Global Tobacco Control Convention Proposes to Limit Cigarette Flavor Additives

Public health officials from all around the world decided to restrict or ban flavor additives which make tobacco products more tobacco control WHOattractive to new smokers, especially to youngsters.
The representatives from 172 countries that have signed on to the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control also assented to recommend that tobacco manufacturers divulge ingredients they use to health authorities.
The tobacco producers opposed these guidelines, stating that millions of people would loss their jobs and economies would be broken in case countries implement them.
“There were many protests against these guidelines. But I think that this is a significant achievement because countries have showed unity and that public health is more important than some industry interests. In case this guidelines will be adopted, it could bring to a particular decline of new smokers,” stated, spokesman Tarik Jasarevic.
Working out special guidelines for how governments have to regulate aromatic and flavor additives which make harsh cigarettes more pleasant to smoke has been a main goal since this treaty took effect five years ago.
United States has already signed this convention and it is among many countries which supervise these additives.
“Australia, Canada and France also control the additives. It may be done differently, either making a list of ingredients that are prohibited or ask that tobacco manufacturers get a license for any new additive,” Jasarevic stated.
Chocolate, mint and strawberry flavors are among hundreds of ingredients which are added to tobacco products.
“All that is added in food is also added in tobacco, there are so many additives and chemicals that making a fixed list would be quite difficult or even impossible,” said, Antoon Opperhuizen, a Dutch toxicologist.
The 172 countries agreed to:
• Support Uruguay in its defense against Philip Morris International, the largest tobacco manufacturer, which states that country has infringed a commercial agreement by demanding graphic warning on 80 % of cigarette packages. In case World Bank arbitrators accede, Uruguay might be forced to pay Philip Morris millions of dollars.
• Creating a working group in order to establish regulations on levying tobacco products in ways that could lessen tobacco use and assure continued funding for the tobacco control convention.
• Advice that smoking cessation programs should be paid by national health systems and that governments should assure qualified experts to help people quick their bad habit.
Other important goals were not discussed during the convention, such as regulations for supporting tobacco farmers to switch to other crops.
The International Tobacco Growers Association states that this treaty endangers the livelihood of 20 million tobacco growers around the world.

Spain anti-smoking law

Spaniards will wake up on Sunday to find that what many consider an inalienable right — puffing on a cigarette with a drink at their smoking ban in Spainlocal bar — has overnight become illegal.
On January 2, one of the laxest anti-smoking laws in Europe will have become one of the strictest, along with that of Ireland.
Spanish smokers will no longer be able to light up in bars, restaurants and cafes as new legislation takes effect that bans smoking in all enclosed public spaces.
It will also be illegal to smoke in children’s playgrounds and on school or hospital grounds, according to the law, which received final approval from parliament on December 21.
Spain already has an anti-smoking law, in force since January 2006. But it is less restrictive than that in other European countries, which bans smoking in the workplace, on public transport and in shops.
It allows owners of bars, restaurants and cafes to decide whether to allow smoking or not. Most, faced with a drop in business, naturally chose to permit their customers to light up.
The new measures take effect nearly seven years after Ireland became the first European country to outlaw smoking in public places, a move that unleashed a domino effect across Europe in favour of smoke-free bars and cafes.
But the new Spanish law has many professionals in the hospitality industry fuming.
The government has “imposed a total ban without regard to the figures that we have presented, or without an objective and rigorous study,” said Jose Luis Guerra, vice president of the Spanish Hotel and Catering Association (FEHR).
He said bars and restaurants “have been very badly hit by the economic crisis,” suffering “31 months of falling sales.”
He estimates the ban could spark a further 5.0-percent drop in sales in restaurants, about 10 percent in bars and 15 percent in night clubs — just as the country is struggling to emerge from the crisis.
His association has proposed a system similar to that in France, where separate smoking areas with ventilators are permitted, he said.
Dominic Brisby, the chairman of Spanish tobacco company Altadis, a unit of Britain’s Imperial Tobacco, called it “one of the most radical anti-smoking laws in the world.”
“It is even more extreme than in Ireland, as there they can smoke outdoors, and here it is prohibited in some situations,” he told Spain’s leading daily El Pais.
“It seeks to turn those who smoke in bars into second-class citizens, and it will fail because it will cause enormous economic damage, for those who smoke and for those who don’t.”
One smoker, Ignacio, a 42-year-old soldier who was puffing away in the crowded bar in Madrid, condemned it as “a backward step, especially considering the lifestyle here we have here in Spain, the social life in places like this.”
Health Minister Leire Pajin has backed the law as “a decisive step in the defence of the health of the Spanish people.”
She said it could even be a boon for bars and restaurants as it would encourage non-smokers, especially those with families, to go out more. But she acknowledged it would “demand changes” which would “take time” as “habits cannot be changed in a day.”
And some in the industry even agree.
“It will obviously hurt us financially,” said Alfonso Castro, co-owner of El Borbollon restaurant in central Madrid.
“But in a few months people will get used to it, as they did in Italy, Germany and England, and there won’t be any problem.”
A non-smoker himself, he said that 28 years working in a smoky environment had left him with problems with his blood circulation.
Mario Flores, the manager of the Monte Nevado restaurant in Madrid’s Chueca nightlife district, agreed that small establishments such as his would not suffer as customers would quickly get used to the new restrictions, although night clubs would be hard hit.
The new law could even have one unforseen social benefit, according to an opinion piece in El Pais.
Once the law takes effect “we will be seeing new knots of people at doorways exchanging complaints, cigarettes and phone numbers..,” it said.
“After the cigarette, new couples return to drinks or work, to further enjoy a conversation started around a lighter’s spurt of flame.”
© 2010 AFP

