Clear The Air News Tobacco Blog Rotating Header Image

Plain Packaging

It looks like the tobacco industry found a way around Australia’s tough plain packaging laws

Nov 2nd, 2016
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://www.businessinsider.com.au/it-looks-like-the-tobacco-industry-found-a-way-around-australias-tough-plain-packaging-laws-2016-11

Australia’s tough tobacco regulations are acting as a catalyst for the industry to develop sophisticated marketing practices. These companies are gaming the system by anticipating regulatory impact and then using unregulated marketing elements to overcome it.

Australia has been a guiding light for countries looking to improve public health through the effective regulation of tobacco, which remains the world’s biggest cause of preventable illness and death, and still kills around 15,000 Australians annually.

December 2012 saw the implementation of Australia’s innovative plain packaging legislation, this was followed by four 12.5% annual tobacco tax excise increases. As a result the number of Australian smokers has fallen to a record low.

However the tobacco industry has used several strategies, including price reduction, brand differentiation and promoting the idea of healthier cigarettes, to undermine Australia’s new regulatory environment.

To offset price hikes manufacturers have expanded lower priced product ranges, with new ultra low priced brands. One example of this is the British American Tobacco Australia’s (BATA) Just Smokes, which sells for around 70% of the premium brand prices. BATA has also shifted Rothmans, previously a premium brand, into the economy segment by cutting its price by more than 30%.

Another pricing initiative is twin pack promotion. Most consumers recognise that progressively larger packs offer progressively lower unit prices – a lower cost per single item or single pack.

This used to be true for tobacco, with the largest cartons (usually with 200 cigarettes) offering best value. However, since 2012 discounted twin packs represent best value.

A supermarket twin pack, per cigarette price, is up to 10% cheaper than single packs – effectively discouraging single pack purchases. Australia’s leading brand Winfield twin pack, per cigarette price, is equal to or below that of larger cartons.

Regulatory price increases are financial deterrents to smoking. The low price branding and discounting strategies in Australia are clear attempts to get around these, and reduce smokers’ financial motivation to quit or cut down.

Heavily discounted twin packs also teach smokers, through financial reward and penalty, to buy twin rather than single packs. This is of particular concern since research shows that larger purchases trigger higher consumption.

In 2014 the industry claimed tobacco consumption had actually increased after plain packaging. While this was disproved, it suggests big tobacco anticipated increased consumption as smokers switched to twin pack purchase behaviour.

New tobacco products and promotions

Plain packaging was expected to restrict tobacco brands. However, after 2012 manufacturers introduced numerous new products, and brand ranges actually expanded.

For example, Australia’s leading brand Winfield supported more than 20 brand variants in 2015-2016 compared to just 12 in 2012-2013. Brand differentiation is a proven marketing approach for generating greater sales, with each variant targeting a specific consumer market segment.

Since plain packaging was introduced, tobacco companies have varied the names of brands as well. Names have evolved to include the information previously covered by packaging, such as colour and new product features. For example, Dunhill Infinite is now Dunhill Infinite White + Taste Flow Filter.

Today around 80% of Australia’s leading brands’ variant names include a colour, compared to less than half before plain packaging. Tobacco companies are also using colours to mislead consumers that certain product ranges are “healthier” options.

A universal colour code has been promoted by the industry in which smokers interpret lighter colours (white, silver, gold, yellow and blue) as being less harmful, and darker colours (red and black) as more harmful. Before plain packaging colour hues were a pack design component, now the myth of healthier tobacco options is perpetuated by colour names. This is disturbing from a public health perspective as it represents industry efforts to lessen smokers’ health motivations for quitting.

The effects of clever marketing

Australia’s tobacco regulations have significantly reduced smoking. However, their impact would be greater without unscrupulous industry initiatives to overcome and thwart them.

Industry response to plain packaging and excise increases have not been simple marketing efforts to increase sales, but illustrate cynical attempts to reduce financial and health motivations for quitting, and to encourage smokers to smoke more. Australian regulators, and those in other countries, should therefore consider further regulation.

