Over 1,6 million kg of tobacco sold

This is more than the 403 000kg worth US$1,2 million sold through the same system in the same period last season.
According to the latest statistics released by the Tobacco Industry Marketing Board, the average price is US$3 per kg.
The number of bales laid to date amounted to 19 971 and of these 17 676 were sold.
Of the three floors, the Zimbabwe Industry Tobacco Auction Centre sold the highest amount of tobacco at
206 000kg worth US$597 000 followed by the Burley Marketing Zimbabwe that sold 173 000kg worth
US$ 528 000.
The Tobacco Sales Floor sold the least at 165 000kg worth US$470 000.
Meanwhile tobacco deliveries to the floors continue although transport problems keep on affecting farmers with some few losing their crop due to the recent rains the country received.
A few farmers had their bales rejected because they were wet.
The tobacco selling season officially opened last week with most farmers witnessing an improvement in prices and payment methods than in the previous season.
Most of the tobacco growers said they wanted money to pay-back loans, school fees and procure inputs, among other things.
Last season a target of 74 million kg was set for the 2008/9 season but due to challenges such as shortage of inputs, constant electricity cuts, coal shortages
and the high inflation rates production was severely affected.
Some tobacco growers are getting US$1 500 cash on spot with the balance being deposited in their foreign currency accounts.
Some farmers however, are getting their cash late because there are only two groups of buyers who are rotating the three floors resulting in delays in selling at some floors.
Some farmers received their money for the opening day, the second day of trading because of this arrangement.
This season a grower can choose not to encash any portion of his or her sales proceeds and have his entire proceeds transferred into the FCA account by informing the auction floor before the sale.
Last season farmers had to spend days camping at the floors waiting to encash their cheques while the banks were giving insignificant amounts that could only be used for transport to and from the farm.

Reducing Tobacco Use Among Young People

A clear commitment from adults against the use of tobacco is expected by their children as they grow up, and it can prevent teenagers from starting to smoke or use snuff. This is shown in current research from Umeå University in Sweden.
In 1993 a program called Tobacco-Free Duo was started in collaboration between the Country Council of Västerbotten County and the schools in the county’s municipalities. The target group was young people between 13 and 15 years of age, and the program is still going on. A central component of the program was to include adults in the task of supporting adolescents in saying no to tobacco.
In her dissertation, Maria Nilsson evaluates the effects of the program and studies the attitudes of young people to how adults, and especially parents, should approach the use of tobacco among their children.
Both boys’ and girls’ smoking declined during the seven-year evaluation period for Tobacco-Free Duo, whereas no change was observed at the national level. Using a multifaceted interventional model that includes tobacco-free duos consisting of one adult and one teenager, it is possible to bring down the use of tobacco among young people. An unexpected bonus effect of the program was reported. One adult in four who supported a young participant Tobacco-Free Duo was a tobacco user who stopped using tobacco in order to be able to participate. The Tobacco-Free Duo intervention has proven to be viable in the municipalities throughout the years. The long-term design of the program proved to be important in that the major effects were shown only after a few years of work.
In an interview study, 15-year-old smokers respond that they experience smoking as a way to gain control of their feelings and their situation during their teens. They expect grown-ups to intervene against their smoking. They describe close relationships with adults who care for them as a reason for smoking less or trying to quit smoking.
In a national questionnaire study with data from three decades, teenagers are becoming more receptive of parental intervention against their children’s smoking. Young people clearly support this, whether they themselves smoke or not. They prefer to have parents get involved by persuading their children not to smoke, by not smoking themselves, and by not permitting their children to smoke at home. The results contradict the notion that young people ignore or even have negative perceptions of their parents’ attempts to counteract the use of tobacco.
“Children expect adults to work against tobacco. They say this is important and that grown-ups can make a difference by showing a clear and positive commitment,” says Maria Nilsson.
Having a shared and consistent norm against tobacco from both schools and parents with a supportive approach can have a preventive function regarding tobacco use among young people.
© Copyright: Sciencedaily

