Clear The Air News Tobacco Blog Rotating Header Image

Passive Smoking

Bill to raise minimum tobacco purchase age to 21

Aug 24th, 2015
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://www.tobaccojournal.com/Bill_to_raise_minimum_tobacco_purchase_age_to_21.53139.0.html

The Health Ministry plans to raise the minimum age for purchasing tobacco from 18 to 21 and ban displays of the products in shops, the New Straits Times said.

Smoking in vehicles with children as passengers also would be part of the legislation, the newspaper said on its website. A ministry spokesperson was quoted as saying the ministry has had a tobacco act ready for submission to Parliament since 2009, but unnamed factors prevented submission until this year.

Secondhand smoke exposure (SHS) and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in Chinese never smokers in Hong Kong

Aug 11th, 2015
by Editor.
No comments yet

Download (PDF, 693KB)

Public health group calls for levy on tobacco firms to help fight smoking

Jun 10th, 2015
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/jun/10/public-health-group-calls-for-levy-on-tobacco-firms-to-help-fight-smoking

Health organisations say tobacco industry should pay levy to help smokers quit and prevent young people picking up a habit that costs UK at least £12bn a year

Passive smoking causes more than 150,000 cases of illness in children every year, the Royal College of Physicians has found. Photograph: Jonathan Brady/PA

Sarah Boseley
Wednesday 10 June 2015 00.01 BST

The government should impose a new levy on tobacco companies to help pay for the harm they cause, according to 120 public health organisations launching a proposed new strategy against smoking.

By 2035, the proportion of the population who smoke should be brought down from 18.5% to just 5%, says the group, which is led by Action on Smoking and Health (Ash), Cancer Research UK and the British Heart Foundation.

They hope their proposed five-year strategy document, Smoking Still Kills, will be taken up by government in the same way that their previous reports have informed government policy. In 2008, they published Beyond Smoking Kills, named after the Labour government’s 1998 white paper, Smoking Kills, which proposed many measures that later became law, such as the ban on tobacco displays in shops.

Smoking costs the NHS at least £2bn a year and a further £10.8bn in wider costs to society, including social-care costs of more than £1bn, says the document. With the public health budget now set to lose £200m a year, the group says that the tobacco industry should pay an annual levy to offset those costs and assist with the effort of stopping young people picking up the habit as well as helping smokers to quit.

The tobacco companies, which last year made over £1bn in profit, are responsible for the premature deaths of 80,000 people in England each year, and should be forced to pay for the harm they cause.

Peter Kellner, chair of the report’s editorial board and president of YouGov, said: “The NHS is facing an acute funding shortage and any serious strategy to address this must tackle the causes of preventable ill health.

“The tobacco companies, which last year made over £1bn in profit, are responsible for the premature deaths of 80,000 people in England each year, and should be forced to pay for the harm they cause,” he said.

“Investing in evidence-based measures that reduce smoking is highly cost effective; for example stop smoking services have been shown to be one of the most cost-effective ways to improve people’s health. Placing a levy on tobacco companies to fund such work is a win-win – saving both money and lives.”

The report says that smoking is entrenched more than ever in disadvantaged households and calls on the government to address the health inequalities that result. In England more than 1.2 million children and 3 million adults live below the poverty line in households with smokers. The strategy would require tobacco companies to publish their sales figures broken down to local levels.

The current Tobacco Control Plan for England runs until the end of this year. Deborah Arnott, chief executive of Ash, said they had been working on the document for more than a year and they were hopeful that it would be favourably received by the government.

“This is an area on which there is lots of consensus,” said Arnott, pointing to the exchange on Twitter between the shadow health secretary, Andy Burnham, and the health secretary, Jeremy Hunt, over plain packaging. Burnham congratulated Hunt in setting a timetable for introduction and Hunt responded welcoming “a rare moment of consensus! Let’s hope both our children can grow up in a smoke-free generation”.

In last year’s autumn statement, the chancellor, George Osborne, said he would consult on a tobacco industry levy. That concluded in February, but Osborne said in March that the government would “continue the consultation on whether to introduce a tobacco levy through informal consultation with stakeholders”.

