Ban on seductive cigarette packaging a bad day for big tobacco, says Reilly

Moves to ban "seductive" cigarette packaging and replace it with gruesome warnings mark a "bad day for big tobacco", Health Minister James Reilly has insisted.
The Cabinet backed Dr Reilly’s bid to make Ireland the first country in the EU to pioneer such an anti-smoking initiative.
The move bans all branding, including trademarks, logos, colours and graphics from packs. Only the name of the brand and type of produce in uniform type face will be permitted on the packages as part of a drive to end all smoking in Ireland by 2025.
“This is a good day for our children and a bad day for ‘Big Tobacco’.”
The minister said cigarette companies designed packs to “ensnare children, especially young girls”.
With 78% of smokers saying they became addicted before the age of 18, Dr Reilly insisted the change in the law would cut the 5,200-a-year death toll attributed to tobacco-related diseases every year.
Dr Reilly denied he was rushing through the initiative as he fears being given the chop in next month’s Cabinet reshuffle after presiding over a string of controversies.
“My future is in the hands of the Taoiseach.”
However, Dr Reilly admitted it would be a “bit of a while away” before the ban on packaging is enacted as he expects strong legal challenges from tobacco companies against the move.
Dr Reilly said the companies’ claims the change would not cut smoking numbers were at odds with their determination to prevent it happening.
Dr Reilly said the move was mainly aimed at deterring children from taking up smoking.
“Given all we know about the dangers of smoking, it is not acceptable to allow the tobacco industry to use deceptive marketing gimmicks to lure our children into this deadly addiction and to deceive current smokers about the impact of their addiction. The introduction of standardised packaging will remove the final way for tobacco companies to promote their deadly product in Ireland.
“Cigarette packets will no longer be a mobile advertisement for the tobacco industry.”
Australia was the first country to ban attractive packaging and will soon be followed by New Zealand.
Opponents of the move such as Forest Éireann’s John Mallon, said Dr Reilly was using the issue as distraction.
“There is no hard evidence that plain packaging will deter children from smoking. There is, however, evidence from Australia that it will increase illicit trade.
“If plain packaging is introduced, there is a serious risk Ireland could be flooded with fake cigarettes which could be far more harmful to consumers, including children,” Mr Mallon said.
The Public Health (Standardised Packaging of Tobacco) Bill 2014 will be introduced in the Seanad before the end of the month.

Children Exposed to More Brain-Harming Chemicals Than Ever Before

A new report finds the number of chemicals contributing to brain disorders in children has doubled since 2006

In recent years, the prevalence of developmental disorders such as autism, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and dyslexia have soared. While greater awareness and more sophisticated diagnoses are partly responsible for the rise, researchers say the changing environment in which youngsters grow up may also be playing a role.
In 2006, scientists from the Harvard School of Public Health and the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai identified five industrial chemicals responsible for causing harm to the brain — lead, methylmercury, polychlorinated biphenyls (found in electric transformers, motors and capacitors), arsenic (found in soil and water as well as in wood preservatives and pesticides) and toluene (used in processing gasoline as well as in paint thinner, fingernail polish and leather tanning). Exposure to these neurotoxins was associated with changes in neuron development in the fetus as well as among infants, and with lower school performance, delinquent behavior, neurological abnormalities and reduced IQ in school-age children.