Instead of tobacco – salt and pepper

Topics of smoking often related designers . While projects they create quite a sensible way – do not call for smokers to quit, but those who do not smoke – smoking. How to apply to such projects, each addressing himself designers importantly – to realize his idea. In fact, with the Cigarettes it is not so straight.
After all, not every person will see in these salt and pepper just tobacco. Maybe it’s just some sticks in no way related to tobacco. But, of course, designer Myan Duong clearly hinted at a cigarette. He believes that such salt and pepper can really distract from smoking. You can simply hold in the hand of one of the sticks, it seems that this cigarette, and smoke and maybe do not want to. But with a heavy smoker, this option does not take place. In any case, these containers is a fun feature. Eventually using them you can throw the ashes in their food! Only this is not the ashes, and salt and pepper. While difficult to predict what the reaction would cause such a step, and whether at all – think salt and pepper, and not as we saw on our site. But the precise form of this interesting routine, but this is exactly the plus. In the United States raised the tax on tobacco
American smokers in the middle of this week will have to pay tax on a pack of Cigarettes is not $ 0.39 as it is now, and $ 1.01, reported AP. The measure – part of one of the first acts of the legislation on the protection of health, signed by President Barack Obama. And manufacturers of Cigarettes, and their opponents, civil society organizations opposed to smoking, trying to cash in on the situation. Tabacco firms in response to the adoption of the law have raised prices to offset the fall in demand. People believe that in a crisis, higher prices – a great excuse to give up bad habits. According to the plan of Obama, the budget of the new tobacco-up will receive additional $ 33 billion Congress is preparing a bill to regulate the tobacco market, which will deal with the Ministry of Health. Obama, who himself struggled with bad habits will likely sign the legislation.

Tobacco Use in Connecticut

· High school students who smoke: 21.1% [Girls: 22.6% Boys: 19.5%]
· High school males who use smokeless tobacco: 6.2%
· Kids (under 18) who try cigarettes for the first time each year: 15,500
· Additional Kids (under 18) who become new regular, daily smokers each year: 4,600
· Packs of cigarettes bought or smoked by kids in Connecticut each year: 9.7 million
· Kids exposed to second hand smoke at home: 186,000
· Adults in Connecticut who smoke: 15.4% [Men: 16.5% Women: 14.4% Pregnant Females: 7.0%]
Nationwide, youth smoking has declined significantly since the mid-1990s, but that decline appears to have slowed. The
2007 Youth Risk Behavior Survey found that the percentage of high school students reporting that they have smoked
cigarettes in the past month decreased to 20 percent in 2007 from 23 percent in 2005. 19.8 percent of U.S. adults
(about 43.4 million) currently smoke, which is a significant decline from the 2006 rate of 20.8 percent.
Deaths in Connecticut From Smoking
· Adults who die each year in Connecticut from their own smoking: 4,700
· Adult nonsmokers who die each year from exposure to secondhand smoke: 440
· Connecticut kids who have lost at least one parent to a smoking-caused death: 2,900
· Kids alive in state today who will ultimately die from smoking: 76,000 (given current smoking levels)
Smoking, alone, kills more people each year than alcohol, AIDS, car crashes, illegal drugs, murders, and suicides
combined. For every person in Connecticut who dies from smoking approximately 20 more state residents are suffering
from serious smoking-caused disease and disability, or other tobacco-caused health problems.
Tobacco-Related Monetary Costs in Connecticut
· Annual health care expenditures in the State directly caused by tobacco use: $1.63 billion
· Annual health care expenditures in Connecticut from secondhand smoke exposure: $45.1 million
. State Medicaid program’s total health expenditures caused by tobacco use: $430.0 million
· Citizens’ state/federal taxes to cover smoking-caused gov’t costs: $897.6 million ($680/household)
· Smoking-caused productivity losses in Connecticut: $1.03 billion
· Smoking-caused health costs and productivity losses per pack sold in Connecticut: $14.30
The productivity loss amount, above, is from smoking-death-shortened work lives, alone. Additional work productivity
losses totaling in the tens of billions nationwide come from smoking-caused work absences, on-the-job performance
declines, and disability during otherwise productive work lives Other non-health costs caused by tobacco use include
direct residential and commercial property losses from smoking-caused fires (about $400 million nationwide); and the
costs of extra cleaning and maintenance made necessary by tobacco smoke and tobacco-related litter (about $4+ billion
per year for commercial establishments alone).
Tobacco Industry Advertising and Other Product Promotion
· Annual tobacco industry marketing expenditures nationwide: $13.4 billion ($36+ million per day)
· Estimated portion spent in Connecticut each year: $124.1 million
Published research studies have found that kids are three times more sensitive to tobacco advertising than adults and
are more likely to be influenced to smoke by cigarette marketing than by peer pressure, and that one-third of underage
experimentation with smoking is attributable to tobacco company marketing.
Connecticut Government Policies Affecting The Toll of Tobacco in Connecticut
· Annual State tobacco prevention spending from tobacco settlement and tax revenues: $8.3 million
National rank: 29 (with 1 the best), based on percent of CDC recommendation
· State cigarette tax per pack: $2.00

