Smoking Rights






   

<< December 2004 >>
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
 01 02 03 04
05 06 07 08 09 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31


Our Web Page

Ontario Health Promotion Resource System

Smokers Rights Canada

Forces

Our Newsletter


Anti Smokers:
National Clearinghouse on Tobacco and Health Program
Serves the information needs of health intermediaries.

How they Lie- The Truth









Monday, December 27, 2004
The Science and News

Clean-Air Backer Wants Blitz on Public Smoke
By gail johnson
Publish Date: 23-Dec-2004
Clean-Air Backer Wants Blitz on Public Smoke. Mark Atomos Pilon illustration
British Columbia has taken some positive steps to reduce people's exposure to secondhand smoke. But according to the provincial health officer, B.C. needs to do more. Dr. Perry Kendall also says the government should step up public-education programs about the benefits of quitting smoking.
Kendall's call to eliminate secondhand smoke falls on the heels of newly proposed legislation in Ontario that, if enacted, would bring about aggressive smoke-free laws. He made the recommendations in his annual report, released in mid-December, which this year focused on air quality.
Ontario's bill to make all workplaces and public spaces 100-percent smoke-free by May 2006 was introduced on December 15, the same day Kendall issued his report. Besides prohibiting smoking in all restaurants, bars, banquet halls, health-care facilities, schools, casinos, bingo halls, and offices and government buildings, as well as in private clubs (including Royal Canadian Legions), common areas in residential buildings (including hotels and apartment and condominium buildings), and work vehicles, the proposed legislation would also eliminate all designated smoking areas and enclosed ventilated rooms in such public places. The new law would restrict the display of tobacco products in stores, banning the walls of cigarette packs and cartons behind convenience-store counters.
Kendall's office would welcome similar rules here.
"A number of provinces are moving toward major bans on smoking," said deputy provincial health officer Dr. Eric Young in a phone interview with the Straight. "We're hoping that there will be some impetus for such changes based on this report now that Ontario has introduced its proposal.
"We approach things from a public-health perspective," Young added. "In B.C., there are over 5,500 deaths per year related to smoking. We've known for a long time that smoking leads to lung cancer, heart disease, breast cancer, leukemia, asthma, premature birth, low birth weight, SIDS... It's an extremely important issue, one individuals and society have a lot of control over."
According to the Ottawa-based Physicians for a Smoke-Free Canada, 1,107 nonsmoking adults died in 1998 as a result of tobacco-related causes, as did 96 infants under the age of one year. The organization's Web site (www .smoke-free.ca/) lists illnesses known to be caused by secondhand smoke, including nasal-sinus cancer and nonmalignant respiratory disease in adults, and bronchitis, asthma, pneumonia, and middle-ear disease in children. It describes other conditions thought to be caused by secondhand smoke, like stroke, cervical cancer, and miscarriages in adults and decreased lung function and the exacerbation of cystic fibrosis in children.
Kids are especially vulnerable when it comes to secondhand smoke, because they have weaker immune systems and breathe more air relative to body weight than adults. According to the PSFC, exposure to cigarette smoke causes up to about 220,000 ear infections in Canadian children annually, 2,100 tonsillectomies and adenoidectomies, and 270 sudden-infant-death-syndrome fatalities. Maternal smoking can negatively affect the fetus, since it deprives the baby of oxygen and other nutrients.
Also known as environmental tobacco smoke, secondhand smoke contains at least 40 carcinogens, the PSFC says, and some of them are in stronger concentrations in secondhand smoke than they are in the smoke that goes directly into smokers' lungs. Among the toxic substances are arsenic, cadmium, formaldehyde, benzene, vinyl chloride, and lead.
"Even if smoking is restricted to a single room, the harmful constituents of cigarette smoke can be dispersed throughout the house," the PSFC Web site states. "Many of these highly dangerous chemicals are in invisible gas form."
Sixty-eight percent of British Columbians have no real protection from secondhand smoke, the group alleges.
Antitobacco organizations support any efforts to enforce stricter smoke-free laws. Take Airspace, a Burnaby-based group that maintains on its Web site that nonsmokers have a right to breathe air that is not polluted with carcinogenic secondhand tobacco smoke; that smokers and passive smokers have the right to hold the tobacco industry accountable for smoking-related illnesses and death; and that smokers have a right to publicly funded smoking-cessation services.
That last is a critical point, because no one denies how hard it is for some people to quit smoking. Young said that smokers trying to stop need a lot of support.
"It's difficult to change habits, especially highly addictive habits," he said. "People need to get from the thinking-about-it stage to actually taking steps to making it a reality. And they need to recognize there will be setbacks but not beat themselves up. If they have a setback, they need to say, 'All right, I'll just try again.'
"We encourage those who are smoking to make every attempt to quit; it's a very, very addictive substance and it's difficult to quit. But keep trying to quit. Use every available means. They might want their doctor's advice. They might need medication in the form of patches or gum. There are other aids; there are a variety of methods.
"If people are committed to smoking, they have a personal responsibility not to expose other people to secondhand smoke," he added. "They shouldn't smoke at home if there are children in the home. They shouldn't smoke in the car if other people use that car."
Not surprisingly, the smoke-free movement has its opponents. Last September, the Canadian Tobacco Manufacturers' Council funded an on-line smoker's association called mychoice.ca. The group says it is committed to "restoring common sense, balance and civility" to the way Canadian adult smokers are treated by their federal, provincial, and municipal governments.
"Research shows Canada's adult smokers are tired of feeling powerless and voiceless as they are hit time and again with increasing taxes, more severe restrictions, and social stigmatization," the Web site states.
Smokers and nonsmokers will obviously never see eye to eye, but tougher secondhand-smoke laws would at least help clear the air.
 

