January, 2017:
Beijing’s Smoking Ban Cuts Nicotine Fiends, Though 22 Percent Still Toke
https://www.thebeijinger.com/blog/2016/12/30/beijing-butts-out-smoking-ban-results-200000-fewer-smokers
While Beijing residents accustomed to smoky restaurants, bars, and other hazy interiors doubted that the city’s latest ban on lighting up would have any effect, it’s actually been a slow but steady success: Most F&B venues report good compliance with the rules, and state media recently reported that 200,000 fewer Beijingers are lighting up these days.
Based on findings jointly released at the end of 2016 by the Beijing Patriotic Health Campaign Committee and the Beijing Municipal Health Commission, the percentage of local adult smokers has gone down from 23.4 percent in 2014 to 22.3 percent this year.
Stricter smoking restrictions were announced in 2014, and put into effect citywide in 2015, barring anyone from puffing at eateries, workplaces, public transport and other public places. However, skeptics assumed that those rules would be less than successful, seeing as a 2011 ban did little to rid the capital tobacco haze (though, according to the BBC, those rules were more vague).
Such doubts were quickly dispelled in the summer of 2015, however, when the rules began to be earnestly enforced. State media says more than 127,000 restaurants, bars and other businesses were inspected since June of last year, leading to 5,300 people being forced to at least stub out their cigarettes, while of those 2,719 people in violation of puffing had to pay fines, which totaled RMB 142,500 (USD 20,700) between June 1 and November 30 last year.
Longtime F&B blogger and renowned man-about-town Jim Boyce vividly recalls just how different a night out in Beijing was before the ban. “Eating, drinking, and smoking were the trinity of activities for people going out back then,” he recalls. “I remember a night at places like First Floor, The Den, or Fubar would leave your clothes reeking of smoke — but that was also true of many bars and restaurants.”
Many Beijigers would argue that the capital’s livehouses were the smokiest of all local joints. I can recall the popular Wudaoying livehouse School Bar being so ashy on New Years Eve 2012, when indie troop Hedgehog drew such large throngs of cigarette-puffing fans that one member of my party opted to leave mid set, complaining her eyes were stinging so bad she could hardly see the band.
School Bar owner Felix Liu says such smoke-adverse patrons breathe easier at the livehouse now. “Most people follow the rule and smoke outside and in our yard, because no one actually wants to stay in a hazy room. But we still have some guests that smoke indoors, and we have to get our staff to stop them.”
Other venue owners say the new clear-air era of Beijing’s public spaces went easier than expected. Pink, manager at Temple Bar, says the stricter smoking ban has been successful. “Most customers are happier about the air quality inside our bar now, and smokers are understanding about the rule and go outside to smoke.”
Tristan Macquet, co-owner at Cafe de la Poste, attributes such compliance to the ban’s financial consequences, saying past capaigns “used to be words without actions, but this time [the authorities] really went all out. Fines for smokers and the restaurants were an incentive. Asking for people to report smokers has its pros and cons but it proved effective. We saw it at the time even in Chinese restaurants on Guijie: smokers were asked to go out to have their cigarette.”
Macquet says Beijing’s bar scene has boded well after the ban, adding: “for Café de la Poste, I definitely believe it was the right thing to do. Of course smokers groaned a little at first, but not for long. And the whole atmosphere of the restaurant got better afterwards. Soon it was as if it had always been like this. I think that air quality is such an issue now, especially in term of awareness, that customers really prefer it this way.”
One of the proprietors at Bungalow Tiki Bar says venue owners had just as much, if not more, to gain from the ban. “You reduce table surfaces getting burned, ash on the floor, and, when you have a small place like ours, you avoid the smell. Our bar would be a smoke pit if we’d been open before the smoking ban. It’s changed the whole Beijing nightlife scene. I know a few bars where you can still smoke inside, and now when I go in it’s quite horrible.”
