have tried prohibiting cigarettes in some state prisons, like in California, and we have seen that smoking continues, with cigarettes traded illicitly. There is a violent black market that fills the void and leads to unnecessary deaths over access and the inflated profits.

Luckily, no one is proposing making cigarettes illegal. On the contrary, our public health campaign around cigarettes has been a model of success compared with our results with other prohibited drugs. By placing high taxes on cigarettes, restricting locations where one can smoke and banning certain kinds of advertising, we have seen a significant decline in the number of people who smoke.

Instead of giving teens “reefer madness”-style propaganda, we have treated young people with respect and given them honest education about the harm of cigarettes, and we have been rewarded with fewer young people smoking today than ever before.

Although we should celebrate our success and continue to encourage people to cut back or give up smoking, let’s not get carried away and think that prohibition would eliminate smoking.

We need to realize that drugs, from cigarettes to marijuana to alcohol, will always be consumed, whether they are legal or illegal. Although drugs have health consequences and dangers, making them illegal — and keeping them illegal — will only bring additional death and suffering.

Don’t just take my word for it. Take it from the news anchor who was called the most trusted man in America, Walter Cronkite.

Here is what he said about prohibition and our war on drugs: “I covered the Vietnam War. I remember the lies that were told, the lives that were lost — and the shock when, 20 years after the war ended, former Defense Secretary Robert S. McNamara admitted he knew it was a mistake all along. …

“And I cannot help but wonder how many more lives, and how much more money, will be wasted before another Robert McNamara admits what is plain for all to see: The war on drugs is a failure.”


Copyright © 2009 Alternet

The Cayuga County Legislature decided almost unanimously to reject a settlement deal with the Cayuga Indian Nation regarding cigarette sales tax and to pursue an appeal of a state court’s decision that allows the tribe to sell untaxed cigarettes.
An appellate court ruling on Friday granted the tribe permission to sell untaxed cigarettes, overturning a lower court’s ruling and leading Cayuga and Seneca counties to seek an appeal. On Monday, the tribe offered to throw out a lawsuit against Cayuga and Seneca counties and pay $180,000 to cover their legal fees if the counties agreed to not appeal the judge’s decision.

“We’re not for sale,” Cayuga County Legislator George Fearon, R-Union Springs, said after the Legislature’s executive session Tuesday night.

Dan French, an attorney for the tribe, said the offer was intended to protect taxpayers from what could be an expensive lawsuit. The tribe’s lawsuit seeks at least $500,000 to cover the revenue lost after their Lake Side Trading stores were raided of more than 3 million untaxed cigarettes in November and they were ordered to cease selling cigarettes in March.

“At some point the leaders of Cayuga and Seneca counties might avail themselves of the Cayuga Nation’s good faith efforts to resolve these issues through negotiations French said. “Tonight’s decision is obviously not a step in that direction.”

Cayuga County Legislator Daniel Schuster was the sole desenter in Tuesday night’s vote to move forward with an appeal.

“The opposition is not really the Cayuga Nation,” Schuster said. “The opposition is the state,” which has not sufficiently enforced its tax laws.

In addition, Schuster said, a case against the tribe brings up additional issues that were, at the moment, unpursued, if unresolved. The condition in the court’s decision Friday that allows the tribe to sell untaxed cigarettes is the designation of their property as a qualified reservation.
Copyright © 2009 Auburnpub

The hosts had a message for President Obama – we’ve got ‘em, so smoke ‘em while you’re here. But America’s most famous wannabe ex-smoker was having none of it, and instead encouraged Russians to quit for health’s sake.

Russia is a smoker’s delight – ashtrays in hotel elevators, cheap cigarettes readily available. The Tuesday edition of the Moscow Times, an English-language paper, urged the American president to use his time here to re-embrace the habit he’s trying to kick.

The paper even gave him the Russian translation for bumming a cigarette: “Mozhno strelnut u vas sigaretu?”

“You are among friends, smoking friends, so enjoy yourself,” the paper wrote, pointing to the inexpensive price per pack – the equivalent of $1.25 – as proof that someone would gladly hand over a cigarette.

There were no reports of Mr. Obama lighting up, and the White House says the president doesn’t smoke in front of his wife and children, who accompanied him on this trip.

Mr. Obama said he offered advice to Russian President Dmitry Medvedev on reducing the smoking rate in Russia.

