 |
||
|
||
|
FROM THE DIRECTOR'S DESK
Smokefree Coalition Director Mark Peck is calling National Party associate health spokesperson Jonathan Coleman's presence
in British American Tobacco's (BAT's) corporate box an unbelievable lapse in judgement.
 A pack of the Freedom brand of cigarettes marketed in New Zealand (front side). Image supplied courtesy of the New Zealand Medical Journal. |
Wellington School of Medicine (University of Otago) Researchers Nick Wilson, George Thomson and Richard Edwards have written to the Commerce Commission urging them to widen their investigation into the use of deceptive terms such as 'light' and 'mild', by also considering the issue of misleading cigarette brand names.
The Commerce Commission is currently investigating a complaint made by the Smokefree Coalition and other groups in July 2006 that the terms 'light' and 'mild' are deceptive and breach the Fair Trading Act 1986 because smoking such cigarettes does not confer any health benefits.
A particular focus of the researchers' complaint is the cigarette brand Freedom. They say that the connotations of the name and the flying bird images on the pack are misleading.
"Given the near universal regret that smokers have about starting smoking and the highly addictive nature of nicotine, the use of the term 'freedom' would appear to be extraordinarily inappropriate. It is also highly misleading and contributes to the promotion of tobacco by creating positive associations with tobacco smoking."
In addition, the researchers point out there are other deceptive cigarette brand names on the New Zealand market, such as Holiday, Lucky Strike and Double Happiness.
"These brand names and the associated imagery around them are inherently misleading and give smokers a false impression about a product which is highly addictive and poses serious risks to their health, including premature death."
They say that there is new neuroscience evidence based on experiments with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) which provides biomedical evidence for the powerful effect of brand names and imagery on human beliefs and behaviour.
In addition to fines the Commerce Commission could impose on the industry, they ask that the following recommendations to Government be considered:
- making the brand name a very small part of the pack cover (perhaps five percent and on one side only)
- not allowing certain brand names where these have positive associations and attributes
- banning brand names and branding altogether and allowing only plain packs with health warnings.
Ultimately, however, they say there is an urgent need to adopt a new regulatory framework which removes the tobacco industry from all aspects of tobacco marketing. Such a framework could also remove the profit motivation from cigarette production and distribution by making this the responsibility of a not-for-profit agency with a public health mandate.
NATIONAL MĀORI QUIT SMOKING BOOK LAUNCHED
When Riki and Chrissy Karena from Dannevirke quit smoking they knew it would help their family and community, but they
didn't know that a few years later they would be featured in a book to help Māori quit smoking.
The Karena family has been smokefree for over seven years, and now features as a smokefree whānau in He ara orange - A journey to wellbeing, written by The Quit Group and launched in Wellington on Friday 1 December.
Chrissy started smoking when she was 18 years old. "My parents both smoked while I was growing up and I really hated tobacco smoke. But by the time I was 18 I started smoking too. Most of the people around me smoked and I just stopped resisting," she says.
Chrissy was motivated to quit smoking when she found a diary her Mum had kept while she was quitting smoking. "In the days following Mum's death we found a diary that she had used to record her quitting experience; it talked about how hard it had been for her. It made me cry. You don't often realise that your whānau need support to quit. You just think good on them and that's it really."
Chrissy says it's great to be part of something that helps people. "I hope many Māori read this book and make the change to a smokefree lifestyle."
Riki and Chrissy Karena live with their two sons Aaron and Caleb, who are also featured in the book. They belong to Rangitāne ki tamaki Nui a Rua. Both Chrissy and Riki's quitting stories can be read online at www.quit.org.nz.
He ara oranga is a bilingual booklet which includes Māori health concepts, quitting tips, ideas for preventing relapse, and support for whānau who live with smokers.
The book was funded by the Ministry of Health, and is offered free of charge from the Quitline on 0800 778 778. The national Quitline offers free national support and quitting resources, along with low cost nicotine patches and gum to help people with their quit attempt.
OCEANIA TOBACCO CONTROL CONFERENCE - CALL FOR ABSTRACTS
From
Vision to Reality
4-7 September 2007
The call for abstracts for the inaugural Oceania Tobacco Control Conference is now open. Deadline for abstract submission is 31 January 2007. Abstracts can be submitted through the conference website www.smokefreeoceania.org.nz.
Abstracts are invited from researchers, policy analysts and practitioners interested in achieving a smokefree Oceania. Abstract submission guidelines and details about the conference can also be found on the website.
The conference will be held in Auckland, New Zealand, 4-7 September 2007. Conference registration will open in early January 2007. This conference promises to be both exciting and informative. Confirmed keynote speakers include, Cynthia Callard with Physicians for a Smoke-Free Canada, Shu-Hong Zhu from the University of San Diego, California, and Professor Melanie Wakefield with Cancer Council Victoria in Melbourne.