Now the same researchers have reviewed the literature and found six additional industrial chemicals that can hamper normal brain development. These are manganese, fluoride, chlorpyrifos, dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, tetrachloroethylene and polybrominated diphenyl ethers. Manganese, they say, is found in drinking water and can contribute to lower math scores and heightened hyperactivity, while exposure to high levels of fluoride from drinking water can contribute to a seven-point drop in IQ on average. The remaining chemicals, which are found in solvents and pesticides, have been linked to deficits in social development and increased aggressive behaviors.
The research team acknowledges that there isn’t a causal connection between exposure to any single chemical and behavioral or neurological problems — it’s too challenging to isolate the effects of each chemical to come to such conclusions. But they say the growing body of research that is finding links between higher levels of these chemicals in expectant mothers’ blood and urine and brain disorders in their children should raise alarms about how damaging these chemicals can be. The developing brain in particular, they say, is vulnerable to the effects of these chemicals, and in many cases, the changes they trigger are permanent.
“The consequence of such brain damage is impaired [central nervous system] function that lasts a lifetime and might result in reduced intelligence, as expressed in terms of lost IQ points, or disruption in behavior,” they write in their report, which was published in the journal Lancet Neurology.
They point to two barriers to protecting children from such exposures — not enough testing of industrial chemicals and their potential effect on brain development before they are put into widespread use, and the enormous amount of proof that regulatory agencies require in order to put restrictions or limitations on chemicals. Most control of such substances, they note, occurs after negative effects are found among adults; in children, the damage may be more subtle, in the form of lower IQ scores or hyperactivity, that might not be considered pathological or dangerous. “Our very great concern is that children worldwide are being exposed to unrecognized toxic chemicals that are silently eroding intelligence, disrupting behaviors, truncating future achievements and damaging societies, perhaps most seriously in developing countries,” they write. “A new framework of action is needed.

The General History of the Hookah

The Hookah was first created to elevate peoples' states of mind. Although born in India, this device spread to the countries of the Near East, Far East, the Arab world, Persia, East Africa, and all the way to the Ottoman Empire. With the discovery of Tobacco, the original form of the hookah evolved, and its uses changed so that it became a device synonymous with pleasurable smoking experiences.
The Hooka’s Indian Roots
The hookah is also known today as the water pipe, the Shisha or the hubbly-bubbly. It was originally used in India to extract the medicinal value contained in plant seeds.
The Hooka in Different Forms
The hooka in its original and simplest of forms was made from a coconut shell base, also known as the narci. This coconut shell was hollowed, and a straw was placed inside it for the purposes of inhaling substances placed in the shell�s core. After some years the device reached Egypt, and it was in Egypt that the Egyptians changed its form further by replacing the coconut shell with a gourd.
Upon reaching the Persian peninsula, the Persians developed the hookah even further, bringing it closer to its modern form. They substituted the straw originally used by the Indians, with a soft and more flexible hose, making the hookah more practical and easier to handle.
These changes came in time with the region’s first introduction to Tobacco. Seeing the newly discovered substance in a whole new light due to the more relaxing effects it provides, the Persians experimented with the possibility of inhaling it using the Hookah. With this idea in mind, it was soon discovered that the hookah device needed to evolve from its original form so as to satisfy this purpose. A bronze tray, known at the time as "Ser" was placed above the hookah’s body to hold the tobacco. The type of Tobacco popular amongst the Persians at the time was known as tambeki. In Syria and Yemen, the Hookah was developed even further so that it took on the form of a long wooden head, an iron stand and a hose sewn from thick cloth.
The first Hookah bar in the Ottoman region was opened in 1554 by a gentleman named Hakem from Aleppo and his partner, a nobleman by the name of Hems from Damascus. This first bar laid the foundations for many others to follow. Hookah bars at the time were places where people of high social standing met.
During the 17th century, the Ottomans changed the hookah into a more practical smoking device. Above the "head" they placed a bowl of baked clay and they also added to it a mouthpiece that connected the hose to the smoker�s mouth. The Hooka at the time had a body of glass, crystal, rock-crystal, porcelain and even silver, a head of brass and silver, and a pipe holder decorated with carvings depicting scenes from nature.
Because the ever so popular Hookah had a base made of glass, it was only natural for the glass making industry to also flourish in popularity. It was in the 19th Century and during the reign of Selim III that a man by the name of Mehmet Dede set up a workshop in Beykoz, a place where the famous Beykoz glassware was made. After setting up a series of workshops in that area, a glass factory was soon established in 1899. The local factory however was unable to compete with the glassware imported from Europe at the time and it soon closed down. The first glass factory in the modern sense was established upon the orders of Atatrk in 1934 during the Republic period, and it was then that the prettiest hookahs in history were made.
The Hookah Today
Hookahs are still used today, but are seen as the more pleasurable form of smoking only employed as a pass time in coffee houses across the region.