Reynolds targets quitters marketing Camel Snus

R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. has launched a national campaign marketing Camel Snus as a potential New Year’s resolution solution for smokers.
David Howard, a Reynolds spokesman, said that it is the company’s first campaign aimed specifically at encouraging smokers to switch to Camel Snus.
“A lot of adults make a decision to quit smoking this time of the year,” Howard said. “For those making that attempt, but still wanting the pleasure of tobacco, we’re saying ‘Here’s an option.’ ”
Bill Godshall, the executive director of SmokeFree Pennsylvania, said he believes that Reynolds is the first large U.S. tobacco company to encourage smokers to quit smoking by urging them to switch to a smokeless product.
The ads have run in magazines such as Entertainment Weekly, People, Sports Illustrated, Time and US Weekly, as well as free and alternative publications.
In the “2011 smoke-free resolution” ad, Reynolds said it supports smokers who have decided to quit using tobacco. “But if you’re looking for smoke-free, spit-free, drama-free tobacco pleasure, Camel Snus is your answer,” the ad’s text reads.
The ads also contain a large warning that “smokeless tobacco is addictive.”
Howard said that the “drama-free” reference is aimed at adults who want to use tobacco products in restaurants, bars and other social outlets where smoking is discouraged or banned.
Reynolds’ print ads are part of a “take the pleasure switch challenge” campaign tied to an age-restricted Camel website.
Matt Myers, the president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, said that Reynolds should “stop its insidious marketing of tobacco products in ways that seek to discourage smokers from quitting and keep them hooked on nicotine.”
“The ads are trying to take advantage of people trying to end all uses of tobacco,” Myers said. “If a smoker does that, switch to smokeless, they’ll be worse off than if they had quit.”
Snus comes in a small pouch that is placed between the lip and gum. The tobacco is pasteurized, not fermented, and it contains less moisture and salt than moist snuff. It also does not require the consumer to spit, Reynolds said.
Although Reynolds does not dictate the price of Camel Snus at retail, the price is comparable to a premium pack of cigarettes, which typically sells for $4 to $4.50.
Reynolds has been the most aggressive U.S. tobacco manufacturer with snus. It began its first trial in April 2006, with national distribution commencing in January 2009.
The ads do not make any claims of reduced health risks with a potential switch.
Some anti-smoking advocates are encouraging the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to allow the advertising of smokeless tobacco as less harmful than cigarettes if such claims can be proven through research.
For example, a study of smokers ages 18 to 70 — released in November by the Tobacco Use Research Center of the University of Minnesota — found that “quit rates for Camel Snus were comparable to those obtained with nicotine replacement therapy.”
“A properly powered study is needed to determine if use of smokeless tobacco products with higher nicotine content can be an effective path to smoking cessation, perhaps especially among smokers who are not interested in or previously were not successful with using approved pharmaco therapies.”
Some anti-tobacco advocates oppose marketing smokeless products under cigarettes’ brand names because of those brands’ appeal to youth.
The 2010 Monitoring the Future survey, released Dec. 14, found that smokeless tobacco use is rising among eighth, 10th and 12th graders, including at 16 percent among 12th-grade boys. The survey is conducted by the Institute for Social Research at the University of Michigan.
Michigan researchers said that factors leading to the increases in smokeless-tobacco use likely included increased advertising and availability of these products.
Myers said that research of smokeless products must evaluate what harm is caused by the product along with how the product is marketed. “If a smokeless product reduces the risk of disease, but results in more people using tobacco, it could result in more deaths, not fewer,” Myers said.
Godshall said it will be interesting to see if the FDA tries to claim “that Reynolds’ new ads make Camel Snus an unapproved smoking-cessation drug device.” He said that the FDA has made such a claim with electronic cigarettes.
By RICHARD CRAVER
rcraver@wsjournal.com