To find out more about the conference visit www.smokefreeoceania.org.nz.
WHY KIDS START SMOKING
A survey has indicated that women who smoke during pregnancy are far more likely to produce offspring who take up smoking than are those who abstain.
The findings, based on a survey of 3,058 mothers and children in Brisbane, Australia, and published in the December issue of Tobacco Control, imply pregnant smokers may 'program' their children to follow in their footsteps, the scientists said.
They concluded the sons and daughters of the 30 percent of women who said they had smoked during pregnancy were nearly three times more likely to start smoking regularly at or before age 14 and approximately twice as likely to do so on or after their 15th birthday as were the non-smokers' children.
The results varied little between children of mothers who temporarily refrained from smoking but then resumed after the baby's birth and those of mothers who had always stayed away from cigarettes.
Also adding to the sizeable pile of reasons for discouraging pregnant women from smoking, another investigation - published in the journal Child Development - linked the practice to behaviour problems in toddlers.
Specifically, the researchers associated routine exposure to cigarette smoke in the womb and a nearly 12-fold increased risk of unusually troublesome behaviour at age two.
"The ability to identify these disruptive behaviour patterns in exposed children, even at this young age, is very striking," said lead study author Lauren Wakschlag, associate professor of psychiatry at the University of Illinois, Chicago, College of Medicine's Institute for Juvenile Research.
In the study, involving 93 children between ages one and two, 44 had mothers who smoked while pregnant, with half of the women smoking more than half a pack a day.
The investigators found the exposed children became increasingly disruptive between 18 months and 24 months of age. This included being more defiant, aggressive and less skilled in personal interactions than their milder, more stable and socially adept peers who had had a smokefree environment while in the womb.
On the other hand, the researchers observed similar irritability in both groups - an important finding because various behaviours are associated with different areas of the brain, they said.
"These findings suggest that for some children the roots of problem behaviour may occur before they are born," Wakschlag said. She stressed the study shows an association between pre-birth exposure to smoke and bad behaviour but does not prove the former causes the latter.
The team now is looking into how prenatal exposure to cigarette smoke affects teen behaviour and how it might interact with genetic factors to contribute to problematic comportment during adolescence.
United Press International, 29 November 2006
WHEN DON'T SMOKE MEANS DO
Philip Morris has adopted the role of good citizen these days. Its website brims with information on the dangers of smoking, and it has mounted a campaign of television spots that urge parents to warn their children against smoking. That follows an earlier $100 million campaign warning young people to "Think. Don't Smoke," similar to the "Just say no" campaigns against drugs.
All this seems to fly against the economic interests of the company, which presumably depends on a continuing crop of new smokers to replace those who drop out or die from smoking. But in practice, it turns out, these industry-run campaigns are notably ineffective and possibly even a sham. New research shows that the ads aimed at youths had no discernible effect in discouraging smoking and that the ads currently aimed at parents may be counterproductive.
A study just published in The American Journal of Public Health concluded that the ads aimed directly at young people had no beneficial effect, while those aimed at parents were actually harmful to young people, especially older teenagers. The greater the teenagers' potential exposure to the ads, the stronger their intention to smoke, and the greater their likelihood of having smoked in the past 30 days.
Just why the costly advertising campaigns produce no health benefits is unclear. The ads are fuzzy-warm, which could actually generate favourable feelings for the tobacco industry and, by extension, its products. And their theme - that adults should tell young people not to smoke mostly because they are young people - is exactly the sort of message that would make many teenagers feel like lighting up. (Trial testimony has made it clear that the goal of Philip Morris's youth smoking prevention programmes is to delay smoking until adulthood, not to discourage it for a lifetime.)
Analysis of the industry's tactics, by Judge Gladys Kessler of the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia, concluded that youth smoking prevention programmes were not really designed to effectively prevent youth smoking but rather to head off a government crackdown. They are minimally financed compared with the vast sums spent on cigarette marketing and promotion; they are understaffed and run by people with no expertise; and they ignore the strategies that have proved effective in preventing adolescent smoking. The television ads, for example, do not stress the deadly and addictive impacts of smoking, an emphasis that has been shown to work in other anti-tobacco campaigns.
Philip Morris says it has spent more than $1 billion on its youth smoking prevention programmes since 1998 and that it devised its current advertising campaign on the advice of experts who deem parental influence extremely important. But the company has done only the skimpiest research on how the campaign is working. It cites June 2006 data indicating that 37 percent of parents with children age 10 to 17 were both aware of its ads and spoke to their children about not smoking. How the children reacted has not been explored. And somehow the company forgot to tell the parents, as role models, to stop smoking themselves.
Philip Morris, the industry's biggest and most influential company, is renowned for its marketing savvy. If it really wanted to prevent youth smoking - and cut off new recruits to its death-dealing products - it could surely mount a more effective campaign to do so.