“We talked about the fact that government programs can be initiated, but to the extent that there’s been success in the United States around reducing smoking levels, it’s not only a matter of changing laws – it’s also been changing attitudes, so that people feel that they need to change,” Mr. Obama told a gathering of civil society activists Tuesday afternoon.

At the White House last month, Mr. Obama resorted to legal muscle rather than attitude change. He signed a bill to bring cigarettes under tighter government control, require more prominent health warnings and force companies to halt cigarette marketing campaigns that the government says are aimed at getting children hooked.

During the signing ceremony, Mr. Obama talked about his own struggle with nicotine addiction, which began in his youth.

Russian lawmakers have contemplated a nationwide ban on smoking in public, but it’s a tough sell. Reporters walking out of the Kremlin after Monday’s news conference between the Russian and American presidents remarked on the strong smell of cigarettes detectable well inside the building.
Copyright © 2009 Washingtontimes

Record levels of compliance with the workplace smoking ban were much trumpeted last week, following the publication of the Office of Tobacco Control’s (OTC) annual report for 2008. However, not everyone is complying, reports Brian Kavanagh

THE NUMBER of workplaces that complied with smoke-free inspections was lowest on licensed premises, an analysis of the latest figures published by the Office of Tobacco Control (OTC) has shown.

Indeed, at 89 per cent, the proportion of publicans found to be complying with the smoking ban was substantially lower than the average proportion of compliant working environments across the State, which stands at 97 per cent.

There were also more convictions among publicans for violating smoke-free workplace legislation, with 17 of the 24 prosecutions brought by environmental health officers directed against licensed premises.

A spokesman for the Vintners Federation of Ireland, however, says that it isn’t true that publicans are more susceptible to breaching smoke-free workplace legislation.

“The small number of convictions secured in the context of over 9,000 pubs operating throughout the country, for 363 days of the year, is not material, even though we would prefer it if there were no convictions.

“It must also be recognised that some of these convictions may have been handed out for violations committed in hallways or doorways when inclement weather conditions prevented the patron from going outside.

“What these figures prove is that pubs are extremely compliant and we do not see this as being an issue for our members,” he adds.

There was less welcome news from an independent audit of 1,526 Irish retail and licensed premises, which was carried out by TNS mrbi in 2007.

This audit found that just 36 per cent of underaged people who attempted to buy tobacco on licensed premises were refused.

This was a far lower rate than in other retail outlets, where the percentage refused was as high as 61 per cent.

But overall, retailers shouldered the greater proportion of blame, with 22 out of 23 prosecutions in relation to giving tobacco to minors taken against retail premises.

But OTC spokesman Nigel Fox believes the legislation still acts as a considerable deterrent, and says the OTC is making progress with retailers.

“The fact that there were 23 prosecutions is important in sending a clear message to retailers that where violations take place, prosecutions will be enforced.

“The OTC has initiated a number of information campaigns, chief among them being an information guide for retailers published in four languages, which advises workers to ask for ID when selling tobacco and advises them on how to deal with refusal of sale.

“You’ll notice that there aren’t prosecutions for the entire 3 per cent of workplaces which do not adhere to the smoking ban.

“When breaches are encountered, environmental health officers work with the publican or the retailer and ask for changes to be made.

“Prosecutions are initiated only where this is significant or [where there is] sustained infringement of the legislation,” he adds.

While welcoming the report, Dr Angie Brown, chairwoman of anti-tobacco lobbying group ASH Ireland, says the organisation has serious concerns about the number of prosecutions for selling tobacco to minors.

“We welcome the publication of the report, which indicates that there is such massive support of the workplace smoking ban.

“It is now important that every effort is made to ensure that this level of compliance becomes the accepted norm,” says Brown.

“However, rigorous action must be taken against retailers who continue to sell a dangerous and addictive product to young people,” she adds.

A total of 25,350 inspections were carried out in workplaces around the State by environmental health officers in 2008.

Some 24 cases were brought under the Public Health (Tobacco) Acts resulting in 19 convictions.

In addition, a total of 23 cases were taken over a failure to comply with the sales-to-minors legislation, resulting in 19 convictions.

The report found that last year, 97 per cent of workplaces were compliant with the ban, the highest level of annual compliance since the introduction of relevant legislation under the Public Health (Tobacco) Acts in 2004.

According to Norma Cronin, health promotion manager with the Irish Cancer Society, the report shows the true effectiveness of anti-tobacco legislation, and says one of its greatest achievements has been the protection of workers.

“The annual report really couldn’t be any better,” says Cronin.