On smoking and driving

It should have been easy to see that driving under the influence was going to come up when voters gave the thumbs up to medical smoking drivingmarijuana in Michigan. Marijuana is an intoxicant that has some effects similar to alcohol and opiates. It would seem to be a good thing for medical marijuana patients to not drive while under the influence of the medication. That’s a matter of public safety, and not just because police have been reported to lay in wait near compassion centers where marijuana smoking takes place in order to arrest drivers suspected of intoxication. Other patients have been charged with DUI after having been stopped for other traffic violations and divulging that they were medical marijuana patients.
“There are some things you don’t need to tell, don’t have to and shouldn’t,” says Brandy Zink, a spokesperson for the Michigan Chapter of Americans for Safe Access, a pro-medical marijuana organization.
Hmm, maybe a variant on the old Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy for gays in the military is pertinent to the medical marijuana patient.
Zink notes that the odor of marijuana in your vehicle is probable cause for police to suspect intoxication, and the presence of marijuana might give police a clue. Either of those things could lead to a blood or urine test to figure out if you’ve ingested marijuana. Bad behavior might qualify you for closer scrutiny too.
This is way more complicated than it sounds and prompts a lot of questions that have not been answered on the legal tip. For instance, police test drunk-driving suspects for alcohol, the intoxicating ingredient in beer, wine and distilled spirits, in their blood. A blood alcohol content of .08 or higher makes you a drunk driver in Michigan. When it comes to marijuana, a legal limit for the presence of THC hasn’t been established. What’s more, the majority of marijuana tests are for metabolites created from marijuana as the body processes it; they mostly do not test for THC, the part of marijuana that gets you high. While some tests do identify the THC level, most tests are for 11-COOH-THC (also known by several other names), a byproduct metabolite that does not get you high but stays in the body much longer than the psychoactive ingredient.
Under the prohibition-zero tolerance approach, police need only prove the presence of these metabolites to establish that someone had used marijuana. This is fairly new territory. For law enforcement in the past, the focus was on arresting users for possession, not for impaired driving.
In June, the Michigan Supreme Court ruled that, for registered medical marijuana patients, the presence of byproduct metabolites was not proof of intoxication at the time of citation — although there have been cases where police have charged drivers with medical marijuana cards for the presence of marijuana metabolites other than THC in their bloodstream since then. None of them have made it to trial.
Still, how does ingesting marijuana affect driving? In the past, there was no reason to figure out a level where legal impairment begins. Now medical marijuana patients want to know: How long do I have to wait before I can drive?
There is no established level of THC at which you are legally impaired for the purpose of driving. However, there are lots of opinions by experts and others involved. Attorney Matt Abel, of Cannabis Counsel TLC, says that THC, the substance in marijuana that gets you high, is out of your bloodstream in “four to six hours, although that doesn’t mean someone has to wait that amount of time before they drive.”
That seems based on the alcohol model where there is an established legal level. Paul Armentano, deputy director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws and expert witness on marijuana science issues, begs to differ. Armentano says THC intoxication for smoked marijuana has “about a two-hour window. If administered orally, we could be talking as long as four hours. This is a subject that has been studied. I’m taking calls on this subject every day now.”
Armentano has also studied up on motor impairment caused by marijuana. “Acute intoxication from marijuana that could adversely affect motor skills lasts about 60 minutes. A study published just this past year on psychomotor impairment said that experienced users of the drug really didn’t perform differently after they used marijuana.”
Indeed, a study published this past fall in the journal Psychopharmacology, titled “Tolerance and cross-tolerance to neurocognitive effects of THC and alcohol in heavy cannabis users,” reported: “In conclusion, the present study generally confirms that heavy cannabis users develop tolerance to the impairing effects of THC on neurocognitive task performance. Yet, heavy cannabis users did not develop cross-tolerance to the impairing effects of alcohol, and the presence of the latter even selectively potentiated THC effects on measures of divided attention.”
Basically, they found that while drivers who smoked marijuana did not perform that badly on driving tests, adding alcohol to the mix was really bad. Nobody is saying that it’s OK to drive while impaired by marijuana. However, when compared to alcohol use, the harms were much less. Or as Abel puts it, “marijuana is way safer than alcohol.”
A 2007 research report from the Society for the Study of Addiction, “Developing limits for driving under cannabis,” suggests a THC level of 7 to 10 nanograms per milliliter, which is analogous to .08 percent blood alcohol content in terms of driving impairment.
But that just addresses the high. There are actually some 400 different chemicals in marijuana, and indications that some of them are useful in treating some 30 different ailments. This prompts a few more questions from Abel: “What gives you the munchies? What relieves spasm? What causes short-term memory loss?”
By Larry Gabriel