And while the general acceptance, along with assertive enforcement, both seem promising for those opposed to tobacco, not all of the findings in the Patriotic Health Campaign Committee and Municipal Health Commission study were positive. CCTV, for instance, notes that a mere 30 percent of the capital’s adults said they understood the ill effects caused by lighting up. But at least 16.8 percent of them put in the effort to give up the cigs in 2016, a 1.9 percent uptick compared to 2014. We would have been equally interested, however, to learn just how those strong willed Beijingers gave up smoking. Vapes? Tobacco patches? Nicorette gum? Or did they go cold turkey?
Hopefully the next report will clear the air in that regard.
Metro TV welcomes plan to ban cigarette ads
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2017/01/14/metro-tv-welcomes-plan-to-ban-cigarette-ads.html
Metro TV news director Suryapratomo said Friday that the private TV station welcomed lawmakers’ plan to ban cigarette advertisements on television and radio, saying that a ban would not significantly affect its revenue.
“Lawmakers have the right to make any regulation. But I hope the House of Representatives carries out comprehensive discussion before making a final decision,” Suryapratomo told The Jakarta Post on Friday.
He added that a ban would have minimal impact on Metro TV, as cigarette ads contributed only a small portion to the company’s revenues.
“So please do ban [cigarette ads on TV] if you want. Metro TV does not make much from cigarette ads. We also don’t air cigarette ads frequently on our TV station,” Suryapratomo emphasized.
TV stations are currently allowed to air cigarette ads only after 10 p.m. However, the government may issue a total ban on cigarette ads on TV and radio, with a draft bill comprising stipulations of a ban awaiting deliberation at the House.
The House is expected to start deliberations this month and has assured that it will include various stakeholders in the discussion to gain comprehensive insight.
How spotting someone vaping triggers the same cravings as real tobacco
Seeing someone use an e-cigarette encourages smokers to light up, a study has warned. Even though they don’t look like a normal cigarette, ‘vape pens’ can trigger the same cravings as real tobacco products.
http://dailytimes.com.pk/infotainment/14-Jan-17/how-spotting-someone-vaping-triggers-the-same-cravings-as-real-tobacco
A study by Chicago University found the devices were a ‘potent trigger’ to encourage young adults to smoke as they mimic the same behaviour – inhaling and exhaling – and use the same hand and mouth movements as regular cigarettes.
The findings cast doubt on how well the smoking ban has worked to put cigarettes ‘out of sight’, as vaping becomes common.
Although the 18 to 35-year-olds in the study who were influenced by e-cigarettes already smoked, the findings also raise concerns about a ‘gateway effect’ encouraging people who smoke to vape as well.
The study, published in journal Nicotine & Tobacco Research, used 108 volunteers ranging from light smokers to those who went through a pack of cigarettes a day.
When they saw someone use a vape pen, they were more likely to want a cigarette or reach for one.
Vape pens look more like pens than cigarettes but still deliver a nicotine hit and puff out vapour.
Research leader Dr Andrea King, director of the clinical addictions research laboratory at Chicago University, said, “Vape pens look different but they share too many salient features of the act of smoking – including inhalation, exhalation and hand-to-mouth behaviours. This makes them a potent trigger, encouraging people to smoke.
Their impact is roughly equal to watching someone light up a cigarette. They made the young adults in our study want to smoke.”
The decade-old UK ban on smoking in public places was designed to make the habit seem less normal by keeping smokers out of offices and pubs.
However, despite calls from the World Health Organisation for countries to consider a similar ban on e-cigarettes, they are becoming increasingly popular.
To measure their effect on susceptible young adults, the researchers planted a pretend volunteer among their study group who smoked either a conventional cigarette or a vape pen.
Both cues increased the desire among research subjects for a cigarette or an e-cigarette. Then 26 of the group were tested 20 minutes later by placing a cigarette on a tray, along with a lighter and an ash tray.
Told they would receive a cash reward of 20 cents for every five minutes they resisted, those who had seen the person smoking a cigarette or vape pen managed to hold out for only 20 minutes.