“The real success story of the smoke-free workplace legislation is that there is now a 97 per cent compliance rate,” she adds.

Independent testing of working environments also corroborated the OTC’s assessment of nationwide compliance rates.

In an effort to ensure objectivity, the OTC employed the TNS mrbi to conduct a national survey of the public’s perception of the smoking ban in December 2008.

A representative sample of 1,000 people were asked to rate the quality of the atmosphere in their indoor working environment and the last bar or pub they visited.

Impressively, the study reflected the findings of the OTC report with little variance, as 96 per cent of those surveyed replied that on both accounts, the atmosphere was “not smoky”.

Yet the OTC has reiterated that more could still be done.

“Although the rate of 97 per cent has been billed as record compliance, if you look back, the rate of compliance has always been high and has grown incrementally by 1 per cent since the inception of the smoking ban,” according to Nigel Fox, OTC spokesman.

Such a resounding confirmation of the pervasiveness of smoke-free workplaces may be a cause for celebration, Fox says, but the OTC can ill afford to become complacent: “Compliance is moving in the right direction, but we still have a lot to do.”
Copyright © 2009 Irishtimes

Three Reno-area hospitals have announced a collaborative campaign to make their facilities and campuses completely smoke and tobacco free by the first of the year.

At a joint news conference Thursday, executives of Renown Health and Saint Mary’s Regional Medical Center in Reno and Northern Nevada Medical Center in Sparks said the move is a commitment to public health.

While smoking has been prohibited in hospitals for years, the facilities have had designated smoking areas outdoors. In the coming months, those areas will be phased out and tobacco use will be banned on all the facilities’ properties.

Officials add all the hospitals offer smoking cessation programs from patients and employees to help them kick the habit.

After a vital vote on the Senate floor on Monday, Congress is set to approve the most dramatic changes in the tobacco industry regulations since the 1960s.

The amendment praised by anti-smoking activists and health advocates, would provide the US Food and Drug Administration with the authority to regulate production, distribution and advertising of tobacco products. The legislation would as well allow the FDA to force tobacco industry to place larger health warnings on each cigarette pack and demand to reveal the composition of tobacco products.

According to the amendment, the cigarette manufacturers would not be able to define their cigarettes as “light” or “low tar” to make smokers believe that their cigarettes are of smaller health risks anymore, as it would be prohibited to do it.

Another change is related to regulating cigarette advertising campaigns in order to prevent children from getting lured to cigarettes and therefore, reducing teen smoking rates.

Hillary Reynolds, the spokesperson of the MATCH Coalition, an alliance of anti-smoking groups from Connecticut, named the Bill as an unbelievable landmark breakthrough since it would be a victory for public health as many people would learn more about the hazards of cigarettes and definitely give up their harmful habit.

The Senate voted 61-30 to approve the bill and move one step closer to it’s soonest passage. The Bill supporters gained one voice more than it was initially needed to keep the amendment going.

Anti-smoking advocates have been seeking a similar measure for decades; however they have also faced strong opposition from tobacco lobbyists and representatives of tobacco-growing states, who claimed that the FDA should not be entitled to authorize tobacco products.

Bills similar to the latest one have been approved by both houses of the Congress in past years, however they never passed the Senate and the House of Representatives in the same legislative session, what made the bill impossible to be approved even earlier.

Nevertheless, the lower chamber of the Congress cleared the bill by 298-112 final vote two months ago.

Sen. Christopher Dodd, the main supporter of the bill in the Senate, states that nowadays it is the high time to approve the bill since the Congress is poised to start debating over a health care reform, because the bill stresses the need to prevent illnesses rather than to treat them.

Previously, the most ferocious battles against smoking have been witnessed at the municipal and state levels, when the city councils and state assemblies implemented indoor smoking bans in public places, increased excise cigarette taxes and imposed other restrictions.

The spokesman for American Cancer Association underlined the significance of providing the FDA with the power to regulate tobacco products because it would prevent thousands illnesses caused by smoking or exposure to secondhand smoke.

The Department of Corrections composes a good-sized portion of the state’s budget, and a large portion of the FDOC budget is expended on inmate health care. There is a co-payment arrangement, but care can’t be denied to indigent inmates.

Most long-term and life-sentence inmates are indigent. Virtually all of these inmates smoke cigarettes or use chewing tobacco, which are sold in the FDOC canteen system. The prison dorms are supposedly “no smoking” but that can’t be enforced, so nonsmoking inmates are seriously affected, as well as the smoker.