Arnott said that anti-smoking efforts must not slacken, or the decline in smoking rates would stop. When the Tobacco-Free Living initiative of Michael Bloomberg, the New York mayor, ended in 2010, smoking rates in the city began to rise again.

Prof Jane Dacre, president of the Royal College of Physicians, points out that smoking is still the UK’s biggest killer. “As the RCP’s reports show, we still need strong policies to help the disadvantaged groups in society most affected by smoking – such as people with mental illness and lower-income families,” she said. “In particular, our children need protection – passive smoking causes over 150,000 cases of illness in children every year.

“The new government has an opportunity to make a real difference by accepting and implementing the recommendations of Smoking Still Kills, which has overwhelming support from health and medical organisations, and local authorities.”

The bad-air days that make me feel ill

May 19th, 2015
by Editor.
No comments yet

I have never been the kind of high-minded person who shouted about the need to protect Mother Nature. I found all the arguments a bit too much. However, I have started to care about these issues because of concern about my health.

I suffer from a nasal allergy and am affected by emissions from car exhausts and from people smoking outside.

On those days when the air quality is really bad, I have difficulty with my breathing and my nasal passages are congested.

I wish smokers would think about other citizens who are affected by second-hand smoke and would not light up in public.

Also, I urge those with private cars to try wherever possible to use public transport.

Think about the health of your fellow citizens and of the planet.

Albury Ma, Tin Shui Wai

http://www.scmp.com/print/comment/letters/article/1803059/letters-editor-may-20-2015

Passive problem: Like banning idling engines, Hong Kong’s campaign against smoking in public is an embarrassing flop

May 8th, 2015
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://www.scmp.com/comment/insight-opinion/article/1788635/passive-problem-banning-idling-engines-hong-kongs-campaign

I was waiting for a friend outside a shopping mall in Tsim Sha Tsui recently when a woman stood right next to me and lit up a cigarette. I happened to be downwind as well, and was soon inhaling copious amounts of second hand smoke she was generously blowing my way.

I pointed out to her politely, with a friendly smile, that there was a dustbin for smokers about 10 feet away from us. She replied with a defiant “So? This is a public space.” It was all downhill from there.

As someone who finally succeeded in kicking the habit more than a decade ago, after numerous failed attempts, I have difficulty remaining passive about passive smoking.

In the heat of the moment, I had fleeting visions of snatching that cigarette out of her mouth and extinguishing it in her eye as I tried to control my temper. But she was all smoke and fire and it would have turned into a ghetto fight right there on the street, dignity be damned, if it hadn’t been for her much more reasonable husband or partner, who hastily ushered her away while she continued to give me the evil eye in parting.

Which now brings me to the point: is it just me or is everyone and their mum smoking in the streets and other public places in Hong Kong these days?

The government banned smoking in all indoor public venues back in 2004, providing much-needed relief to staff and non-smoking customers at bars and restaurants. Hong Kong now boasts of a blanket ban across all indoor and outdoor public venues.

If only everyone was cooperating, though. Walk into many bars and restaurants across Hong Kong now, and you’ll see the ban is a joke. I’ve been to bars where cigarettes are sold over the counter. What’s the government doing about it?

According to the Health Department’s Tobacco Control Office (TCO), the number of complaints about illegal smoking fell slightly from 18,079 in 2013 to 17, 354 last year. More than 29,000 inspections were carried out last year, which was a 6 per cent increase over 2013. More than 8,000 fixed-penalty notices and summonses were issued to offenders.

But let me explain what goes on behind the smokescreen of seemingly impressive statistics.

Speaking from personal experience, when you see someone smoking in a bar or restaurant and get worked up enough about it to make a complaint to the TCO hotline, be prepared for some serious frustration. To begin with, the service is contracted out to a call centre, so it’s no use venting at the person on the other end of the line if you have difficulty getting through or have to leave a message.