Progress in the fight to tackle tobacco smuggling

The Government has today taken another significant step in the fight against tobacco smuggling as Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury, Angela Eagle today signed anti-smuggling agreements with two international tobacco manufacturers.
The agreements with Philip Morris International (PMI) and Japan Tobacco International (JTI) – complement the legislation that the Government introduced in 2006, requiring all tobacco manufacturers to help prevent smuggling through careful control of their supply chains.
The Exchequer Secretary/Angela Eagle, said: “These agreements are an important new element in the fight against tobacco smuggling. In the last decade we have halved the size of the illicit cigarette market in the UK and by signing these agreements, we are demonstrating that we are determined to continue working with tobacco manufacturers to tackle smuggling.”
Since the UK’s first Tackling Tobacco Smuggling strategy was published in 2000, HM Revenue & Customs and the UK Border Agency have:
* reduced the proportion of illicit cigarettes from 21% in 2000 to 13%;
* seized more than 14 billion cigarettes and more than 1000 tonnes of hand rolling tobacco in the UK and abroad;
* broken up 370 criminal gangs involved in large-scale smuggling;
* prosecuted more than 2,000 people and issued more than £35m worth of confiscation orders.
Notes to Editors
1. Under the new agreements, PMI and JTI are committed to working with the European Commission, the UK Government and customs authorities across the EU to tackle the smuggling and counterfeiting of their products. They will do this through measures which include Know Your Customer rules and track-and-trace technology.
The agreements also require PMI and JTI to make payments to the UK authorities if their genuine products are seized by HMRC.

2. The Government announced its intention to conclude negotiations on signing these agreements at the time of the 2008 Pre-Budget Report, when it published Tackling Tobacco Smuggling Together: An Integrated Strategy for HM Revenue and Customs and the UK Border Agency.
3. In April 2009 HM Revenue & Customs established inland detection teams to target the illegal trade in tobacco, alcohol, and oils. (HMRC Press Notice no. NAT 29/09) The UK Border Agency operates detection functions at UK borders having brought together officers staff from HM Revenue & Customs, the Border and Immigration Agency and Foreign and Commonwealth Office visas. UKBA began operation on 3 April 2008 and was officially launched by the Home Secretary at Gatwick Airport. Its formation was announced in November 2007 3.