As these long-term inmates age, they acquire all the usual tobacco- related illnesses, such as cancer, emphysema and heart disease.

Being indigent, their medical costs are passed on to taxpaying Floridians. The cost to the taxpayers is millions yearly. The number of inmates with tobacco-related illnesses is staggering.

Tobacco is banned in the federal prisons and county jails. Floridians should demand that FDOC do the same. Those millions could buy a lot of school lunches and pay for college tuitions and elderly care.

Copyright © 2009 Heraldtribune

There really is no right answer to that question. A quit smoking CD may be the right choice for you, especially if you have tried other quit smoking programs and haven’t experienced any success. As with all programs, results are going to vary depending on the individual. The most important aspect is that you have made the decision to quit. How that is achieved is entirely up to you.

One of the major drawbacks to a program such as this is simple. Unlike being able to walk into a clinic and speak with staff and other smokers in the program, most CD’s are sold either online or through major bookstores.

This is where you have to gather as much information as possible for before making such a purchase. Be sure any program that you choose includes a refund policy. If there is a way to contact the company, do so. Ask for references if at all possible. If you can’t seem to get the right answers, Move on.

Quitting smoking should not be taken lightly. Find a company that realizes this and is willing to help you before the sale of their product. Granted, it may take some legwork, but will be well worth the time invested.

When you finally do choose a quit smoking cd, make sure you follow the program religiously. Most programs will deal in the realm of self hypnosis and hypnotherapy. The theory behind this method is based on addressing your subconscious mind and the ability to actually change the way you think about your smoking habit. Most use a variety of techniques to induce a relaxed state of conscious then implant the suggestions that are designed to help you quit the habit of smoking.

By now you may be a bit skeptical, but hypnosis and hypnotherapy has been used for decades to help people finally quit smoking. Granted, there have not been numerous studies done to get an accurate measure of success. Again, this where it is crucial that you do your research ahead of time.

One of the major advantages of using a quit smoking cd is the cost associated with it. Most programs tend to be relatively inexpensive in comparison to standard clinic type programs. If you finally have come to conclusion that you want to quit smoking and start leading a healthier life, you’ve already made the first giant step in that direction. Now the rest is up to you. Be determined to finally be free of the addiction to cigarettes.

If you want to quit smoking it is important to make sure that you are motivated enough. One way to do this is to create a “wish list” that will help you remember all of the reasons why you want to quit. Most smokers know many of the benefits for quitting but sometimes it is important to really push yourself to think of all of the benefits. These benefits include family, health, financial, and even psychological and emotional reasons. As you can see, the reasons for quitting encompass many areas of a person’s life and it is important to realize all of these benefits if you want to be properly motivated.

For some people, one reason may be enough but others may not realize the right reason soon enough or they may need several reasons to quit smoking. If you can figure out all of the reasons that will motivate you to quit before you begin trying then you will have more motivation and willpower. It is important to write these reasons down so that you do not forget them. Be sure to keep the list in places that will help you to remember your reasons at all of the right times.

In order to make your wish list more effective, try rating your reasons for quitting in order of the most important. You may even want to make some short notes on how these benefits will influence your life so that you can think them out fully and decide which are truly the most important.

Here is an example of such a “wish list”:

1. Family – my wife will enjoy intimacy more and my children will hang around me more. My four-year old daughter told me yesterday that I stink. I will also be helping to keep them healthy.
2. Health – I will save money on future medical expenses and live longer. I may even be able to know my Great-Great-Grandchildren. Hopefully I won’t have to suffer and my family won’t have to watch me die.
3. Financial – we can use the money I save on cigarettes for a family vacation next year.
4. Exercise – I will be able to jog and play soccer, again. This is pretty important since my daughter wants to start playing soccer next season.
5. Food – I will be able to taste my food again. Thanksgiving is 3 months away and my wife would love it if I could rave over her turkey like everyone else does.

Your wish list can be longer or shorter than this. All that matters is that you are motivated mentally and emotionally to quit smoking.

In order to bring attention to the dangers of tobacco, May 31st is World No Tobacco Day, WNTD. The World Health Organization, WHO, has been shining the spotlight on the harmful effects of tobacco use and various tobacco company practices since 1987. In 1988, a resolution was passed dedicating May 31st World No Tobacco Day. Countries and communities around the world participate in the annual event in order to stomp out tobacco use.