Dr King said, “Our study focused on a classical Pavlovian trigger, as seeing someone smoke is a known potent cue that can induce others to smoke. We did not expect that the vape pen would be as potent a cue as the regular cigarette, but it was as potent.”
Smoking kills, so stop protecting it
http://www.nst.com.my/news/2017/01/204184/smoking-kills-so-stop-protecting-it
JAMES Bond isn’t the only one with a licence to kill. The World Health Organisation reports that smoking costs the global economy RM4.5 trillion a year, and will take eight million lives annually by 2030.
For a species that has invented fire, travelled to space and split the atom, we are still paying an industry to kill us. Mankind is indeed strange.
Decades of research have shown that smoking can be fatal. So, we are often asked: if cigarettes cause such harm, why are they allowed to exist?
One challenge is the separation of the problem — the health industry sees tobacco as a health issue, while businesses and governments see it as an economic driver.
But the same WHO report also states that the cost of smoking far outweighs the revenue from tobacco taxes.
Treating smoking-related diseases drives up the cost of healthcare. In 2005, Malaysia’s Health Ministry spent 26 per cent of its budget to treat those diseases, which accounted for 0.74 per cent of its gross domestic product.
There are also the environment, productivity and human development — smoking pollutes our air and water, and smokers are 30 per cent more likely to miss work (for longer periods, too). In some families, money for cigarettes is taken from household essentials.
No other industry causes as much damage to its users and non-users alike — and remains legal.
Instead of protecting this industry, we urge the nation to support tobacco control efforts in Malaysia.
Tobacco control can work. A study published in the United States this month reports that efforts since 1964 had resulted in eight million fewer smoking deaths.
We should want the same for our fellow Malaysians.
MANDY THOO
National Cancer Society Malaysia
Legality of tobacco product in question
Two of the world’s largest tobacco companies are at odds over whether a new tobacco product being launched in New Zealand is illegal.
This comes after the identity of a mysterious tobacco product, which prompted concern on the part of a University of Otago academic, was revealed as a product called Iqos.
The Philip Morris product heats tobacco, rather than burning it. The Ministry of Health says it has contacted Philip Morris “in relation to activities relating to the Iqos product”.
A member of the public, who declined to be named, said they were at a launch party for the product in Auckland last month. There was free alcohol at the event, which he said was run by marketing agency Brand Spanking and another company. People were educated about how to use the product and given free samples.
After a story on the then-mystery product was published in the Otago Daily Times yesterday, British American Tobacco (BAT) head of legal and external affairs Saul Derber made contact to say it was not behind the product.
Derber confirmed the product was Iqos and said it was BAT’s belief it was illegal in New Zealand.
He pointed to the Ministry of Health website, which stated “heat not burn” products were considered tobacco products for oral use, and their sale was prohibited under the
Smoke-free Environments Act 1990.
BAT had a similar product on sale in Japan but did not have plans to launch it in New Zealand because it was not legal under New Zealand law, Derber said.
He questioned the way the product was launched and a job advertisement that stated it would be marketed throughout New Zealand. He would not be drawn over whether such activity breached rules banning tobacco advertising.
“All I can tell you is that we wouldn’t do that.”
He said the mystery product was not the “Voke Inhaler” mentioned as a possibility in yesterday’s ODT. It was not yet approved for sale in New Zealand and had recently been sold to a company not connected to BAT.
Philip Morris responded late yesterday, saying the section of the law referenced on the ministry’s website was put in place in the 1990s, to address American-style chewing tobacco.
“It has absolutely nothing to do with heated tobacco or e-cigarettes,” a spokesman said.
“Our product fully complies with all relevant legislation in New Zealand.”
The company was launching the product in New Zealand because of widespread interest in alternatives to conventional combustible tobacco products, the spokesman said.
Iqos could help the Government’s push to a smokefree 2025 goal, he said.
