Smoking levels are not on the decline. Each DAY in the United States:
The tobacco industry spends >$34 million marketing products
Almost 4,000 adolescents start smoking
~1,200 current and former smokers die prematurely
The nation spends >$260 million in direct medical costs related to smoking
The US alone spends >$270 million in lost productivity
~1,200 current and former smokers die prematurely
The nation spends >$260 million in direct medical costs related to smoking
The US alone spends >$270 million in lost productivity
Source: CDC’s Best Practices for Comprehensive Tobacco Control Programs
Are you shocked by this? I sure am. Last week the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) passed a new comprehensive tobacco control strategy aimed to encourage more smokers to quit and prevent non-smokers from starting. The initiative described as "the most significant change to health warnings on cigarettes and in cigarette advertisements in more than 25 years" will force tobacco companies to display warning labels covering >20% of the total packaging. source
“We want to make sure that every person who picks up a pack of cigarettes knows exactly what the risk is they are taking,” said HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. source
What do you think? Do you think it will make a difference?
On one hand, I'd argue that most current smokers (and those about to start) already do know the harmful effects. Yes many current smokers didn't have the knowledge we have today when they started, but I think it's safe to say that today the general population agrees smoking is harmful to your health and can kill you.
I'd be interested to know what percentage of smokers subconsciously keep the warning labels out of view from others. For example, if fur coats contained a small tag that said "this fur came from a live animal", I'd bet most fur lovers would tuck the tag away from public viewing. However, if the tag was written over 20% of the coat, would they still wear it?
What about forcing tobacco companies to make the actual cigarettes (not just packaging, as they're more visible) share a common feature representing some type of warning? For instance, consider a "Black stripes, Black lungs" campaign (as an example) where all cigarette paper was required to be black and white striped.
What do you think?
Do you propose increasing tobacco taxes, costs of cigarettes, etc?
Do you think the new packaging will help?
What do you think would work?
Do you propose increasing tobacco taxes, costs of cigarettes, etc?
Do you think the new packaging will help?
What do you think would work?
I might sound stupid saying this, but I feel the need to say this. I have never smoked and actually never touches a cigarette in my life, but I have been in treatment before with women who were struggling to recover from alcoholism, drug addictions, eating disorders, and depression; many of these women were smokers and used smoking as a way of coping. I know it might not be healthy, but I do not think that the cost of cigarettes should be increased and I do not think that smokers should be forced to feel guilty about their habit, I mean do people make you feel guilty for spending large amounts of money on running clothes and other unnecessary items that you might not need?
ReplyDeletePlease do not take this as an attack, I am just posting my views and I hope it is discussed!! :)
@Lindsay Lindsay, thanks for posting. I don't take this as offensive, I appreciate all opinions. I know people need to cope but I think you have to look at the amount of people who positively use smoking to cope with issues vs. the amount of people that die from it. The numbers don't really compare. I suggested the taxes because the tax money has to come from somewhere to pay for the 200+ million per day medical costs that tax payers shell out for smoking related diseases (someone has to pay for it, right?) Who should? The non-smokers?). I was just throwing out suggestions for conversation starters.
ReplyDeleteI have to say smoking is disgusting and trading one addiction for another for "coping" is not okay either. I think retail licenses to sell tobacco products should be increased nationwide and we should adopt the Canadian approach "out of site out of mind" i.e. no tobacco products can be displayed in the store, you have to ask the clerk specifically for what product you desire. I would also like to see cigarettes cost $12 dollars a pack to make up for the loss in productivity and damage the millions of cigarette butts do to the environment each time they are thrown to the ground. Also, when you throw your cigarette on the ground it is littering and you should receive a $250 ticket. Would you throw a candy wrapper on the ground when you were done eating it?..... Just my thoughts.
ReplyDeleteAnother point: buying running clothes does not harm other people. Second hand smoke definitely does. Why should non-smokers have to pay for smoker's poor choices?
ReplyDeletei definitely am on board with policy efforts and environmental efforts in the fight against tobacco use (worked in cessation and youth prevention for a few years); i think that one of the very first things that needs to happen is policy amendment so that states MUST use more than 2% of their tobacco revenue for prevention or cessation.