Tobacco marketing and teen smoking

Every year the tobacco industry spends literally, billions of dollars on promotion, sponsorship and advertising. Tobacco advertising increases tobacco consumption which in turn kills people. Teens are at especially high risk of starting to smoke product advertisements and viewing such ads alone is guaranteed to start more youths on this deadly habit. 

Authors of a new study published online this week in the Pediatrics journal state: 

"Our results support the notion of a content-related effect of cigarette advertisements and underlines the specificity of the relationship between tobacco marketing and teen smoking; exposure to cigarette advertisements, but not other advertisements, is associated with smoking initiation."

Scientists from Institute for Therapy and Health Research in Kiel, Germany, and colleagues examined the results from a longitudinal survey of 2,102 adolescents aged 10 to 17 who had never smoked. After exposure to advertisements for six brands of cigarettes and eight commercial products at different frequencies, it was revealed that 13% of adolescents had started to smoke after nine months time. 

Most smokers take up smoking before the age of 18. Children whose parents or siblings smoke are around three times more likely to smoke than children living in non-smoking households. 

Although around 60% of teenagers report that they have never smoked, among those who do experiment with smoking many become addicted to nicotine and continue to smoke as adults. 

The effectiveness of youth-focused health education is limited and at best appears to delay the age of starting to smoke. It appears that the best way of reducing youth smoking is to have comprehensive tobacco control policies in place that apply to the whole population. 

Exposure to other advertisements, for products, such as sweets, clothes, and mobile telephones, did not predict smoking initiation. High exposure to cigarette advertising remained a significant predictor of smoking initiation even after controlling for other factors. 

The study's authors continue: 

"The study results support the notion of a content-related effect of cigarette advertisements and underline the specificity of the relationship between tobacco marketing and teen smoking initiation."

Tobacco companies such as British American Tobacco and Philip Morris have adopted a public posture of opposition to teenage smoking and even funded anti-smoking initiatives for teenagers. But an investigation by the Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) which is based in the United Kingdom, and The Cancer Research Campaign, has revealed that this is no more than a public relations strategy. The purpose is to fend off meaningful restrictions on tobacco advertising and gain PR advantage, while proposing only measures that are unlikely to reduce youth smoking and likely make it more attractive by positioning cigarettes as an adult product and smoking as rebellious. 

Virtually all tobacco advertising is now illegal in the UK and many other countries. The Tobacco Advertising & Promotion Act 2002 came into force in November 2002 in the UK, with most advertising ending on 14th February 2003 and a gradual fade out for the rest by July 2005. 

Since the implementation of the final stage of the tobacco advertising ban in 2005, ASH has carefully monitored the situation to try and stop any direct or indirect breaches of the law. 

Tobacco companies have concentrated sponsorship on successful, high-profile sports in order to ensure maximum coverage for their products. These sports are extremely attractive to sponsors and other companies have gradually replaced sponsorship from tobacco companies without difficulty. Even Formula One, the sport most reliant on tobacco, announced in 1998 that it would replace its tobacco sponsorship within four years. 

Tobacco is a unique consumer product as there is no safe level of use and half of all life-long smokers die prematurely from smoking-related diseases. Despite the harm caused by smoking, tobacco products are largely unregulated while medicinal nicotine used as an aid to stop smoking is very tightly controlled. 