It was available in more than a dozen markets and in Japan alone, more than one million smokers had quit cigarettes and used Iqos. The man who was at the Auckland launch of Iqos, at The Wharf, said people were given the opportunity to try the product, which involved putting half-sized tobacco cigarettes in a device that heated but did not burn tobacco.
The man at the launch party likened the product to a cross between ecigarettes, which involve heating liquid often containing nicotine, and normal cigarettes and said there were mixed responses from those who tried it.
Ministry of Health tobacco control programme manager Jane Chambers said in an emailed statement the ministry was aware of the product launch.
“The ministry is concerned with any activity that actively promotes the sale or notifies the availability of any tobacco product.
“The ministry has contacted Philip Morris in relation to activities relating to the Iqos product.”
She said if the product contained tobacco, it was potentially illegal to market it at events and “educate” people about it.
The revelations come after a job advertisement sought 20 people to work for “experiential marketing” agency Brand Spanking and be trained regarding a new tobacco industry product.
Brand Spanking did not reply to follow-up questions yesterday. Director and creative strategist Mark Pickering said in an email on Wednesday night the agency “does not discuss client work with the media”.
– Otago Daily Times
Cigarette ad ban aims to protect children, lawmaker says
The House of Representatives’ plan to ban tobacco companies from advertising their products on television and radio aims to protect young audiences, says a lawmaker.
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2017/01/13/cigarette-ad-banaims-to-protect-children-lawmaker-says.html
Lawmaker Elnino M. Husein Mohi argued that cigarette advertisements could be easily viewed by children.
“Broadcasting companies run the industry using state-owned frequency, which is supposedly used to help build good character,” Elnino told The Jakarta Post on Friday, adding that smoking did not help build positive character. “The plan to ban cigarette advertisements is basically meant to protect youngsters from the campaign”.
The politician from the Gerindra Party explained the House had included stipulations to ban such advertisements in a draft bill on broadcasting to amend a prevailing law passed in 2002. The current draft was initiated by the House.
Elnino, a member of House Commission I overseeing defense, foreign affairs and information, however, ensured that Commission I would open the deliberation process to the public to include relevant stakeholders in the discussion.
“We are aware of the complexity of the issue. Therefore, deliberations will later invite insights from various stakeholders, including the broadcasting industry, so that we can obtain a comprehensive understanding before passing the bill into law,” he emphasized. (dmr)
Clear The Air Request to Members to Show Support for 85% Graphic Health Warnings
Dear Clear the Air members and interested readers/researchers
Background
This is an urgent request for support for the Hong Kong Government policy on upgrading the 2007 graphic warnings from 50% to 85% coverage of the area, doubling the number, and adding a quitline number – not that far off plain packaging.
Opposition from the vile and heinous child addicting tobacco industry has been intense, particularly as HK is seen as an exemplar for the Asia-Pacific region, with an effect more far-reaching than just the 7 million who live here.
The industry and their paid front groups are bombarding Government and Legislative Council with letters, and it would be very helpful and save lives if you could sign the (sample) letter below and send to Legco before 17th January 20917 when the important meeting will take place to discuss this important health prevention measure.
Send the email, you do not have to be a permanent resident of Hong Kong.
…………………………
Date: 13th January 20917
Panel on Health Services
Legislative Council
Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China
panel_hs@legco.gov.hk
Re: 85% Graphic Tobacco Pack Warnings in Hong Kong
I/we support the Hong Kong government proposal to upgrade the current graphic pack warnings, to 85% coverage as outlined below.
I AGREE that my submission be made available to the media as per Legco requirements and the public and be uploaded onto the Legislative Council website.
Yours sincerely,
Signed:
Name:
Title:
Organisation:
Contact email/verifiable details/:
Briefing paper from the government to Legco:
LC Paper No. CB(2)386/16-17(05)
DETAILS OF THE PROPOSAL
The Proposal
3. At present, the Smoking (Public Health) (Notices) Order (Cap. 371B) stipulates that the health warning should cover at least 50% of the two largest surfaces of the packet or retail container of cigarette, cigar, pipe tobacco and cigarette tobacco in accordance with the prescribed forms and pictures. The existing batch of health warning pictures has been in use since 2007. The Government now proposes to change the prescribed forms of health warnings and the indication of tar and nicotine yields on the packet and retail container of cigarette and relevant tobacco products.