New York Times, 27 November 2006
ENGLISH SMOKING BAN TO BEGIN 1 JULY 2007
Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt has announced the smoking ban for all enclosed public places and workplaces will begin in England on 1 July 2007.
Similar rules have already been introduced in the Republic of Ireland and Scotland. The ban in Wales starts on 2 April.
The Health Act gained Royal Assent in July, and the restrictions in England will come into effect next summer. The measures are designed to protect everyone from the harmful effects of second-hand smoke when at work or at leisure, and make it easier for smokers to give up.
"This is a triumph for public health and a huge step forward for health protection," Ms Hewitt said.
"Thousands of people's lives will be saved and the health of thousands more protected. Smokefree legislation will protect everyone from the harm of second-hand smoke when working, socialising and relaxing and will provide a more supportive environment for smokers who wish to give up."
"The scientific and medical evidence is clear - second-hand smoke kills, causing a range of serious medical conditions including lung cancer, heart disease, and sudden infant death syndrome in children.
"This legislation will help to prevent the unnecessary deaths caused every year from second-hand smoke, and recognises that there is absolutely no safe level of exposure.
"Where countries have gone smokefree the impact on the health of staff has been immediate and positive. And the experience of going smokefree in Ireland, Scotland, New York and elsewhere has been good for business."
Ms Hewitt also launched a Smokefree England campaign to help the country's 3.7 million businesses, including nearly 200,000 pubs, bars, restaurants and other leisure outlets, prepare for the implementation of the legislation.
The Daily Mail, 30 November 2006
SMOKING BAN CUTS HEART ATTACK RATES
New research from Italy provides additional evidence that banning smoking in public places may help prevent heart attacks, at least over the short term.
After the Italian government's law against smoking in indoor public spaces took effect in January 2005, hospital admissions for heart attack in the Piedmont region fell 11 percent among people under 60 years old, Dr. Francesco Barone-Adesi of the University of Turin and colleagues report.
Given that both active smoking and second-hand smoke increase the risk of heart and blood vessel problems, the researchers used hospital records from Piedmont to investigate whether hospital admissions for heart attacks changed after the law's introduction.
They compared heart attack admission rates from October to December 2004 with rates from February to June 2005, as well as hospital admissions for the same period in the previous year.
In February-June 2004 922 men and women younger than 60 were hospitalised for heart attack, compared with 832 in February-June 2005, an 11 percent reduction. There were no changes in heart attack rates seen among those older than 60.
Rates of hospital admission for heart attack had actually been on the rise from 2001 to 2004, suggesting that the drop the researchers observed was not due to any long-term trend, Barone-Adesi and his colleagues note, and suggests that the ban's effect may be underestimated.
The age difference seen in the current study may have been because the ban had a stronger effect on younger people's smoking, while heart attacks are more likely to be due to causes other than smoking among older individuals, the researchers note.
"Our findings suggest that smoking regulations may have important short-term effects on health," they conclude. "The long-term effects of the Italian ban on respiratory and cardiovascular diseases and cancer will have to be evaluated in the years to come."
Reuters, 27 November 2006
HALVING DAILY CIGARETTE QUOTA HAS NO BENEFIT
Halving the number of cigarettes smoked every day in the belief that it will stave off an early death makes no difference, suggests research in Tobacco Control. Although reducing consumption may have a place as a temporary measure in smoking cessation, this study proves quite clearly that the only safe way out of the risk caused by smoking is to quit, say the authors.
They base their findings on more than 51,000 men and women, all of whom were aged between 20 and 34 at the start of the study. Participants were initially assessed for cardiovascular risk factors, and then screened again twice at an interval of three to 10 years, adding up to an average monitoring period of over two decades.
Participants were classified as never smokers; ex smokers; quitters (those who gave up between the first and second check); moderate smokers (1 to 14 cigarettes daily); reducers (more than 15 cigarettes a day, cut by more than half at the second check); and heavy smokers (more than 15 cigarettes a day).
Among men, deaths from lung cancer and cancers associated with smoking were not significantly lower in those who had cut back compared with heavy smokers.
Men who cut back only had slightly lower death rates from all causes combined than the heavy smokers during the first 15 years. After that, death rates were comparable.
And there were no significant differences in death rates from specific causes, including early death from cardiovascular disease, among women who cut back their daily consumption, compared with those who continued to smoke heavily.
Women who cut back actually had higher death rates from all causes combined than heavy smokers.
The authors conclude that long term monitoring provides no evidence that heavy smokers, who halve their daily cigarette consumption, significantly cut their risk of early death. They add that people may be misled if they are advised that cutting back will help them stave off disease.
GLOBALink News and Information, 28 November 2006
BLAST FROM THE PAST
Get
Lucky (1963)
Brand: Lucky Strike, American Tobacco Co.