Research suggests that future effective controls might include:

  • Introducing a standard fixed per stick price for all cigarettes – preventing differentiation by price and cheaper brand options
  • Prohibiting price variation by pack size – preventing volume discounting or twin pack promotion that encourage smokers to make larger purchases and smoke more
  • Restricting pack size to a maximum of 10 or 20 cigarettes to limit increased consumption associated with larger pack sizes
  • Banning colour variant names – removing colour-health connotations
  • Restricting brand variant ranges, for example to one variant or representation per brand, to limit the way tobacco companies use differentiation to increase sales.

The tobacco industry is committed to gaming regulations, like plain packaging and tax excise increases, and developing approaches to undermine their impact. However, the Australian government is equally committed to reducing the national adult daily smoking rate to 10% by 2018. The additional tobacco controls outlined above should help the government achieve this.

Steven Greenland is an Associate professor at the Swinburne University of Technology.

The Tobacco Control Atlas: ASEAN Region

Nov 1st, 2016
by Editor.
No comments yet

Download (PDF, 11.39MB)

Tobacco packaging and labelling policies in countries of the Eastern Mediterranean and Western Pacific Regions

Nov 1st, 2016
by Editor.
No comments yet

Download (PDF, 499KB)

Uruguay: A giant leap to prevent tobacco-assisted suicide

Oct 25th, 2016
by Editor.
No comments yet

https://blogs.worldbank.org/health/uruguay-giant-leap-prevent-tobacco-assisted-suicide

Tobacco is arguably one of the most significant threats to public health we have ever faced. Since the publication of the landmark U.S. Surgeon General’s Report on Tobacco and Health in 1964, that provided evidence linking smoking to diseases of nearly all organs of the body (see graph below), the international community slowly began to realize that a century-long epidemic of cigarette smoking was causing an enormous, avoidable public health catastrophe across the world.

History is not linear. The road to progress tends to be circuitous and full of uncertainties, and even more than a few steps backwards. In spite of this reality, at certain points in time, we have to admire those individuals and countries who have stepped in to shine the light to allow us all to move forward.

Recently, Uruguay, a small country in South America, offered us a good example of how a government that is committed to protecting the health and wellbeing of its people was able to withstand for more than 6 years the pressure of litigation from a giant multinational tobacco company, whose annual revenues of more than US$80 billion exceed the country’s gross domestic product of close to US$50 billion. As discussed in detail below, Philip Morris started proceedings in February 2010 claiming that the comprehensive tobacco control measures adopted by the Government of Uruguay since 2003 violated obligations under international trade and investment arrangements.

We are heartened by the resolve of leaders in Uruguay, which reflects the “garra charrúa” or the “resourceful, daring, and never to give up attitude” of the Uruguayan people. Perhaps in this case is apt to paraphrase the words of Apollo 11 astronaut, Neil Armstrong, after he stepped onto the lunar surface for the first time in 1969, to describe Uruguay’s victory as “one small step for a country, one giant leap for global tobacco control.”

Although cigarettes are “legal” goods that are produced, traded, and sold across the world, it is an indisputable fact, as one of us can attest as a specialist in vascular disease, that tobacco acts in a number of direct and indirect ways to cause damage to our blood vessels, heart and brain. Over time, these injuries raise blood pressure, reduce ability to tolerate exercise, and increase risk for blood clots and cancer.

adverse_effects_of_tobacco_smoking-png_1

Indeed, the bleak truth is that tobacco is the only “legal” product that kills when used as advertised. Despite decades of accumulated epidemiologic and experimental evidence on the causal relationship between tobacco smoking and lung cancer and other diseases, as well as significant progress achieved in reducing tobacco use globally since the adoption in 2005 of the WHO’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), smoking remains one of the largest causes of preventable disease and death, with nearly 80% of the world’s one billion smokers living in developing countries. Data from the 2015 Global Burden of Disease study show that tobacco-attributable deaths and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) lost have continued to rise across the world because of increases in population and aging that overwhelm declines in both exposure and risk-delated rates of related disease burden. In 2015, more than 7.1 million people died due to all tobacco smoke-related cases, up from 6.8 million people in 2005.