4. We propose to amend the prescribed forms (including specifications) of the health warnings, the size and number of the health warnings and messages for the packet or retail container of cigarettes and tobacco products under the Smoking (Public Health) (Notices) Order as follows –
(a) the area of the graphic health warning shall be of a size that covers at least 85% of two largest surfaces of the packet or the retail container;
(b) the number of forms of health warning will increase from six to
twelve;
(c) the following health warning message is to be included in the
existing statement “HKSAR GOVERNMENT WARNING” / “香
港特區政府忠告市民” –
“QUIT SMOKING FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS” /
“請為你的下一代戒煙”; and
“QUITLINE: 1833 183” / “戒煙熱線：1833 183”;
(d) the indication of tar and nicotine yields should be printed on a side adjacent to a typical flip-top lid of a cigarette packet, excluding the portion which forms part of the lid and the two largest surfaces, presented in a conspicuous place of such side of
the packet.
Born in Russia after 2014? You might never be able to buy cigarettes.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/born-russia-2014-might-never-able-buy-cigarettes-195105247.html
If Russia’s Ministry of Health gets its way, the country’s youngest citizens will never be able to buy cigarettes. On Monday, Russian media reported that the agency’s 2017-2022 antitobacco plan includes a ban on cigarette sales to any Russian born in 2015 or later, according to Radio Free Europe, a US government-funded publication.
Currently, Russians may legally purchase cigarettes at the age of 18. The Ministry of Health’s proposal – which still requires government approval – would take away this option beginning in 2033, when those Russians born in 2015 will turn 18.
This proposal comes on the heels of a report from the National Cancer Institute and the World Health Organization, which found that 33.8 percent of adult Russians smoke daily. Smokingrelated mortality cost the country’s economy $24.7 billion in 2006.
Recommended: Sochi, Soviets, and czars: How much do you know about Russia?
Russia’s Ministry of Health clearly views this situation as a problem. But its proposal to ban future generations from buying cigarettes breaks with conventional wisdom on how to reduce smoking.
“Government efforts to reduce cigarette consumption by restricting supplies have been largely unsuccessful,” researchers wrote in a 2001 report published on behalf of the World Bank, World Health Organization, and the Human Development Network. “Banning tobacco is unrealistic and unlikely to work.”
Sixteen years later, most policymakers still aren’t talking about bans. Instead, US experts credit a “winning combination” of policies, including cigarette taxes and graphic warning labels, with bringing the number of smokers to a record low. Similar techniques have also been used in Russia. A 2009 anti-smoking campaign plastered graphic anti-smoking ads around Moscow, and the country declared the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics “smoke free.” The Ministry of Health’s most recent proposal would also increase restrictions on where Russian smokers may light up, banning smoking in cars with children. Public health measures like these may already be showing results:
According to the World Bank, the percentage of Russian men who smoke dropped from 67 percent in 2000 to 60 percent in 2012.
But some want those numbers to drop faster, and see a birth-year ban like Russia’s as the best path forward. Barring those born after a certain date from buying cigarettes was first proposed by Jon Berrick, an Australian-born mathematician who teaches at the National University of Singapore.
In a 2013 article published in the journal Tobacco Control, Berrick noted that “More than 80% of smokers start by age 18, and virtually all by 26. Therefore, preventing youth initiation may be the key to ending the tobacco epidemic.” He argued that simply restricting cigarettes to 18 – and-up consumers undermined this goal. Instead, this practice created a “rite-of-passage effect” that linked smoking with adulthood in the eyes of teenagers, and encouraged those near the age of 18 to light up.