Text: The taste to start with, the taste to stay with. The taste of a Lucky spoils you for other cigarettes. This famous taste is the best reason to start with Luckies and the big reason why Lucky smokers stay Lucky smokers. How about you? Get the taste you'll stay with. Get the fine-tobacco taste of Lucky Strike.
Retrieved from: 20th Century Tobacco Ad Collection Collected by Richard Pollay, catalogued by Roswell Park Cancer Institute http://roswell.tobaccodocuments.org/pollay/dirdet.cfm.
QUOTABLE QUOTES
"I happened to be in the British American Tobacco box and there happened to be cigars there. I lit it and the next thing I knew I was covered in water."
National Associate Health Spokesperson Dr Jonathon Coleman
"Cigarettes contain 200 poisons. Why haven't they been taken off the market? If any of our food products contained poison, they would not remain on our supermarket shelves."
Letter to the editor commenting on smoking in doorways,
The Star (Dunedin), 23 November 2006
"High cigarette taxes discourage smoking and will eventually reduce state expenditures for smokers' health care. That should be reward enough for the state."
Editorial: Winston-Salem Journal, 29 November 2006
"I think that if it were ever conclusively shown that there was some connection between smoking and, say, lung cancer most ad agencies would not be advertising cigarettes. But it's easy to get stampeded, and the tobacco industry is being very much maligned.... The fact is that I have never met a finer group in my life than the people in the tobacco industry.... And tobacco has given pleasure to an awful lot of people. You should never act on hunches; suspicions, and stir-ups."
Henry Pattison, account executive for the Philip Morris Company
at the Benton and Bowles Agency; 1969
MEDIA THEMES
"Ashtray Queen" agrees to stub it out in public
The chain-smoking Queen Margrethe of Denmark, who has been dubbed the "Ashtray Queen", has bowed to public opinion and decided to stop smoking in public.
With a new law banning smoking in public buildings soon to come into effect, the Queen had little choice.
Although Queen Margrethe was frequently criticised by anti-smoking campaigners, she had the press on her side. Once, when was asked about her smoking problem, she replied crisply, "I have no problem," - before promptly lighting up. She also shrugged off criticism when she was seen lighting up in front of asthmatic pensioners at an old people's home.
When the law comes into effect in April 2007, court employees also will have to stop smoking, or at least smoke only at home. Apparently the Queen, despite still smoking in private corners of her palaces, wants to show solidarity with her courtiers.
Plainly the Queen does not want to fall foul of the anti-smoking organisations at a time when 1,000 Danes a year die from passive smoking, according to the Danish Lung Association. About 25 percent of Danes over the age of 13 smoke daily.
Elizabeth I became Britain's first royal smoker after Walter Raleigh popularised tobacco at court as a cure for coughs.
King James I of England became a trailblazer for the anti-smoking lobby with his 1604 polemic: A Counterblaste to Tobacco.
Napoleon III rejected requests to ban smoking with the words, "This vice brings in 100 million francs in taxes every year. I will certainly forbid it at once, as soon as you can name a virtue that brings in as much revenue."
Edward VIII gave Benson and Hedges its first royal warrant and is said to have greeted Queen Victoria's death with the words, "Gentlemen, you may now smoke."
After smoking heavily throughout the Second World War, George VI lost a lung to cancer in 1951 and died the following year.
Princess Margaret lit up the party circuit as a teenager with her glamorous tortoiseshell cigarette holder, and was allegedly smoking 30 a day within months of a 1985 biopsy all-clear verdict.
The Times, 25 November 2006
Adoption ban on smoker
A childless couple have been banned from adopting because the husband smokes. Paul Kersey must quit smoking for six months before being considered as a parent.
But he protested yesterday: "I don't even smoke in the house - only in the garden shed. My wife is strict about that."
Paul and partner Ella, 27, have been trying to adopt for 18 months after four years of unsuccessful fertility treatment. Social Services have told them Merchant Navy skipper Paul, 47, must stop smoking and produce a GP's letter proving it.
But the couple from St Austell, Cornwall, say they are too heartbroken to tackle the adoption process again. "I understand about passive smoking but Ella makes me smoke in the shed, even if it's raining. We're desperate to have a family. It's so hurtful. They want super-families, not normal people," Paul said.
A council spokesman said: "On medical advice the service would not place children under two with families who smoke."
The Sun Online, 25 November 2006
If you have received this email newsletter in error or wish to unsubscribe click here.
Produced by The
Smokefree Coalition. PO Box 12-084, Wellington.
Tel. +64 4 472 0157. Fax +64 4 472 0167. Mobile +64 274 591 664. Email director@sfc.org.nz
If you are considering using any material from the Smokefree Coalition Tobacco Control Update, please first seek permission from Mark Peck - director@sfc.org.nz