Plain Packaging

It seems our carrying in good faith last week the data-selective assertions of Canadian journalist and development officer of ‘Students for Liberty,’ Yael Ossowski, that plain cigarette packaging does not work as a harm reduction tool, is way short of the full story. So short as to be untrue, says Yussuf Saloojee, Executive Director of SA’s National Council Against Smoking in his response below. He claims Ossowski is just plain wrong – and provides a wider data-set, making a strong case for plain packaging. Saloojee picks out a more convincing Australian data-set than the one Ossowski used. It’s one of those fields where trillions of dollars are at stake and smoke and mirrors are the order of the day. As I found out when once I tried to sift through the mountains of opposing data submitted by the protagonists in the e-cigarettes debate where the latest arena of battle is harm-reduction. Some international scientific heavyweights stack up on the side of e-cigarettes, like SA-born pioneering long distance swimmer and executive director of the Vitality Institute, Dr Derek Yach. Harm-reduction and preventative wellness medicine and exercise lie at the core of Discovery Health’s business model, hence the choice of former WHO executive Yach to head up their Institute. Yach was behind much of the ANC’s globally-admired, progressive smoking policies and evolving legislation. But he parts company with Saloojee on e-cigarettes and harm reduction, saying it’s the smoke that kills, not the nicotine (which e-cigs deliver, without the more harmful smoke). Here are the results of Saloojee’s foray into the scientific wizardry of Oz where this dataset seems to blow away some of the red outback dust that Ossowski stirred up. – Chris Bateman

http://www.biznews.com/health/2017/03/06/cigarettes-plain-packaging/

By Yussuf Saloojee*

In Australia, the attractive colours and logos that increase the appeal of the cigarette pack, especially to children, have been replaced by honest, truthful information on the dangers of smoking. Cigarettes are now sold in plain packaging – that is, in dark brown packets with pictures of sick smokers on it.

And plain packaging works. Smoking rates have dropped to record lows since its introduction in late 2012.

The latest data from the Australian Secondary Student’s Alcohol and Drug survey show that between 2011 and 2014 the number of 12 to 17 year-old students who have never smoked increased from 77.4% to 80.5%. Adult smoking rates have also fallen. Among Australians aged 14 or older the number of people who smoke daily fell from 15.1% to 12.8% between 2010-13.

There are now 200,000 fewer smokers in this age group.

The tobacco industry knows that plain packaging lowers profits, so the industry and its cronies have resorted to falsely claiming that plain packaging is ineffective.

Further, the major cigarette companies are rapidly expanding into the e-cigarette business and would obviously benefit from growth in this market. So, to kill two birds with one stone, the industry proposes that plain packaging laws should be dropped and that e-cigarettes (or ‘vaping’) be promoted to reduce smoking. A win-win for the industry, as a measure that reduces sales would be replaced with one that increases profits.

The problem with this suggestion is that the majority of e-cigarette users still continue to smoke regular cigarettes and there is no health benefit if people both vapor and smoke. While the industry would profit from addiction by selling e-cigarettes alongside regular cigarettes, there would be no public health gain.

The decision to implement plain packaging in Australia was based upon extensive scientific evidence and the law has been upheld by the courts. Numerous other countries, including Ireland, the United Kingdom, France, Hungary, New Zealand, Norway, Chile and Singapore, are persuaded by this evidence and have now adopted or are considering adopting similar measures.

South Africa would be well advised to also do so, as plain packaging will help reduce the over 40,000 deaths caused by cigarettes each year.

Yussuf Saloojee, Exco Director of the SA National Council Against Smoking

Big tobacco has exploited a loophole in Australia’s world-first plain-packaging laws, which allowed smokers to ditch the now famous drab packaging.

http://www.smh.com.au/national/health/just-one-2000-fine-issued-since-tough-new-plain-packaging-laws-introduced-20170301-guoiu4.html

The Department of Health has received 1054 individual complaints involving 746 cases since the December 2012 legislation banning tobacco companies from putting their products in anything other than dark olive brown packaging that feature graphic health warnings.

Of those cases, 459 were cleared and 135 warning letters were issued, according to figures revealed in a Senate estimates hearing on Wednesday, with an ACT retailer receiving the only fine, paying $2040 for “non-compliant cigars”.

But the department could not say whether Imperial Tobacco, one of the world’s biggest tobacco companies, received a warning for producing what it described as a “fresher, premium product” for its Peter Stuyvesant brand which allowed customers to shed the government-mandated packaging and use a plain silver soft pack enclosed inside.

The Plain Packaging Act allows lining within the pack, but only foiled back paper, while also outlawing both inserts and onserts (a sticker that can go over existing packaging).

Departmental deputy secretary Wendy Southern told the hearing the Imperial insert, brought to the department’s attention by a media enquiry last year, was found to be an example “where clearly we believed it as circumventing the plain packaging legislation”, but there was some question over whether it constituted a breach.

“The department engaged with the manufacturer through correspondence and basically the company undertook to remove the product from the market,” she said, under questioning from Labor senator Murray Watt.

“So we have one of the biggest tobacco manufacturers in the world, quite deliberately circumventing these laws and nothing happens apart from an undertaking and that’s after several steps in the chain,” the Queensland senator asked.

“The undertaking is to remove it from the market, which is ultimately what we were seeking,” Dr Southern replied, adding that the way the legislation was crafted, there was a process of “escalation”.

The legislation sets out a maximum penalty of $36,000 for manufacturers who don’t comply.

A departmental spokesman told Fairfax Media the “vast majority” of tobacco manufacturers and retailers were obeying the legislation, but on the Imperial Tobacco matter there “were differing views on the compliance of the product with the legislation”.

“As a result of correspondence between the department and the company which did include warnings about the consequences of continued non-compliance, the company made a decision to withdraw the product from the market,” he said.

“The decision by the company to withdraw the product from the market, in this instance, avoided the potential for costly and protracted litigation with an uncertain outcome and achieved the compliance outcome sought by the department.”

He said the department received reports from Imperial on the withdrawal of the packs from sale.

Shadow health minister Catherine King said there was room to revisit the landmark legislation, which was created under the Rudd/Gillard governments, saying it was “critical” the laws were enforced.

“If the government believes the laws need strengthening to do this, then Labor will work with them as a priority. Or else they should explain why companies are being let off the hook,” she said.

The laws have seen early indications of success in other areas, with an Australian National University study finding calls to the quit hotlines increased by 78 per cent during the phase-in period, and sat above average for the next 10 months.

The department estimates 15,000 Australians die every year from smoking-related diseases and costs Australia more than $31 billion in social and economic costs.