Citing evidence that “smoking initiation predominantly occurs in the company of same-age peers,” Professor Berrick proposed that governments take cigarettes off the table for all those born after a certain date, a plan he calls “Tobacco-Free Generation.” Activists have pressed for this policy in Singapore, Britain, and the Australian state of Tasmania – all cited by the a Russian Ministry of Health representative in explaining their proposal. In January 2016, Balanga City in the Philippines became the first – and, so far, the only – jurisdiction to implement the policy.
Could a tobacco-free generation emerge in Russia? Matthew Meyers, the president of the Coalition for Tobacco-Free Kids, thinks so.
“Russia faces one of the most serious tobacco problems in the world and is to be commended for the strong steps it has taken in recent years,” he writes in an emailed statement to The Christian Science Monitor. “We believe it is appropriate for countries like Russia, which are facing a crushing burden from tobacco use, to explore innovative and multifaceted approaches to rapidly reduce tobacco use like the current set of proposals now being considered in Russia.”
But others see challenges ahead. Smokers’-rights activist Olga Beklemishcheva told Russian media that “there will be a black market” for cigarettes if the ban goes through, pointing to the trade in currently banned drugs.
Berrick, the first proponent of such a ban, has previously downplayed the possibility that a ban would fuel illegal trade.
“By avoiding forced cessation among existing users,” he wrote in 2013, “the measure creates no new denied addicts needed to fuel a black market.” Officials in Russia’s Ministry of Health seem to agree.
Ex-Indiana health commissioner: Raise smoking age to 21
http://www.indystar.com/story/opinion/2017/01/13/feldman-raise-smoking-age/96542626/
Raising the minimum legal age to 21 is not so farfetched and is rapidly gaining momentum. This has already occurred in New York City, Cleveland, Chicago, Kansas City and more than 170 other localities. A number of states, including Alaska, New Jersey, Utah and Alabama have already increased the legal age to 19, and two states, Hawaii and California, have passed legislation to raise the legal age of tobacco sales to 21. Any chance in Indiana? Many would think Indiana would probably be one of the last states to enact such a law, but I anticipate such a measure will actually be considered this legislative session.
The prestigious Institute of Medicine issued a report that concluded that raising the minimum legal age for tobacco sales to 21 would have substantial positive effects on our nation’s health. This would delay or reduce the number of adolescents and young adults who initiate tobacco use and ultimately reduce the prevalence of adult smoking.
Increasing the legal age of purchasing tobacco makes a lot of public health sense:
Eighty percent of smokers begin daily smoking before age 19, and 95 percent initiate smoking by age 21. Four out of five smokers become daily smokers before age 21.
•Between the ages of 18 and 21, many young smokers move from experimentation to regular daily use. It is a critical time of solidifying tobacco addiction.
•A major focus of the tobacco industry is promotion to college-age young adults. The highest prevalence of smoking is between the ages of 21 and 25 years of age.
•Ninety percent of individuals who purchase tobacco for minors are between the ages of 18 and 21.
•According to the IOM, children between the ages of 15 and 17, those most vulnerable to nicotine addiction due to differences in brain physiology, would benefit the greatest by enacting a 21 sale age.
•According to an internal tobacco industry document: “If a man has never smoked by age 18, the odds are three-to-one he never will. By age 24, the odds are 20-to-one.”
Raising the minimum age to 21 would reduce smoking by 12 percent (even much higher percentages in youth) and smoking-related deaths by 10 percent. Almost 250,000 fewer premature deaths and 50,000 fewer deaths from lung cancer among people born between 2000 and 2019 would result.
But what of the argument that if one is old enough to vote and serve in the military, one should be old enough to smoke? One solution has been to exempt active-duty military from the law. But consider these facts: The drinking age is 21 in all states, and tobacco is more dangerous than alcohol. And further, tobacco is also the only legally-available product that kills the consumer when used exactly as intended.
Feldman is an Indianapolis family physician and is a former Indiana state health commissioner. Email him at richarddfeldman@gmail.com.