Government Bill 48 – Purely anti-business legislation threatening public health, public safety and public accountability

New Brunswick's Health Minister,
the Hon. Michael Murphy, has recently proposed legislation that would come to
ban the sale of flavoured tobacco products in the province. Focused on the
perceived threat of flavoured cigarillos in the marketplace, Bill 48 (An Act
to Amend the Tobacco Sales Act) is unfortunately void of any meaningful or
real understanding of the products, the market and/or the industry in
question. Bill 48, which is currently up for Second Reading in the Legislature
- is completely leveraged on what is arguably tantamount to a serious
misrepresentation of the facts.
    "The push to ban flavoured little cigars / cigarillos is an orchestrated
attack spearheaded by a handful of anti-tobacco extremist groups in Canada,
that have since found unsuspecting support and leverage among well-meaning but
critically misinformed youth organizations, national health agencies and
politicians across the country", says Luc Martial (in charge of government
affairs with Casa Cubana and formerly with the Non-Smokers' Rights
Association, the Canadian Council on Smoking and Health, the National
Clearinghouse on Tobacco and Health, and the Tobacco Control Programme at
Health Canada). "These attacks are purely about hate, not health - about fear,
not fact", says Mr. Martial. "From a rational, expert-based tobacco control
standpoint, banning flavoured little cigars / cigarillos is simply
ill-conceived public health policy that will likely come to cause greater,
irrevocable harm to our society. This is a minors' access issue, not a product
design issue". More to the point, international health authorities have long
argued that "prohibition", the banning of legal product and/or supply-side
interventions have never had any proven effective impact on reducing minors'
access to age-restricted (e.g. alcohol, gambling, tobacco) and or illegal
products (marijuana, cocaine, etc.).
    As importantly, at a time in our history when legitimate jobs and
government revenues are at a premium, any politician or government that would
propose anti-business legislation based on less than all of the facts is
simply acting in a publicly irresponsible, unaccountable and detrimental
    In terms of some actual facts about little cigars / cigarillos, the use
of flavours in tobacco and the market in New Brunswick:
    - There are thousands of different cigar products sold worldwide,
      manufactured in a multitude of shapes, sizes and packaging formats. The
      cigarillo is a longstanding and well recognized subcategory of
      traditional (large) cigars, well established within the international
      trade for more than half of a century.
    - The use of flavoring agents in tobacco dates back, in some instances,
      more than 100 years. Some historical examples identified through U.S.
      trademark registrations include: Apple (1905), Peach (1905), Wild
      Cherry (1910), Strawberry (1922), Butterscotch (1945), Mint and menthol
      (1971), Wild Blueberry (1971).
    - The exact same flavours found in little cigars / cigarillos sold in New
      Brunswick (and across Canada), which seem to be the point of contention
      and source of outrage among anti-tobacco groups and some politicians,
      are found in a much greater quantity and much wider variety of alcohol
      products approved for sale by the government of New Brunswick (and
      every other Canadian government). For example, the government of
      New Brunswick approves 19 different alcohol beverages for sale which
      are flavoured Strawberry; 7 different alcohol beverages which are
      flavoured Peach; 14 different alcohol beverages which are flavoured
      Raspberry; 7 different alcohol beverages which are flavoured Cherry; 12
      different alcohol beverages which are flavoured Grape and 3 different
      alcohol beverages which are flavoured Chocolate.
    - Flavoured cigarillos account for less than 0.5% of all tobacco products
      sold and consumed every year in Canada. They are regulated by the same
      federal and provincial laws which apply to every other tobacco product.
    - The Canadian Tobacco Use Monitoring Survey (CTUMS) - an annual survey
      conducted by Statistics Canada and Health Canada, and the best
      yardstick for measuring tobacco consumption and mapping smoking
      behavior in our country - clearly confirms that in New Brunswick, the
      vast majority (90%) of those who consumed a little cigar / cigarillo
      (plain or flavoured) in the last 30 days were of legal age to do so;
      the vast majority (80%) were over the age of 20 and the majority (60%)
      were over the age of 25. To suggest that this is a product that was
      designed to target children and/or which only children would ever
      consume (because of the flavours) is simply unjustified.
    - Are minors getting illegal access to flavoured cigarillos?
      Unfortunately, yes. But it is important to note that these minors are
      getting much greater illegal access to (non-flavoured) cigarettes,
      gambling and alcohol products - yet no one is calling for a ban on any