The lawsuit by Philip Morris, the biggest tobacco company in the world, against Uruguay argued that the country’s rules on tobacco packaging negatively impacted its intellectual property rights and sales in violation of the terms of a bilateral investment treaty between Uruguay and Switzerland, where the tobacco company has its headquarters. At its core, the lawsuit opposed provisions in two tobacco control measures adopted by the Government of Uruguay for protecting public health from the adverse effects of tobacco promotion, including false marketing that certain brand variants are safer than others, even after misleading descriptors such as “light,” “mild,” “ultra-light” were banned, and to increase consumer awareness of the health risks of tobacco consumption and encourage people, particularly the youth, to quit or not to take up smoking. Ordinance 514 issued by the Ministry of Public Health in 2008 requires each cigarette brand to have a “single presentation” and prohibits different packaging or “variants” for cigarettes sold under a given brand. Presidential Decree 287 of 2009 mandates an increase in the size of prescribed health warnings of the surface of the front and back of the cigarette packages from 50% to 80%, leaving only 20% of the cigarette pack for trademarks, logos and other information. The application of these provisions forced Philip Morris to withdraw most of its brands (such as Marlboro Red, Marlboro Gold, or Marlboro Green) from retail stores in Uruguay.

On July 8, 2016, however, the International Center of Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), an independent arm of the World Bank Group, dismissed the lawsuit in its entirety and ruled that Uruguay should be awarded compensation for all the expenses and costs associated with defending against these claims. In essence, the ruling accepted the claim made by the Government of Uruguay that its anti-tobacco measures were “about protection of public health, not interference with foreign investment.” We should be clear, as Uruguay’s President, Dr. Tabaré Vázquez, an oncologist, stated in a televised address to the country after the ruling, the ICSID award reinforces that “it is not acceptable to prioritize commercial considerations over the fundamental right to health and life.”

This landmark international ruling came at just the right time, as India prepares to host in early November 2016, the Conference of the Parties (COP7), bringing together 180 Parties, which includes almost every country in the world, as well as regional economic integration organizations like the European Union, for reviewing the implementation of the WHO’s FCTC and the Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products.

At COP7, the victory of Uruguay needs to be highlighted echoing the words of former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, an international public health champion, who provided financial support to help Uruguay deal with the litigation: “No country should be ever be intimidated by the threat of a tobacco company lawsuit, and this case will help embolden more nations to take actions that will save lives.” Indeed, countries across the world have now an important precedent to follow for the benefit of their people.

Leaked Big Tobacco document suggests it used convenience-store, anti-contraband groups as lobbyists

Oct 25th, 2016
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/leaked-big-tobacco-document-suggests-it-used-convenience-store-anti-contraband-groups-as-lobbyists?__lsa=950e-127a

Across Ontario and Quebec, city and town councils passed a wave of similar resolutions, urging provincial governments to crack down on the scourge of contraband tobacco.

It was no coincidence: the municipalities had all been lobbied by convenience-store and anti-contraband associations.

The same, seemingly independent groups have also called for a freeze on legal tobacco taxes, opposed bans on menthol cigarettes and, today, are fighting the federal government’s plan to require plain packaging for smoking products.

But a leaked Imperial Tobacco document suggests that 2012 lobbying campaign was no grassroots movement, and that the retail and contraband organizations have for years been used as surrogates by the cigarette giant to promote its own interests.

The internal PowerPoint presentation describes deploying the convenience-store groups and the National Coalition Against Contraband Tobacco — both at least partly funded by the tobacco industry — to promote fears about contraband, push for action against it and keep taxes down on legal ones.

The document focuses at length on what it calls Project M&M: “Mobilizing municipalities to pressure for Big Government action.”

It then refers to cases where the convenience-store associations or anti-contraband group garnered media coverage and convinced dozens of local councils to pass those resolutions.

One slide in the August 2012 presentation suggests Imperial’s tactics worked, noting there had been no increases in tobacco taxes since 2008.

“Our campaigns have delivered some success.”

The document — a presentation made to parent company British American Tobacco — was leaked to a public-health researcher by a company “whistleblower,” said Melodie Tilson of the Non-Smokers’ Rights Association.

“This presentation makes it really clear,” she said. “They are orchestrating various organizations and using them basically as their puppets to ensure governments don’t enact effective tobacco-control measures.”

Groups like the convenience stores mislead the public and elected officials when they fail to make clear their close ties to Big Tobacco — whose products are one of the biggest sources of chronic disease and death in Canada, said Tilson.

She and other anti-smoking advocates agree that contraband cigarettes — whose cheap prices may be encouraging more smoking — are an important issue.