Research Report on China’s Cigarette Industry – 2010-2012

China is the world’s largest producer and consumer of tobacco products. The tobacco industry in China plays an important role in the national economy, and is an important source of jinshen chinaChina’s government fiscal revenue. China’s tobacco industry is a highly controversial industry. On the one hand, as a government monopoly, the tobacco industry brings enormous profits and taxes to the Chinese government and its state-owned tobacco producing and marketing enterprises. On the other hand, the support has grown for the requirements to restrict the tobacco industry due to the harm of smoking in China and the whole world.
In 2010, there are about 410 million smokers in China, accounting for about 30% of the total population, and about one quarter of the world’s smoking population, of which more than 20 million are women. As a special commodity, the cigarette plays multiple roles of necessity, gift, etc. in social life. To Chinese smokers, cigarettes not only act as daily consumer goods but also are endowed with sociality and other meanings. With sustainable development of the Chinese economy, Chinese smokers are increasing their demand level of cigarettes, and medium and high-grade cigarettes are occupying increasingly a higher proportion.
In 2009, China’s tobacco industry produced 2290.90 billion cigarettes, increasing by 4.10% YOY; the sales volume of cigarettes reached 2286.30 billion, increasing by 3.70% YOY. The market concentration of China’s tobacco industry is on the rise. The number of China’s cigarette brands could even reach 2,400. In 2002, the number of cigarette brands produced in the whole industry reached 758, which reduced to 582 in 2003. With the intensified efforts to integrate China’s cigarette brands, the number of brands produced in China’s cigarette industry had fallen to about 150 by the end of 2009. China’s tobacco industry are undergoing M&A, and some M&A activities have improved the competitiveness of enterprises, while some others just aim at being in the vogue to a large extent.
Currently, high import tariffs keep imported cigarettes from entering China in large numbers. Therefore, foreign cigarettes with big advantages in price and quality are entering Chinese market by smuggling in large numbers. Take “”555″” cigarettes owned by British American Tobacco Co., a maker of famous Dunhill cigarettes, Ltd. for example, “”555″” cigarettes are imported cigarettes with a large sales volume in China. The sales price of each package of legally imported “”555″” cigarettes (20 cigarettes for each package) in China’s reaches over USD 2, while that of smuggled “”555″” cigarettes (20 cigarettes for each package) produced by Vietnam in Chinese market is only USD 1.5, indicating the obvious price advantage. The cigarette smuggling market scale in China is estimated to be over USD 5 billion annually, while the import value of China’s legal cigarettes reported by China Customs was only USD 76.02 million in 2009, which still sees a downward trend in 2010.
China’s cigarette market has a great fascination for the world’s tobacco enterprises. China’s cigarette market will be open to the outside world sooner or later, in spite of the unknown consumed time in this process.
Following and more information can be acquired from this report:
* Status Quo of China’s Cigarette Industry
* History and Status Quo of China’s Cigarette Monopoly System
* China’s Cigarette Price System
* China’s Major Domestic Cigarette Manufacturers and Their Cigarette Brands
* Retail Prices of Major Brands in Chinese Market
* Import & Export Situation of China’s Cigarette Industry
* Investment Opportunities in China’s Cigarette Industry
Following people are recommended to buy this report:
* Cigarette Manufacturers
* Cigarette Trade Enterprises
* Related Enterprises of Cigarette Industry Chain
* Investors and Research Institutions Focusing on China’s Cigarette Industry
Key Topics Covered:
1 Overview of China’s Cigarette Industry, 2009-2010
2. Shanghai Tobacco (Group) Corp. and Its Holding Companies
3 Analysis on Major Cigarette Enterprises in Northeast China
4 Analysis on Major Cigarette Enterprises in North China
5 Analysis on Major Cigarette Enterprises in the Central Plains of China
6 Analysis on Major Cigarette Enterprises in Central and South China
7 Analysis on Major Cigarette Enterprises in Southwest and Northwest China
8 Analysis on Major Enterprises in East China
9 M&A Analysis on China’s Cigarette Industry, 2009-2010
10 Development Prediction on China’s Cigarette Industry, 2011-2012
Selected Charts
Chart China’s Cigarette Yields, 2001-2009 Chart Sales Volume of China’s Cigarette, 2001-2009 Chart Number of Chinese Smokers, 2001-2010 Chart First Concern of Chinese Smokers in Purchasing Cigarettes Chart Number of China’s Cigarette Brands with Annual Sales of over 50 Billion, 2003-2009 Chart Brands and Sales Volumes of China’s Cigarettes with Annual Sales of over 50 Billion, 2009 Chart Sales Volume Concentration of China’s Cigarettes with Top 10 Sales Volumes, 2002-2009 Chart Standards for Grade Classification of China’s Domestic Cigarettes Chart China’s Cigarette Export Volume, 2001-2009 Chart China’s Cigarette Export Value, 2001-2009 Chart China’s Cigarette Import Volume, 2001-2009 Chart China’s Cigarette Import Value, 2001-2009 Chart China’s Major Tobacco Groups and Their Major Cigarette Brands, 2009-2010 Chart Number of China’s Cigarette Manufactures, 2002-2010 Chart Number of China’s Cigarette Brands, 2002-2010 Chart Cigarette Yields of Shanghai Tobacco (Group) Corp., 2001-2010 Chart Big Events of M&A in China’s Cigarette Industry
Companies Mentioned:
* Beijing Cigarette Factory
* China National Tobacco Guizhou Industrial Co., Ltd.
* China Tobacco Anhui Industrial Co., Ltd.
* China Tobacco Chuanyu Industrial Co., Ltd.
* China Tobacco Guangdong Industrial Co., Ltd.
* China Tobacco Guangxi Industrial Co., Ltd.
* China Tobacco Henan Industrial Co., Ltd.
* China Tobacco Hubei Industrial Co., Ltd.
* China Tobacco Hunan Industrial Co., Ltd.
* China Tobacco Jiangsu Industrial Co., Ltd.
* China Tobacco Jiangxi Industrial Co., Ltd.
* China Tobacco Shaanxi Industrial Co., Ltd.
* China Tobacco Shandong Industrial Co., Ltd.
* China Tobacco Shenzhen Industrial Co., Ltd.
* China Tobacco Xiamen Industrial Co., Ltd.
* China Tobacco Zhejiang Industrial Co., Ltd.
* Gansu Tobacco Industry Co., Ltd.
* Hebei Baisha Tobacco Co., Ltd.
* Heilongjiang Tobacco Industry Co., Ltd.
* Hongta Group
* Hongta Liaoning Tobacco Co., Ltd.
* Hongyun Honghe Tobacco (Group) Co., Ltd.
* Inner Mongolia Kunming Cigarette Co., Ltd.
* Jilin Tobacco Industry Co., Ltd.
* Shanghai Cigarette Factory
* Shanxi Kunming Tobacco Co., Ltd.
* Tianjin Cigarette Factory
* Zhangjiakou Cigarette Factory Co., Ltd.
For more information visit http://www.researchandmarkets.com/research/c12763/research_report_on