      of these products as a way to stop kids from consuming them.
    The government's proposal to arbitrarily ban flavoured little
cigars/cigarillos is completely irresponsible because:
    1. The government has never undertaken any comprehensive research on (1)
       what specific products are actually being consumed by minors (whether
       they are flavoured or plain; which specific flavours they consume,
       etc.); (2) in which packaging formats they are being
       purchased/obtained; (3) in what quantities/frequencies they are being
       consumed and/or (4) where these products are being accessed (source of
    2. The government has not publicly identified any specific health
       objective which will supposedly be achieved by banning these flavoured
       products and has not committed to monitoring the impact of such a ban
       on youth uptake / smoking.
    3. Banning these products would have no effective impact on minors'
       access to tobacco products. More to this point, health authorities and
       governments have long argued the ineffectiveness of banning legal
       tobacco products - especially as it pertains to addressing minors'
       access issues.
    4. Banning these products would actually fuel demand on the growing black
       market - encouraging an environment in which much more, much cheaper
       and less controlled tobacco products would eventually find their way
       into the hands of the very kids the government says it wants to
    5. Banning these products would come to throw away millions of dollars in
       current legitimate government revenues - by essentially granting
       exclusive market control of these flavoured products to a waiting
       underground network. According to the RCMP, the underground network
       services 30% - 50% of the domestic tobacco market in Canada. Of
       relevance to this matter, law enforcement agencies across Canada have
       long ago acknowledged that they cannot stop, let alone control this
       network. Recent information released by the RCMP clearly confirms that
       the illicit tobacco trade presents a serious threat to public safety
       and health in Canada. According to the RCMP, there are currently 105
       organized crime groups of various levels of sophistication known to be
       involved in contraband tobacco. More troubling is that 69% of these
       criminal networks are also involved in drug trafficking (marijuana /
       cocaine) and/or weapons trafficking. 30% of these criminal groups,
       according to the RCMP, are also known to have violent tendencies.
    6. Banning these products would have no impact on those individuals
       currently breaking the law in New Brunswick by furnishing tobacco
       products to kids (e.g. black market, friends, family members, peers).
    7. Banning these products would undermine the rights of legitimate
       business operators across New Brunswick who have been responsibly
       servicing the legal age market - and who have every financial
       incentive to ensure that kids do not get access to these products.
    8. Banning these products would undermine the rights of tens of thousands
       of legal age consumers who have made the decision to consume these
       legal tobacco products.
    The pressing issue before us, if this is indeed the case, is one of
product access, not product design, pricing or packaging. A more measured,
justified, effective and accurate response would be to:
    1. Request that Health Canada (through CTUMS) specifically and
       comprehensively surveys the market for flavoured tobacco products in
       Canada. This necessary data could then be accountably reviewed and
       analyzed by the government of New Brunswick - in support of truly
       meaningful, effective and fair policy consideration;
    2. Introduce a youth possession law in New Brunswick (as currently exists
       in the provinces of Alberta and Nova Scotia). Strict fines and
       penalties would either be issued to minors (directly) or to legal
       guardians and parents. A youth possession law, as an integral
       component to the province's tobacco control strategy, is sorely
       needed. Such a law would lend credibility and communicate a
       sustainable message to kids and parents. More to this point, such a
       law would penalize those parents who currently condone their
       children's involvement in breaking the law (i.e. illegally acquiring
       tobacco) and would empower those legal guardians and parents who wish
       to effectively end their child's access to such products; and
    3. Develop youth-specific education campaigns on the subject of access to
       tobacco and smoking - that would equally address the issue of parental
       consent, and illegal supply sources (e.g. friends, family, peers).
    Established in 1998, Casa Cubana is a Montreal-based importer of premium
and value brand cigar products across Canada. With more than 450 cigar
products in its catalogue, the company services over 10,000 direct retail
clients across the country. In New Brunswick, Casa Cubana has more than 230
wholesale/retail partners. Casa Cubana is the exclusive distributor of Prime
Time flavoured cigarillos.
Source: Cnw