But they note the groups have not only called for enforcement action against the illicit trade, but opposed tax increases, bans on flavoured cigarettes and even the move to hide tobacco “power walls” in stores.

In fact, there is other evidence of their close links to the industry, including at least three former tobacco-company executives who are now leaders in the Ontario, Quebec and national convenience-store associations.

It’s a bit peculiar that some are hanging their hats on this particular PowerPoint presentation, in that it addresses contraband … which I think all of us should be concerned about
The CEO of the Ontario group, David Bryans, for instance, worked at what is now JTI-MacDonald until 2002, at one time as director of domestic sales. He has led either the Ontario or Canadian convenience-store trade groups since 2003.

But the current president of the Canadian Convenience Stores Association, Satinder Chera, denied his group acts at the behest of the tobacco industry.

Cigarette companies are among 60 national firms who are part of the association, representing the stores’ major suppliers from soft-drink makers to oil companies, he said.

The association lobbies on a “slew” of issues, and makes no apologies for opposing contraband, said Chera.

“It’s a bit peculiar that some are hanging their hats on this particular PowerPoint presentation, in that it addresses contraband … which I think all of us should be concerned about.”

Still — like colleagues from his and the other groups at various legislative committee hearings — he refused to disclose what proportion of the association’s funding comes from the tobacco industry.

Jeffrey Guiler, an Imperial Tobacco spokesman, said in a statement that the company works with a variety of groups on a “multitude of issues,” including contraband.

“This criminal activity harms honest small-business owners. They care about their business and we work with their umbrella groups to advocate for their best interests.”

The National Coalition did not respond directly to the suggestion it is part of Imperial’s lobbying campaigns, but noted in a statement that its 18 member organizations have convinced governments to act against “this growing (contraband) threat.”

The Imperial Tobacco presentation lists the company, the convenience-store groups and contraband coalition side by side as conducting various campaigns for years to oppose illegal cigarettes and to “freeze taxes.”

Then it asks “how to keep the pressure on” and answers by describing the 2012 Project M&M campaign involving the same players, but leaning on Quebec politicians during an election year and on municipalities in two provinces.

Through such “front groups,” the tobacco company essentially co-opted politicians and other “innocents,” charged Cynthia Callard of Physicians for a Smoke-Free Canada.

“If I was a councillor in any of those municipalities that had passed a resolution in good faith,” she said, “I would feel used.”

Tobacco giants return to court in battle against new plain-packaging rules

Oct 18th, 2016
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://www.aol.co.uk/news/2016/10/18/tobacco-giants-return-to-court-in-battle-against-new-plainpackaging-rules/

Tobacco giants return to court today in their battle against the Government’s new plain-packaging rules.

They suffered what anti-smoking campaigners described as a ”crushing defeat” at the High Court in May.

The day before new regulations come into force, a judge in London declared that they were ”valid and lawful in all respects”.

Mr Justice Green rejected a judicial review action brought against Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt.

The judge declared: “There is no basis upon which I could or should strike down the regulations or prevent them coming into effect tomorrow.”

Philip Morris International, British American Tobacco, Imperial Tobacco and Japan Tobacco International had challenged the legality of the ”standardised packaging” regulations.

The judge heard submissions that the Standardised Packaging of Tobacco Products Regulations 2015 would destroy valuable property rights and render products indistinguishable from each other.

But he ruled: “The regulations were lawful when they were promulgated by Parliament and they are lawful now in the light of the most up-to-date evidence.”

His decision that the regulations were ”justified and proportionate in the public interest” came after Europe’s highest court rejected a series of legal challenges.

Action on Smoking and Health (Ash) chief executive Deborah Arnott, said at the time: “This landmark judgment is a crushing defeat for the tobacco industry and fully justifies the Government’s determination to go ahead with the introduction of standardised packaging.”

After the ruling, one of the companies, Philip Morris International (PMI) said it was ”disappointed”, but although there were ”strong grounds”, it would not be appealing.

Three Court of Appeal judges in London will now hear a challenge against the judge’s ruling, expected to last four days.