NATO, NYACS and Manufacturers Sue New York City

NATO, the New York Association of Convenience Stores (NYACS), the Bodega Association of the United States, along with Lorillard Tobacco Company, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., Inc., American Snuff Company, Philip Morris USA Inc., U.S. Smokeless Tobacco Brands Inc., and John Middleton Company have filed a lawsuit in the U.S. Federal District Court for the Southern District of New York seeking preliminary and permanent injunctions against the enforcement of several provisions of a tobacco-related ordinance adopted on October 30, 2013 by the New York City Council and which goes into effect on March 19, 2014.Glamour Super Slims Lilac
The ordinance provisions that are the subject of the litigation are those sections that restrict cigarette and tobacco product coupons and other promotional price discounts (such as buy one, get one free) on tobacco products. As set out in the lawsuit, the ban on cigarette and tobacco product coupons and promotional price discounts raise serious federal and state constitutional questions while also being pre-empted by federal and state laws.
Specifically, the lawsuit seeks a judgment declaring, among other things, that (1) the ban on coupons, multi-package discounts and promotionally priced tobacco products are an unconstitutional restriction of free speech, violating the United States Constitution and the New York State Constitution, and (2) the ordinance provisions are pre-empted by both federal law and New York State law.
The lawsuit claims that these sections of the ordinance are unconstitutional because they restrict a retailer from redeeming cigarette and tobacco product coupons and from communicating to adult consumers that a particular tobacco product price is a promotional discount. The lawsuit also claims that these sections are pre-empted not only by the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act, which prohibits states and localities from enacting restrictions on the advertising and promoting of cigarettes, but also by New York State law, which already regulates tobacco product coupons.

CVS' no-cigarette policy long overdue, Northampton market owner says

It wasn’t a marketing study or Health Department sting that made Richard E. Cooper stop selling Marlboros, Winstons, Camels, Viceroys and dozens of other cigarette brands at his two stores.
It was a question posed by Rebecca Cooper, his then-5-year-old daughter.
“Why do you even sell cigarettes? They’re bad for people,” the youngest Cooper asked in May 2000 after one of Cooper’s clerks had been cited for selling cigarettes to a minor.
As CVS prepares to end cigarettes sales nationwide in October and other pharmacy chains face pressure to follow suit, Cooper’s experience shows that retailers can swear off tobacco sales without driving away customers.

Lucky Strike Click&Roll

More than a decade before CVS, the nation’s second-largest pharmacy chain with 7,600 stores, decided to opt out of the tobacco market, Cooper was selling 121 varieties of cigarettes at Cooper’s Corner in Florence and the State Street Fruit Store, Deli, Wines & Spirits in downtown Northampton.
Business was good – about $36,000 a year between the two stores – but not without hassles. Despite training and warnings, store clerks were caught five times selling cigarettes to customers under 18, leading to fines and license suspensions from the city’s Board of Health.
The fifth time, in May 2000, turned out to be the last time, Cooper recalled Wednesday.
Within hours of learning about the latest violation, an exasperated Cooper was eating dinner at a Chinese restaurant with his wife and daughter, grousing about how mistakes by store clerks were hurting the stores' reputation.
“That’s when my daughter asked why we were selling them (cigarettes) to begin with; when I explained that we sold things that we didn’t use ourselves, she said, 'but they make people sick.' "
A few days later, Cooper showed up at a Board of Health hearing and turned in both licenses. “I don’t want to be part of the problem,” he told board members.

To his surprise, business at Coopers and the State Street Fruit Store improved in the next few weeks, even after the leftover cigarette inventory had been crushed and thrown into dumpsters behind the two stores.

Everyone knows it can be hard to stop smoking.

Everyone knows it can be hard to stop smoking. After all, the nicotine in cigarettes is a powerfully addictive drug. But with the right approach, you can do it. Millions of Americans have kicked the smoking habit by following some key steps, like lining up support from friends and planning ahead how they'll respond to cravings.

This personal planning tool helps you think through your approach. As you work through the planner, you'll see examples of some of the things other people did to stop smoking. When you're finished, you can print a goal sheet to guide and inspire you.
Stopping smoking takes daily awareness. You're replacing your smoking habit with a new, nonsmoking habit — and reprogramming your brain like that takes time. You'll need patience and, yes, willpower. So take it one day at a time. Look at your goal sheet every day and remind yourself of the reasons why you want to stop. Review the things that can trip you up so you can be prepared to take them on them during the day.
Did you forget and light up? Forgive yourself and get back on track. Did you get through a difficult situation without smoking? Congratulate yourself. It's a real achievement to stop smoking. When you reach your goal, you won't just be healthier. You'll also know a bit more about yourself — like the fact that you're strong enough to meet a really tough challenge.