World Health Organization to regulate flavored tobacco

Approximately 170 countries were willing to adopt legal measures last Friday in order to regulate flavored tobacco products, citing concerns that the youth is lured by World Health Organizationflavorings in tobacco and become addicted to smoking.
During the conference organized by the World Health Organization (WHO) for the countries that ratified WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control that took place in a resort in Uruguay, known as the 4th meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the WHO tobacco convention, the participants decided to draw up guidelines on the ingredients of cigarettes and other tobacco products.
The parties as well planned to make a protocol on illegal tobacco trade. In addition, they discussed the issues of tobacco pricing and taxes, as well as the so-called electronic cigarettes.
The electronic cigarettes are battery-operated devices that look like cigarettes, but don’t contain tobacco, delivering pure liquid nicotine to the user, while emitting vapor, which resembles cigarette smoke. Electronic cigarettes are selling in many countries these days, and are promoted as a quit-smoking device in several countries.
“Tobacco products contain hundreds of harmful chemicals used to make smoking more attractive, mainly focused on the young people,” stated Antoon Opperhuizen, vice chairman of the World Health Organization Tobacco Laboratory Network.
Rob Cunningham from the Canadian Cancer Society admitted that the tobacco companies are introducing more and more flavored cigarette brands to the international tobacco market, including chocolate, cherry and apple-flavored cigarettes to attract adolescents to smoking.
Representatives of the tobacco companies, which are strongly against restrictions on flavored tobacco stating they would harm the industry and small business, set up a tent near the hotel where the WHO conference was held to declare their opinion on the issue.
Tobacconists state flavored tobacco accounts for half of worldwide consumption and say they grow and use three kinds of tobacco leaves: Burley, Virginia and Oriental. Therefore, they are concerned that the restrictions would cause prohibitions of some of the best-selling brands.
“If they ban manufacture of the American blend, which is produced from a mix of Virginia, Burley and Oriental tobacco, it would affect nearly six million growers and manufacturers across the world,” declared Antonio Abrunhosa, a tobacco-farmer from Portugal who is also executive director of the International Tobacco Growers’ Association (ITGA).
Several articles of the framework convention promote introduction of guidelines to control ingredients of tobacco products and to require tobacco producers to disclose information regarding the ingredients and emissions of tobacco products.
The measures would “virtually put an end to production of Burley and Oriental sorts of tobacco, which would be a discrimination that would not resolve the public health issuers since smokers would simply opt for other tobacco products,” stated ITGA vice-president Jorge Nestor.
Uruguay, which hosted the conference, is facing a legal action from the world’s largest private tobacco company Philip Morris International for the country’s anti-smoking regulations. But the participants of the conference, several international health organizations and even New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg supported Uruguay in the legal fight with PMI.