Introduction of plain packaging and new, enlarged graphic health warnings in the Australian state of Victoria

Oct 17th, 2016
by Editor.
No comments yet

Change in public support for the introduction of plain packaging and new, enlarged graphic health warnings in the Australian state of Victoria, 2011–2013

http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/early/2016/10/17/tobaccocontrol-2016-053238

Introduction

Since December 2012, all Australian tobacco products have been supplied in packaging that is a standardised drab brown colour with uniform fonts. The implementation of plain packaging coincided with the introduction of refreshed graphic health warnings (GHWs) that increased in size from 30% to 75% of the pack face, with coverage of the pack rear maintained at 90%.1

A slight rise in opposition to plain packaging among Australian smokers was reported immediately prior to implementation, followed by a significant increase in support, from 28% preimplementation (late 2011 to early 2012) to 49% postimplementation (early 2013).2 No data on the views of former or never smokers have previously been published.

Hungary regulates cigarette market further

Oct 5th, 2016
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://bbj.hu/economy/hungary-regulates-cigarette-market-further_122940

Regulation of electronic cigarettes will further strengthen in Hungary as e-cigarettes and related products are expected to be treated the same as regular tobacco products in Hungary, under a bill Cabinet Chief János Lázár submitted to Parliament Tuesday, according to Hungarian news agency MTI.

If the bill is approved by Parliament, e-cigarettes could only be sold in licensed tobacco shops, the text of the bill says, according to MTI, which apparently means that only national tobacco shops will be eligible to sell such products.

The text of the bill says the regulatory changes aim to reduce smoking in Hungary, especially among the younger generation, while the country is required to comply with certain European Union directives.

The bill Lázár submitted would also abolish a progressive healthcare contribution tobacco companies must pay, after the European Commission expressed concerns in July related to the discriminatory nature of the contribution.

Hungary will soon introduce plain and uniform cigarette packaging and ban the distribution of flavored tobacco products. Under a decree published earlier this week, retailers of e-cigarettes will be required to pay additional fees.

Plain packaging on cigarettes and tobacco due in May 2017

Oct 4th, 2016
by Editor.
No comments yet

Health warnings with graphic images of health consequences to dominate packaging

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/oireachtas/plain-packaging-on-cigarettes-and-tobacco-due-in-may-2017-1.2816748

Plain packaging on cigarette and tobacco products will come into effect in Ireland in May next year, Minister for Health Simon Harris has confirmed in the Dáil.

The Government has been adamant it will introduce plain packaging despite threats from the tobacco industry of legal action and the loss of 87 jobs in Mullingar following the decision to close the Imperial Tobacco manufacturing plant.

Health warnings with graphic images of the consequences of smoking will feature predominantly on packaging.

Mr Harris was speaking as he introduced the Health (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill – an amalgam of measures to amend four pieces of legislation relating to different aspects of health.

The Bill amends six sections of the Public Health (Standardised Packaging of Tobacco) Act 2015 relating to the regulation of the appearance of tobacco packaging.

Reducing appeal

Mr Harris said the regulation of the appearance of tobacco packaging is aimed at improving public health by reducing the appeal of tobacco products to consumers, and increasing the effectiveness of health warnings on the retail packaging of tobacco products.

It will also reduce the ability of the packaging of tobacco products to mislead consumers about the harmful effects of smoking, the Minister said.

The Bill will allow the Minister prescribe “the colour of the outer and inner surfaces of tobacco packaging, the form and manner of barcodes and the manner in which a name may be printed on tobacco products”.

The legislation also amends the Irish Medicines Board Act 1995 to allow fees to be paid to board members of the Health Products Regulatory Authority, former the Irish Medicines Board, which licenses medication in the State.

Board members will be paid €7,695 a year, resulting in an overall additional cost to the authority of about €61,560.

The Minister said some members might choose to waive their fee and he pointed out that the “One Person One salary” principle would apply to members of the board who are also in receipt of a salary from the public service.

‘Onerous responsibility’

Mr Harris said he was introducing the changes because “there is an onerous responsibility and significant time commitment placed on members of the authority and we wish to attract the highest calibre of people to apply to be members of such boards”.

A separate amendment to the Nursing Homes Support Scheme Act 2009 will mean that anyone applying for the nursing home Fair Deal scheme will not have to include for means testing certain ex-gratia payments received arising from Government decisions.