The theme for 2009 is “Tobacco Health Warnings” which highlights the effectiveness and importance of images and picture Photo: World No Tobacco Day Poster / WHOwarnings when warning people just how dangerous tobacco use can be. And as they say, a picture IS worth 1000 words!

According to the WHO:

* Nearly half of all smokers will die from a tobacco related disease.
* Everyone exposed to second-hand smoke is affected in some way.
* More than 5 million people die every single year from the effects of tobacco.

Copyright © 2009 Examiner

The only bar in Teton County that still allows smoking is one of four plaintiffs to file a lawsuit challenging the county’s new smoking ban.

The Teton County Board of Health’s rule goes into effect today.

Claim the rule is unconstitutional are Flat Creek Development Co., doing business as The Virginian Saloon in Jackson; the Wyoming Contractors Association; the Wyoming Trucking Association; and the Wyoming State Liquor Association. They want the air rule declared null and void in their lawsuit filed in Teton County District Court on Friday.

The defendants are the Teton County Health District and the Teton County Board of Health.

Teton County’s air rule restricts smoking in all places of employment, bars, restaurants and sports arenas. Smoking cannot take place within 20 feet of any public establishment, outdoor serving areas of restaurants, seating areas in outdoor arenas and ski lifts.

Terri Gregory, Teton County public health manager, said the department was aware of the lawsuit. “We intend to go ahead and implement the rule tomorrow,” Gregory said late Friday afternoon.

“We will be taking an educational approach with the business owners,” and no one will be arrested, she added.

The rule makes a person who smokes in an area where smoking is prohibited subject to a fine of up to $1,000 or imprisonment for up to one year for each day on which the violation occurs. The same penalty applies for business owners and managers.

The lawsuit noted that all bills to authorize counties to regulate smoking have failed in the Legislature. The Jackson Town Council, moreover, has considered and refused to adopt an ordinance to regulate smoking in public facilities.

The lawsuit claims the health board had no authority to adopt the ban. The statutory authority of the health district and board is “to prevent the spread of contagious diseases rather than engaging in social engineering,” the lawsuit said.

The regulation of places of employment for public health and safety, “smoking related or otherwise,” is vested exclusively in the Wyoming Occupational Health and Safety Commission, the lawsuit argues. Regulation of air quality is the job of the Wyoming Environmental Quality Council.

The lawsuit also says that although the air rule is based on the finding that breathing second-hand smoke is a cause of disease to healthy nonsmokers, the rule does not prohibit smoking in personal residences, vehicles or private clubs.

The plaintiffs claim the rule violates the Wyoming constitutional requirement that all persons similarity situated should be treated alike.

In March, the county health board voted unanimously to pass the air rule after a long public comment period.

At that meeting, Mike Kraft, general manager of The Virginian Lodge, said some of his customers came to the bar because it was the only one left in town where people could smoke indoors.

“It’s not so much the health issue, but they are taking away people’s rights to do what they want to do,” Kraft said at the time.

In addition to a declaration by the court that the rule is void and unenforceable, the plaintiffs seek preliminary and permanent injunctions to prevent the defendants from enforcing the ban.

The plaintiffs also want the defendants to pay the costs and fees of the lawsuit.

Cities including Laramie, Cheyenne, Rock Springs and Evanston all have their own versions of a smoking ban.

Copyright © 2009 Casperstartribune

It’s no secret kids pick up the bad habits of their parents – including smoking.

But you would think mothers could avoid the latter by quitting smoking before their children are old enough to try to mimic the behavior.

It doesn’t work that way, report investigators from the University of Arizona who looked at data collected in the Tucson Children’s Respiratory Study. They found moms who smoked while pregnant and early in their child’s life were significantly more likely to have children who had taken up the habit by their mid teens-early 20s – regardless of whether they had quit smoking by the time the child reached school age or not.

These young adult smokers were also less likely to quit smoking than others their age who didn’t have mothers who smoked during pregnancy and early childhood.

“The data suggest that a biological effect is in play, and that eliminating maternal smoking during pregnancy and the preschool years of the child will reduce the risk of her children becoming regular smokers in adulthood,” study author Roni Grad, M.D., was quoted as saying.

But what if you’re a mom who already smoked during pregnancy and when your kids were small? Dr. Grad suggests a heightened vigilance as your children get older. “In children of mothers who did smoke during this critical period, it is important to prevent experimentation with tobacco during the adolescent years.”

SOURCE: Presented at the International Conference of the American Thoracic Society, May 19, 2009

The years-long fight over whether the FDA should regulate cigarettes and other tobacco products could soon be settled on the floor of the U.S. Senate.