Smoking Ban Arrives Jan. 1 for Navy's Submarine Sailors

The USS Michigan got a jump on a dozen other Kitsap-based submarines, and its sailors are breathing easier because of it.Smoking Ban for Navy's Submarine Sailorsy
The Blue Crew of SSGN-727 went smokeless at 7:27 a.m. on July 27, matching the boat’s hull number. By midnight on Dec. 31, the rest of the Navy’s subs must follow suit.
On April 8, the Navy said it would ban smoking cigarettes below decks on submarines to protect sailors from secondhand smoke. The move was in response to a 2009 study by the Naval Submarine Medical Research Laboratory that showed the ill effects on nonsmokers.
The Michigan was the first boat from Naval Base Kitsap, and possibly in the Navy, to kick the habit, said Submarine Group 9 spokesman Lt. Ed Early. It wasn’t alone, however.
As of Oct. 22, 21 of the Navy’s 71 submarines had gone completely smoke-free, Early said. Efforts to get an updated number from Submarine Force in Norfolk, Va., last week proved unsuccessful.
There are about 3,500 submariners based at Naval Base Kitsap. If 31 percent of sailors smoke, as a 2008 Department of Defense survey contends, then nearly 1,100 local submariners will have to either quit or subdue the urge to smoke while they’re on patrol.
Submariners can still use smokeless tobacco, though the Navy highly discourages it. Ten percent of them do, according to the survey. They can take cigarettes onto the boat and smoke them pier side or while on liberty. If they get caught sneaking a puff on board, the commanding officer will determine the proper response.
“The goal is to educate smokers about the effect on smokers, and if they want to quit, to help them quit,” Early said.
Sailors have had seven months to quit, and a lot of help. The Navy provided smoking-cessation classes, counseling, and nicotine patches and gum at Naval Hospital Bremerton, its Bangor health clinic and a substance-abuse rehabilitation center at Bangor, said hospital spokesman Doug Stutz.
“They have qualified counselors who have been accredited and have a thorough knowledge of how to deal with anybody who wants to undertake the process of weaning away from the nicotine habit,” Stutz said.
That includes spouses and girlfriends, Stutz said.
The hospital is working with Submarine Group 9 leadership and submarine commanding officers so the crews have ample resources to kick the habit, Stutz said. Each crew has an independent duty corpsman who oversees the program on the sub and is responsible for the gum and patches.
A week from the deadline, all submarines should be close to smokeless, though there might be some stragglers, Early said.
“We’ve put the word out to all of our boats. We expect when Jan. 1 rolls around, the submarine force will be absolutely smoke-free,” he said.
Anybody with access to the naval hospital can get help to quit smoking, not just submariners, Stutz said. Call (800) 422-1383.

Difficulties of Tobacco Control

NANCHANG, – Local legislators in an east China city have watered down a smoking ban previously touted as China’s toughest, China smokersreflecting the tremendous challenges tobacco control efforts face in China, the country with the largest number of smokers.
Lawmakers in Nanchang City, Jiangxi Province, met Friday to resume deliberations and vote on the controversial bill concerning second-hand smoke. But the vote was postponed.
“Voting was postponed because lawmakers disagreed,” said Xu Yongli, an official with the Municipal People’s Congress in Nanchang. “It has not been decided when the draft will be voted on.”
The revised draft eases the smoking ban in office buildings to include only “public areas” and delays the implementation of a total ban in ticket offices and waiting lounges from 2011 to 2015. Moreover, the ban on smoking in restaurants, bars and entertainment venues is delayed until 2015 from the original 2013.
Chen Huilin, a senior municipal lawmaker in charge of drafting, said the regulation was revised to make implementation easier.
The regulation was previously trumpeted as China’s toughest smoking ban because it completely banned smoking in government offices, restaurants, bars, and other entertainment venues — a first for a Chinese city.
Experts have blasted the revisions.
Yang Jie, a tobacco control officer with Chinese Center for Diseases Control and Prevention (CDC), said the watering down of the regulation “seriously violates” authorities’ tobacco-control commitments.
China ratified the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control in 2003, pledging measures to effectively curb tobacco consumption.
Health experts argue that “smoke-free” means no smoking at anywhere inside and only in designated smoking areas outside.
A partial ban on smoking indoors — by setting up “smoking areas,” for example — does not fully protect non-smokers from the potentially harmful effects of cigarette smoke.
“How do we define ‘public areas’ in office buildings? What about toilets and corridors? The provision results in only a partial smoking ban,” said Yu Xiuyan, a public health researcher at the China University of Political Science and Law.
China has no comprehensive tobacco-control law at the national-level. It largely relies on local legislation to create “smoke-free” environments.
“Government officials should take the lead and fulfill the country’s tobacco-control promise,” Yu said. “Even without legislation, smoking should not be allowed in government office buildings.”
The legislation first appeared in July and was vigorously opposed. Some called it “unrealistic” goal for a second-tier city.
About 30 percent of Nanchang’s 4.64 million permanent residents are smokers. The city’s health bureau estimates that half of the city’s population is exposed to second-hand smoke.
China is home to over 300 million smokers. About 740 million people are exposed to second-hand smoke, according to China CDC estimates.
Smoking a cigarette in public in Nanchang is normal, as it is in other Chinese cities.
Economic and health experts say the cost of smoking in China is alarming: it causes one million deaths and injury to millions of others every year. It also cuts into workforce productivity and burdens the nation’s health care system.
Source: Quotemedia