When they answer or return your call, you can provide details of your complaint, which they’ll pass on to the TCO, but don’t expect any action right away. Inspectors will raid the place days later and you will get an update after that, which could take a week or longer. By then you’ve probably lost interest.

In my case, I was persistent and bloody minded enough to visit the bar I had complained about and ask for details of the raid. The bartender’s account was a revelation.

Three or four TCO inspectors entered the bar where more than a dozen people were smoking at various tables one night. All the inspectors went straight for the first smoker in their line of sight, catching him with a cigarette in his hand, surrounding him and slapping him with the standard HK$1,500 fine. No action was taken against any of the other smokers because they had put their cigarettes down as soon as they saw the inspectors. Those who reacted late didn’t have to worry either, as the guardians of our lungs were too occupied with their primary single target.

Pardon the mixed metaphor, but being caught red-handed with a smoking gun doesn’t mean anything in the world of tobacco control in Hong Kong. All you have to do when inspectors burst in on you is put your cigarette down, cross your arms and pretend it’s not yours. The cigarette may still be lit, but despite the overwhelming evidence they will still accept your shamelessly fraudulent defence. In fact, as in the case of the raid I engineered, nobody else was questioned about all those ash trays full of burning cigarettes around the room. They all returned to puffers’ paradise when the inspectors left.

See the problem here? The powers that be have decided that bar and restaurant operators should not be held accountable for customers breaking the law. Patrons are lighting up at their own risk. Understandably, operators are reluctant to ask customers not to smoke for fear of losing their patronage. Plus they’re not risking anything themselves except lung damage, which is happening anyway because of air pollution in Hong Kong.

I asked health minister Ko Wing-man recently why the government wouldn’t adopt a simple solution – hold the operators of food and beverage establishments responsible. He said it’s not something the government is considering.

Fine. So you can put this right up there with the fiasco that is the government’s ban against idling engines. Officials ended up granting so many exemptions to so many whingers in the transport industry, what started as a bold anti-pollution initiative finished as an embarrassing flop.

I’ve also observed a not-so-subtle change in society’s attitude towards smoking. In the ‘90s, when fitness fads, public awareness and political correctness had stigmatised smoking, the trend in movies, especially from Hollywood, was to shun the “cool dude” images of the past decades of brooding heroes with cigarettes dangling from their lips. Nowadays, it looks like it’s become “cool” again to smoke, judging by the number of movies with protagonists lighting up on screen. It’s even gone a step further with tobacco being replaced by marijuana.

Perhaps that’s one factor encouraging people to contribute to roadside air pollution like so many walking, talking, smoke-belching menaces to society. I’m not attacking those who smoke within the confines of their homes, or in designated smoking areas, without bothering anyone.

I know what it’s like to be addicted to cigarettes, and I’m definitely not out to challenge or antagonise those who cannot or will not stub out the habit. It’s a free society and people have a right to indulge – they understand the risks and they’re making a lifestyle choice.

I’m just saying if you blow smoke in my face with your lifestyle choice and then pick a fight when I object, you’re risking a fat lip. How are you going to look cool with your cigarette then, dude?

Further curb smoking in public areas

Apr 22nd, 2015
by Editor.
No comments yet

We all recognise the harm of smoking. Thousands of lives are lost each year to diseases caused by cigarette smoking and second-hand smoke.

To safeguard public health, the Hong Kong government has taken a number of actions to control tobacco use.

To further protect the public, I would like to suggest that we adopt the measures taken in Shinjuku, Japan, where it is forbidden to smoke while walking on the street.

These controls will also help smokers, who would otherwise be tempted to smoke while running an errand or if they are on their way to some place, to cut down.

I would like to suggest that no smoking should be allowed on open public staircases where we often have to navigate our way around smokers. Further, we can have clearly marked “No Smoking” boundary boxes outside all outdoor MTR entrances and exits, giving enough room for people to comfortably enter or exit without being directly exposed to second-hand smoke.

The exit D of Admiralty MTR station is clearly one spot where this can be applied. In future, these measures could be extended to entrances to recreational facilities and major buildings like stadiums, sports grounds and hotels.