ReplyDeletemost youth know smoking is terrible for your health, but those who try it don't think that it will happen to them (any of the bad stuff). and demonizing the habit isn't the answer either (smoking is unhealthy but doesn't in and of itself make anyone a bad person) so we have some work to do in the same way that we have some work to do with reversing the fat = bad and unhealthy message that is out there.
i'm beginning to ramble so i'll end this before my comment becomes epic. :)
while i am no pro-smoker, i think it should be an economic/social issue not a political issue. no question it is unhealthy and prematurely ends lives young and old. the irony is that to support non-smoker rights is also suppressing smokers rights. both sides cant be right, so to advanced health i think there should be an economic incentive to quit smoking. one idea is higher health premiums on smokers.
ReplyDeletethis issue is complex and i am far from coherent this early in the morning
My grandfather died of lung cancer, so smoking is something I've never understood the point of. BUT, I think taxing cigarettes excessively is hard to justify, especially in today's society where obesity is costing us just as much in medical care as cigarettes. Smokers may cost us more, but so do obese people, and people with alcoholism, and heck, even people with a history of eating disorders. Smoking is preventable at the beginning, but so are all those other disorders. It's an addiction, just like any other. I'm NOT justifying the decision to start smoking, but I think that in the spirit of equality and human rights we cannot single out one addiction to tax. Education is the name of the game here, and though it's incredibly difficult to eliminate smoking, we've come a long way. Reinforcing the message to young kids that addictions kill us- whether they be smoking or anything else- is probably the best way to go, even if it takes several more decades.
ReplyDeleteI think it is disgusting that in a country filled with intelligent citizens we still allow corporations to sell products to our people that knowingly kill them! I am beyond the taxing issue. I say why allow it to be sold in the first place. I know there are all different sides to this debate but shouldn't our country protect us?
ReplyDelete@Gabriela I agree that we can't single out smoking only but that's not exactly what we're doing. Tanning causes cancer and there's now a tax on tanning. There is new legislation for taxing soda and other types of junk food. In CA for example, McDonalds happy meals may no longer be offered. I don't think taxing smokers excessively is the right thing to do but I do agree with the current tax in place because someone does have to pay for the billions of dollars lost each year in medical costs.
ReplyDeleteFrom an educational standpoint, I do agree. I work as a health/wellness coach for inner city DC kids and I recently gave a talk about the effects of smoking. One thing I learned was how challenging it is to properly educate them when >90% of the children's parents smoke (it's hard to tell 8-year-olds you can DIE from smoking).
@Gabriela
ReplyDelete"In the spirit of equality and human rights we cannot single out one addiction to tax."
I appreciate this comment, and would add a few other points to what has been said in these comments. First, the argument about smokers hurting others is true, but actually buying running clothes does hurt others--the people producing those clothes under poor labor conditions who are also working with toxic substances, and those dealing with the environmental burden of the factory (likely not in the US or in low-income minority communities in the US). We don't hold ourselves to the same standard of non-harm, so why hold smokers to it?
Second, why we don't talk about regulating the corporations? Free enterprise can be harmful, this is just one example...
This may be oversimplifying it a bit, but both of parents smoke... a lot. I hope this new packaging is a kick in the ass.
ReplyDeleteI want them to stop and if slapping a strong message on the cigarette carton does the job, then I'm all for it.
@anandaprana I agree. It's worth a shot right?
ReplyDeleteI hope so :)
ReplyDelete@matt gordon From a economic standpoint alone:
ReplyDelete- Tobacco industry spends >$34 million marketing products
- The nation spends >$260 million in direct medical costs related to smoking
- The US alone spends >$270 million in lost productivity due to tobacco-related diseases
wow, those stats are daunting! i wish harmful substances werent at such easy access...
ReplyDeleteI'm skeptical that the new packaging will help. A lot of teens start smoking because they know it is bad and that is part of the appeal. I wonder if the packaging will make it seem even more off limits and thus more attractive. I definitely think they should tax the hell out of cigarettes though!
ReplyDelete