The legislation deals with four Government schemes including three linked to the Lourdes Hospital – the hospital’s Redress Board which involved 119 women; the hospital’s payment scheme which compensated women excluded from the Redress Board on age grounds, affecting 47 women; the Surgical Symphysiotomy Payment Scheme which made awards to some 400 women and payments made by the government or the German Contergan Foundation to 32 Irish survivors of thalidomide.

NZ Plain tobacco packaging bill passes third reading

Sep 11th, 2016
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://www.stuff.co.nz/timaru-herald/news/84079801/plain-tobacco-packaging-bill-passes-third-reading

Timaru North Street Dairy owner Jay Tailor does not think the Smoke-free Environments (Tobacco Plain Packaging) Amendment Bill will make a positive long term impact on smokers.

Plain tobacco product packaging will not help a Timaru smoker who spends $70 every five days on his habit quit, he says.

The Smoke-free Environments (Tobacco Plain Packaging) Amendment Bill passed its third and final reading in Parliament on Thursday to address the 4500 to 5000 premature deaths caused by smoking every year in New Zealand.

To prevent potential young smokers from starting through the attraction to branding and bright coloured labelling, it is hoped the plain standardised packaging, to be implemented by the end of next year, will deter them.

Though the planned plain packaging had not been finalised, it was likely to follow the Australian design of green-brown with 75 per cent of the front emblazoned with health warnings and the brand name in small plain font.

Jamie Robinson, a 28-year-old freezing worker, has smoked for 17 years. Robinson has used gum, patches and pills to give up smoking but still can’t kick the addiction.

He spends $70 on 50 grams of tobacco, filters and rolling papers which lasts him about five days.

He can recall the same amount of tobacco 10 years ago was about $35. His wages have not increased at the same rate.

“I get agitated if I run out. I’m not very fit … I cough a lot and get out of breath.”

Robinson’s late brother introduced him to his first cigarette at the age of 11.

He did not think packaging would make a difference to his habit or to young people as peer pressure to smoke was stronger.

“It’s not socially acceptable for adults to smoke anymore but kids don’t think ahead.”

Murray’s Barber Shop and Beauty Salon owner Geoff Gibson said he would rather see someone smoking while driving than drinking a bottle of liquor while driving.

He did not agree with the Government changing the packaging of “a legal product’ such as cigarettes when labelling on alcohol was remaining.

“The Government does not want to touch liquor and that causes social issues.”

Heather Sutcliffe has been the owner/operator of the Morgans Rd Four Square for 13 years. In that time, measures to curb smoking, such as graphic health warnings introduced in 2008 and hiding tobacco products in cabinets in 2012, had not stopped her regular smoking customers – or prevented new ones starting. She did not expect the new packaging to make an impact either.

“[Smokers are] addicted and try to stop but can’t manage it.”

At a cost of $25 on average for a packet of 20 cigarettes, people were still buying them, she said.

“We have parents come in with their kids and the kids are not allowed to have anything, but [the parents] still buy smokes. It puts families into hardship.”

Mountain View Dairy owner Kirtesh Shah did not think the bill would make a difference.

“People smoke anyway.”

And North Street Dairy owner Jay Tailor predicted once the bill was implemented, it may slow sales for the first six months but then it would return to pre-bill numbers.

A 24-year-old Timaru mother of two, who did not want her name to be published, admits she was attracted to smoking by the packaging at the age of 14.

“I used to buy a packet because of the colour [of the packaging] and buy a lighter the same colour to match it.”

She still smokes but said her children did not miss out on anything because what she spent would be money she spent on herself anyway.

“I buy smokes instead of getting my hair done.”

South Canterbury District Health Board smokefree facilitator Carmen Chamberlain said Australia had found the introduction, in 2012, of plain packaging, larger health warnings and new warnings, had reduced smoking prevalence beyond the pre-existing downward trend.

“It is estimated that plain packaging would have a similar overall effect as a five per cent price increase from a tobacco excise tax rise, without imposing an extra financial burden on low-income smokers,” she said.

“Overall, new evidence suggests that plain packaging will not only deter smoking initiation (its primary objective), but also stimulate cessation among smokers.

“Tobacco is a highly addictive product known to kill two out of three long-term users, and we welcome any steps that will support smokers to become smokefree.”

For face to face support to quit contact 0800 111 880 or check out the Facebook page Kick Ash South Canterbury.

← Earlier Posts Newer Posts →