H. Shah, Mid-Levels

Source URL (modified on Apr 21st 2015, 5:22pm): http://www.scmp.com/comment/letters/article/1772936/letters-editor-april-22-2015

What You Should Know About E-Cigarettes & Cancer

Mar 29th, 2015
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://www.collective-evolution.com/2015/03/29/what-you-should-know-about-e-cigarettes-cancer/

E-cigarettes are hugely popular right now, appearing to be a trendy new social activity that appeals to smokers and non-smokers alike. While e-cigarettes do not contain tobacco, they do contain nicotine from tobacco plants. This is designed to aid smokers in working towards quitting their use of cigarettes.

As more research surrounding e-cigarettes becomes available, it becomes increasingly clear that there are dangers associated with their use, and that at this point, they can be seen as an uncontrolled experiment on consumers.

Negative health effects should be considered for both users and those taking in second-hand smoke. Instead of releasing cigarette smoke, which many know the dangers of, e-cigarettes release an aerosol (commonly but inaccurately called vapor) that many believe isn’t harmful.[1] But the more we learn about what exactly is in that aerosol, the more cause we have for concern.

The Positives of E-Cigarettes

There have been many clear signs of reduction in smoking as a result of using e-cigarettes. If used properly, one could effectively cut down their cigarette use and even kick the habit altogether.

While this is certainly not the only way to quit smoking, it may be a good short-term option for some people. However, it is also important to note the health effects e-cigarettes can have on everyone involved – for both direct users and those inhaling second-hand smoke.

One could also decide to make there own juice for use in their e-cigarette which can cut down greatly, or even completely, the harmful chemical intake.

The Negative Effects of E-Cigarettes

A study done by The German Cancer Research Center outlined key pieces of information we should consider with regards to the use of e-cigarettes.

It was found that e-cigarettes and their emissions are not as safe as originally thought and that they contain cancer causing substances like volatile organic compounds, acetone, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, benzopyrene as well as silicate and various metal particles.[2]

While this might still be seen as a step forward for those looking to quit smoking, it’s important to be aware of the dangers, and also to keep our minds open to other options for quitting.

The German Cancer Research Center states: “Until proof is provided that the products do not involve any health risks, their sale is an uncontrolled experiment, possibly at the cost of consumers’ health.”

As outlined in their study:

“The liquids contain ingredients that on short-term use irritate airways and may lead to allergic reactions and which may be harmful to health when inhaled repeatedly over a prolonged period of time.

The aerosol of some liquids contains harmful substances (formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein, diethylene glycol, nickel, chromium, lead).

The functionality of electronic cigarettes can vary considerably (aerosol production, nicotine delivery into aerosols).

Adverse health effects for third parties exposed cannot be excluded because the use of electronic cigarettes leads to emission of fine and ultrafine inhalable liquid particles, nicotine and cancer-causing substances into indoor air.”

Furthermore, according to the CDC in a recent statement, “If you only cut down the number of cigarettes you smoke by adding another tobacco product, like e-cigarettes, you still face serious health risks… Smokers must quit smoking completely to fully protect their health – even a few cigarettes a day are dangerous.” [3]

What Else Can You Do To Quit Smoking?

There are a number of routes one can take to quit smoking that are entirely safe and effective. Each person is unique and thus various methods will work for different people. GreenMedInfo has put together a great list of options including the research and evidence that goes with their efficacy. You can check out their list on how to quit smoking naturally here.

Exhaled Electronic Cigarette Emissions: What’s Your Secondhand Exposure?

Mar 15th, 2015
by Editor.
No comments yet

Download (PDF, 247KB)

Secondhand E-Cig Vapor Can Penetrate Paint. What Does That Mean For Your Lungs?

Mar 13th, 2015
by Editor.
No comments yet

Jenna Birch

https://www.yahoo.com/health/secondhand-e-cig-vapor-can-penetrate-paint-what-113444498677.html

The emissions from e-cigarettes are just water vapor, right? Wrong.