Demise of Tobacco Agency Closes Chapter in History

The close of this year’s General Assembly brought an end to another chapter in Maryland’s rich tobacco-growing history.
Legislators voted unanimously to abolish the State Tobacco Authority, which was established in the 1940s to conduct tobacco auctions at warehouses so that farmers could get the best prices for their crops.
“It is also another sign of the times. There are only a few warehouses left standing, and now the authority is gone,” said Earl F. “Buddy” Hance, deputy secretary of the state Department of Agriculture and a fourth-generation tobacco farmer from Port Republic.
“It won’t be long before people say, ‘Tobacco? We grew tobacco in Maryland?’ ” he said.
Tobacco was once used as currency in the state and for tithing at churches. Tobacco leaves adorn the Tiffany-style dome of the Senate chamber, and there is a leaf on Calvert County’s flag.
“It was what saved our colony,” said state Sen. Roy P. Dyson (D-St. Mary’s), vice chairman of the Education, Health and Environmental Affairs Committee.
A decade ago, amid continuing health concerns about tobacco, the state offered farmers a buyout to stop growing it. About 70 percent signed up for the program in its first year, Hance said. Now, about 94 percent of the state’s growers are in the program, leaving about 600 acres of tobacco farms in Maryland. At one time, there were more than 40,000 acres, he said.
The last operational warehouse was in Hughesville, and the state’s final auction took place there three years ago, said W. Michael Phipps, president of the Maryland Farm Bureau. Since then, the handful of farmers who still grow tobacco have been contracting directly with tobacco companies, creating a niche market, he said.
“Without the auction market, we have no idea how much tobacco is really produced in Maryland,” said Phipps, adding that the state authority had given the farmers clout and bargaining power.
If there was a new tax on tobacco products, like the recently passed federal and state taxes, the growers would fight it together, Phipps said. He still plants a patch of tobacco on his farm, which borders Route 4 at Briscoes Turn Road in Calvert.
Dyson said the authority could never have been abolished during the heyday of the state’s tobacco industry. “Today, it hardly caused a ripple,” he said. “No one said anything. To be honest, on the committee I serve on, I’m not sure anyone knew what it was.”
Dyson voted against the buyout program, saying he was concerned that it would be difficult for families to find a crop as lucrative to replace it.
Source: Washingtonpost

Tobacco Use and Traffic Crash

Smoking cigarettes gives smokers personal freedom but smoking ban only cut the people’ liberty, hold a group of smokers. Thirty years later, medical evidence showed that secondhand smoke is deadly. But according to the federal Centers for Disease Control, secondhand smoke kills more Americans than traffic crashes.
The Center for Disease Control (CDC) found that each year, because of exposure to secondhand smoke, an estimated 3,000 non-smoking Americans die of lung cancer, and more than 46,000 die of heart disease. On other hand traffic crashes killed 40,059 people in 2007.
The anti-smoking campaigns continue search if smoking is really harmful. Most of the city commission candidates oppose the newly adopted smoking ban. Most doubt the CDC’s conclusions about how harmful secondhand smoke is.
Sidney Shultz, 1218 E Ellsworth, said: “I really couldn’t tell you what secondhand smoke does to people. If it was proven that it is absolutely dangerous then, yes. But they haven’t proven to me beyond a doubt that’s true.” He is not sure if smoking is harmful.
However the CDC declared that tobacco use is the single most preventable cause of disease, disability and death in the United States. Each year, an estimated 443,000 die prematurely from smoking or exposure to secondhand smoke, and another 8.6 million have a serious illness caused by smoking.
That’s more deaths, every year, than were caused by motor vehicles in the past decade.
If secondhand smoke really did pose a significant danger, then the federal government from USA would have intervened. Only smoking ban could reduce the frequency of heart attacks among people, according to researchers’ studies.
Source: Cigs4us