New Law in South Dakota Creates Mixed Signals In Establishment

The smoking ban passed in November that South Dakota voters thought was pretty clear is proving instead to be hazy.south dakota
While most of the owners of Yankton’s bars, restaurants and casinos have ensured that smoking no longer takes place in their establishments, one business is taking a different approach that is leaving some citizens fuming.
Since the ban took effect Nov. 10, there have been at least five reports to police of people smoking at Tobacco Road in the 900 block of Broadway Avenue. The latest report was received Friday evening, though when police arrived they found no one smoking and ash trays in the establishment clean.
Because smoking is being allowed to occur in Tobacco Road — something representatives of the business don’t dispute — the owners of other establishments who once enjoyed the patronage of smokers are crying foul.
“We’re losing business every day,” Gary Boom of Boomer’s Lounge told the Yankton City Commission at its Dec. 13 meeting. “Some of us are even thinking about laying people off. It’s a big problem — a lot bigger than the petty offense of smoking.”
Yankton isn’t the only community with questions about the new law. Sara Rabern, a spokesperson for South Dakota’s attorney general office, said it has received hundreds of inquiries regarding the ban.
*
“There are no official opinions (from the attorney general’s office) at this time, and no one has requested any official opinions,” she said. “But because of the wide variation of inquiries … the AG’s office has basically just been talking with the state’s attorneys and city attorneys on these issues. It’s a petty offense, so the AG’s office can’t really get involved in prosecution. It’s coming down to the state’s attorneys determining how they are going to handle it.”
Rabern said she expects the law to be the subject of various pieces of legislation in the 2011 legislative session.
The most pressing issue in Yankton is the interpretation of a portion of the law that reads, “Any person that owns, manages, operates, or otherwise controls a public place or place of employment shall inform persons violating [that no person may smoke tobacco or carry any lighted tobacco product in any public place or place of employment].”
The owners of Tobacco Road say they are in full compliance with the law.
“This is not an ambiguous statute, and there can be only one interpretation,” they told the Press & Dakotan. “We would suggest our critics actually read the new law or have someone explain it to them.”
They are not alone in their view. Yankton County State’s Attorney Rob Klimisch said that, while he is still considering how he will enforce the smoking ban, it appears that is the correct interpretation.
“If you read the law, it looks like the owner’s only responsibility is to let people know (what it says),” he stated. “Their responsibility ends at that spot.”
Klimisch said he will consult with other counties to see how they plan to handle the situation and then have a meeting with law enforcement and affected business owners. He expects that to occur in the first two weeks of January.
“I’ll let all the affected people know what is expected of them and where things are going to go,” Klimisch said. “I want everybody to be playing by the same rules. It’s not fair that you have a business interpreting something a little differently.”
However, one area of the ban needs no explanation, he said. Those caught smoking will be fined $25. Klimisch stated that he has seven such complaints filed by police officers and, if after reviewing the reports it is determined those individuals were smoking, he will press ahead with issuing fines.
District 18 Rep. Bernie Hunhoff (D-Yankton) said legislators put the burden of the law on smokers and not the business owners out of the belief that South Dakotans are law-abiding citizens.
“Everybody has an obligation to know basic laws — like stopping at stop signs, buckling your seat belt, paying your taxes on time and, now, not smoking indoors in public places,” he said. “Obviously some bar owners are less enthusiastic about the new law than others, but the primary responsibility is on the smoker to obey the law. You can play games with any law, but this one is simple: You don’t smoke indoors in public places. Ninety-nine percent of the people know what it means and will obey the law. The other 1 percent will eventually come around.”
With that in mind, Hunhoff said legislators crafting the ban didn’t expect local law officers to be patrolling businesses looking for smokers.
“That would probably be about as effective as patrolling gravel roads for stop-sign violations,” he said. “We rely on the integrity and honesty of South Dakotans to follow the laws, and the vast majority do just that.”
District 18 Sen. Jean Hunhoff (R-Yankton) agreed that the intent of the law is clear in that the public did not want any exceptions to smoking indoors at a public place. Local governments will have to figure out how to best enforce the ban, she said.
“Other communities in the state are being proactive and working with businesses to create outdoor smoking options,” Sen. Hunhoff stated. “The city has the authority to renew liquor licenses in this community. In their review process for license renewal, non-compliance with statues could be taken into consideration for non-renewal. Local control can be proactive and/or punitive in dealing with noncompliance.
“This does also raise the question of, does a citizen who enters an establishment expecting a smoke-free environment — but smoking is occurring — and gets sick have any cause for civil litigation against the owner of the business for not maintaining a smoke-free environment?” she added.
None of Yankton County’s three legislators mentioned plans to introduce legislation to amend the law.
“I’m inclined not to support any changes right now,” said District 18 Rep. Nick Moser (R-Yankton). “We’re still very early on in seeing what the impacts are going to be. I think you need to give these local governments an opportunity to work some of these things out before you just go and automatically change the law.”
Rep. Hunhoff said he would be open to clarifications and improvements.
“Someone in state government — probably in the health department or the attorney general’s office — should write a summary on the do’s and don’ts of outdoor smoking areas,” he said. “I’ve been contacted by bar owners and contractors who have good questions and seem to have a hard time getting answers.”
As officials work their way to finding a definitive approach to enforcing the law, it’s the police officers and sheriff’s department employees on the front lines who are stuck in the middle of public expectations of the law and the limits of the letter of the law.
“Everybody’s got their interpretation,” said Yankton Police Chief Brian Paulsen. “The only thing everybody is in agreement on is, it’s a horribly written law.”
He was the police chief in Plattsmouth, Neb., when that state passed a similar smoking ban.
“It was made to create a fair and even playing field,” Paulsen said. “South Dakota did not do that well.”
He said officials with Tobacco Road had told him they would actively prohibit smoking in the establishment after it was raised as an issue before the City Commission in November. However, Paulsen later learned that smoking was being allowed again and that a flier was being distributed to inform smokers of the law.
“(The owners of Tobacco Road are) covering (their) bases, but (they are) leaving (their) patrons out there to hang,” he said. “To me, what (they are) doing is totally disrespectful. (They are) being driven by the almighty dollar, and eventually I think it will come back to bite (them). (They aren’t) hurting anybody but the rest of the businesses. I think, eventually what is going to happen is, (they) will need support for something and the rest of the businesses will say, ‘No, you cut our throats.’ That’s what it is. You’ve got one (business that) doesn’t want to play fair with the rest of the businesses.”
Paulsen said his officers won’t begin doing walk-throughs of establishments looking for smokers, but they will respond to complaints.
“I don’t want anyone to be harmed by the law business-wise, but we’re kind of stuck in between,” he said. “We’re going to be complaint-driven and won’t initiate any type of formal action on our own. We’re not going to start walking bars just to find people smoking. I don’t think that’s fair to the establishments who are playing by the rules, versus the single one in town that isn’t.”
By Nathan Johnson
nathan.johnson@yankton.net