The “vapor” emitted from an e-cig is actually not water vapor, but more like an aerosol gas, as the emissions consist of tiny particles that contain nicotine, glycerin/glycols, artificial flavorings and preservatives, among other chemicals, according to a new study from RTI International.

And the warm, humid conditions of the lungs seem to prevent these aerosol particles from evaporating — which is cause for concern. This is just one of the learnings gleaned from an expert panel that convened on Thursday to discuss the latest research in vaping.

The takeaway: E-cigarette emissions — whether you yourself are vaping or if you’re standing next to someone who is — have an immediate effect on your acute lung function.

A big concern is the size of the particles, according to Jonathan Thornburg, Ph.D., author of the study and a senior research engineer and director of Exposure and Aerosol Technology at RTI International. “They are smaller than 1,000 nanometers, 50 times smaller than the width of a human hair,” he says. “They can stay airborne for a long time, and penetrate into the deepest part of our lungs.”

The extremely minute size of the particles actually ups their penetrative powers, which is causing experts to wonder what the impacts will be for tissues inside the body. Stanton Glantz, Ph.D., professor of medicine at University of California, San Francisco and director of the UCSF Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, says the aerosol particles emitted are so tiny they can actually seep through the paint on painted walls. If you scaled that representation to size, the pores in the paint would look something like Swiss cheese in comparison to the particle size — which might cause imminent problems.

We may see vastly different health effects result from of e-cigarette use than we do from conventional cigarettes. Because they don’t burn anything and there’s a lack of combustion, fewer cancer-causing chemicals are emitted. However, e-cig emissions are still composed of ultra-fine particles with nicotine and numerous other potentially damaging additives. “Even some of the flavorings are dangerous — like cinnamon, if you inhale it, can be quite toxic,” Glantz says. “It’s a different risk profile. Some toxicologists think it’s inappropriate to even compare e-cigarettes to tobacco cigarettes.”

Glantz thinks we may eventually discover more heart-related consequences associated with vaping. “Exposure to the ultra-fine particles inhibits blood vessels to get larger when they need to, and makes platelets sticky, which leads to more heart attacks,” he says. “The particle effects are a big factor. The oxidizing agents also oxidize cholesterol, which leads to heart disease and heart attacks.”

And that doesn’t just go for e-cig emissions. Similar health issues also might result in areas of high air pollution, too. “It’s important to understand that heart attacks are triggered,”Glantz continues. “The ultra-fine particles lead to inflammation, which can actually trigger a heart attack.”

Ultimately, when asked flat-out about safety, the panel concluded that e-cigarettes are probably not as harmful as standard cigarettes. “We know that the level of carcinogens and toxins are lower,”says Thornburg.

That said, there was no endorsement for unending use.

“They’re not as dangerous as cigarettes, but they’re not safe,”Glantz says. “You are better off not using them. The question is how much safer are they than regular cigarettes?”

To put it in better perspective, Glantz also offers this: “They are less toxic than a cigarette, but the cigarette is probably the most toxic consumer product ever designed. It’s a low bar.”

And although many ingredients are regarded as generally safe by the FDA upon ingestion, the effects upon inhalation aren’t well understood or studied, leaving a need for better clarity — especially with the prevalence of e-cigarettes taking off in recent years. Since 2007, e-cig sales have doubled each year, finally reaching the $1 billion mark in 2013.

Roughly 13 percent of adults have tried vaping, one-third of whom had never before smoked conventional cigarettes, according to Annice Kim, Ph.D., a senior social scientist in the Public Health Policy Research Program at RTI. “Eight percent of current tobacco smokers also use e-cigarettes,” says Kim, who is currently tracking vaping trends on social media and among key demographics, like kids and teens.

“The trends are alarming,” she says. “Seventeen percent of 12th graders have used e-cigarettes in the past month. To date, 40 states have prohibited e-cigarette sales to minors, but as of January 1, 2015, only four states have banned e-cigarette use in schools statewide.”

Understanding Effective Coalition-Building

Jan 29th, 2015
by Editor.
No comments yet

Download (PDF, 218KB)

← Earlier Posts Newer Posts →