A bill that would give the agency regulatory authority over tobacco passed the Senate HELP committee yesterday, and a companion bill has already been approved by the House. President Obama has said he backs the bill.

But, this morning’s WSJ notes, passage in the full Senate is still uncertain; the bill is opposed by Republican Sen. Richard Burr of North Carolina, a big tobacco state.

Industry isn’t uniformly against the measure. Altria, the parent company of Philip Morris, supports the bill. This 2007 WSJ article explains much of the backstory. And, this morning’s WSJ notes, many believe the legislation could help keep big tobacco companies hold onto the market by making it harder for smaller companies to introduce new products.

Copyright © 2009 Wsj

The fate of Kansas City’s voter-approved smoking ban now rests with the Missouri Court of Appeals.

Lawyers for the city and a group opposing the smoking ban squared off this morning in arguments before the appeals court.

At issue is whether Kansas City’s ban on smoking in small bars and billiard parlors complies with state law or exceeds the authority given by the state to regulate smoking.

Jonathan Sternberg argued on behalf of JC’s Sports Bar, which was fined for violating the Kansas City comprehensive ban against smoking in bars and restaurants that voters approved in 2008. Sternberg argued that, under state law, Kansas City is not allowed to regulate smoking in bars, billiard parlors and restaurants that seat fewer than 50 people. He said smoking in small bars such as JC’s is specifically permitted under the state’s Clean Indoor Air Act, and the city cannot prohibit what state law allows.

But Assistant City Attorney Lowell Gard told the appellate court panel that it is “ridiculous” to argue that city residents cannot vote to exercise police powers within their city to protect the public’s health, and that Missouri’s Clean Indoor Air Act specifically contemplates stricter smoking regulations by local ordinance.

A ruling from the appeals court is expected this summer.

A federal judge on Wednesday asked the Oklahoma Tax Commission not to stop Muscogee (Creek) Nation vehicles that are transporting tobacco until a judge can rule on part of a lawsuit filed against the commission by the tribe.

“I hope this doesn’t cause a flurry of vans filled with illegal cigarettes traveling the roads late at night, but I would ask that you stop this (until the court can rule),” U.S. District Judge Terence Kern said Wednesday.

The tribe filed the suit against the Tax Commission on Friday in Tulsa’s federal district court after agents working with the Oklahoma Highway Patrol stopped trucks on May 13 and May 15. Agents seized $40,000 worth of cigarettes in the first stop and about $68,000 in the second.

Each stop and seizure happened without a warrant, without the driver’s consent and without probable cause, the tribe alleges.

The Tax Commission estimated that an estimated $42,000 worth of taxes on the combined loads would have been lost by the state had the tobacco been sold.

The cigarettes were not on the state’s Master Settlement Agreement roster, which lists what brands can legally be sold in the state. None had tax stamps.

The Muscogee (Creek) Nation is the largest tribe in the state that does not have a compact with the state to sell cigarettes, and the tribe has used various methods to keep its smokeshops stocked.

The tribe has established its own wholesale company — not recognized by the state — and gets non-MSA discount cigarettes from other tribes.

The tribe’s lawsuit alleges that the Oklahoma Tax Commission violated the Fourth and Fourteenth amendments to the U.S. Constitution by stopping the trucks without probable cause and by searching the vehicles without the drivers’ or the tribe’s consent or a warrant.

In its motion to dismiss the case, the Tax Commission states that the stops and seizures were legal because state law allows the OHP to stop and inspect trucks without a search warrant if they are believed to be carrying contraband cigarettes.

A preliminary injunction request filed with the lawsuit asks the court to rule that the tribe’s property cannot be seized while traveling for Indian commerce and asks that the seized cigarettes be returned before their shelf life expires.

At Wednesday’s hearing on the preliminary injunction request and the Tax Commission’s motion to dismiss, Kern told attorneys that he has several unanswered questions. He allowed them until Tuesday to submit briefs on the motion for the preliminary injunction.

Kern also asked the Tax Commission to refrain from pulling over the tribe’s trucks and seizing its tobacco until he can rule on the motion.

State troopers and Tax Commission agents stopped another tribal vehicle Monday and searched for non-MSA cigarettes, a Tax Commission agent at the hearing said, but no tobacco was found.

Tribal officials said the vehicle was a tribal Housing Authority truck and was hauling toilets.

Copyright © 2009 Tulsaworld