Introduced regulations make British American Tobacco reduce earnings forecast

A legislation recently introduced to Kenyan Parliament has dimmed the performance forecast for local tobacco companies, promptingBAT British American Tobacco(BAT), the largest cigarette maker of Dunhill cigarettes, to reduce its earnings outlook for next fiscal year.
BAT Kenya declared in a written statement that an unexpected to Kenyan Finance Bill 2010 proposed in local Parliament in early December would initiate a dramatic price war in the cigarette market, hurting revenues for all local cigarette makers and sellers.
According to the BAT statement the amendment introduced by Kenyan Parliament will lead to in industry-wide aspiration to cut prices on their products so that the companies could benefit from lower excise duty on cigarettes. The company added that a decline in their revenues could prompt taxes imposed by the government fall by 27 percent in 2011.
The World Health Organization as well adopted a new document in November urging tobacco industry to reduce the amount of sugar-containing additives in tobacco products, which the WHO stated lead to an addiction on tobacco in adolescents.
Although the latest regulation has not been approved by the Kenya Bureau of Standards, British American Tobacco admitted that if approved in the country it will make it a way more difficult for the company to market its cigarettes, since the variety of tobacco manufactured in Kenya is very harsh and needs additives to be more pleasant.
British American Tobacco is reported to have approximately an 80 percent market share in Kenyan tobacco market.
Mastermind Tobacco Co, the second largest tobacco company in the country, addressed all questions to the company’s director of external communication, Josh Kirimania, who yet was not available to comment on the issue.
According to the statement revealed last week, BAT stated that Kenyan Parliament members did not consult the company when the amendment to the bill was introduced to Parliament and named amendment in taxation law as “concentrated on supporting only one tobacco company.”
The introduced amendments are likely to supersede the present hybrid excise tax system based on physical properties and retail price of the products. The amended taxation system will be based only on retail price of the products. The measure would increase taxes on several brands by about 65 percent.
If adopted, the new legislation would make local smokers pay more for the most popular brands, like Safari, Sportsman and Sweet Menthol.
British American Tobacco Kenya stated that they would either have to raise the retail price on these brands corresponding to the tax increase or cut retail prices in order to make these products be more affordable to the consumers.
“This could result in to tax losses for the local government forecasted at Sh2 billion; or a drop of 27 percent from the Sh7.4 billion estimated for 2010 down to Sh5.4 billion next year,” stated BAT Kenya.
Kenyan government has imposed “sin taxes” in an attempt to discourage tobacco consumption.
The last tax increase took place in 2008.