Live T.O. club highlights of 2004
By MARY DICKIE -- Toronto Sun
Quotes of '04: Artists with some rhyme and reason
The best thing to happen to the club scene this year -- if not this decade -- was the blessed freedom from cigarette smoke from June 1 onward.
Despite warnings of dire consequences, people adapted, smokers moved outside and clubs still managed to sell out, leaving us with the novel experience of being able to see the musicians and breathe as well. Hallelujah! Here are the live club highlights of my year:
The semi-reunion of the legendary proto-punk band MC5 could have been sad or disastrous, with two members dead, the rest getting on and the fill-ins including the annoying wingnut Evan Dando. But damn it if survivors Wayne Kramer, Michael Davis and Dennis Thompson, plus Mudhoney's Mark Arm on vocals, didn't pull it off, kicking out the jams with passion and energy to shame kids half their age.
Another guy with supernatural rock 'n' roll energy is Ian Blurton, who kept powerhouse drummer Randy Curnew from Blurtonia and added former Nashville Pussy bassist Katie Lynn Campbell's Southern grooves to make a dynamite new band -- perhaps (gasp!) his best ever.
Hips shook, hearts raced and sweat flew. Must be that mystical Toronto-New Orleans-Newfoundland axis.
A breathtaking show that was mostly solo, except for lovely keyboards from Geraint Watkins on a few songs, and proved that the Basher's voice is still in fine honeyed-whisky form and that his songwriting has few equals. A highlight was the acoustic What's So Funny 'Bout Peace, Love and Understanding.
The Whitby native adds soul, rock, reggae and R&B to hip-hop, broadening its reach, expanding its barriers and saving it from staleness and mediocrity. This sold-out, confident, ground-breaking extravaganza proved that the kids are listening, and that in fact no one can resist K-OS, or at least his Krabuckit.
A beautiful songwriter and singer -- whose album inexplicably went nowhere despite the devastating single Somewhere Else -- parted ways with his label and treated a few lucky fans to a gorgeous solo acoustic set with sporadic guest vocals from protege Kathleen Edwards. Make an album!
The toast of Paris returned home triumphantly for a packed show, during which she showcased the versatility of her lovely voice and delicate songs, rocking some up and making the Bee Gees sound like Bacharach. Can do no wrong.
Television's guitar god teamed up with Jimmy Ripp to perform Music For Film, live soundtracks to avant-garde films by Man Ray, Fernand Leger and others. Lyrical, flowing, dazzling and highly atmospheric -- an ode to the powers of the sensitively played guitar.
Ah, the rewards of constant touring -- from loose and raggedy (but still endearing) small shows to transfixing a huge outdoor crowd with a seemingly effortless mix of a dozen players and a multitude of beautiful sounds in a year. Man, they're bloody arena-ready!
The amount of pure concentrated rock energy that can emanate from one supercharged singer/drummer and an equally manic bassist is still astounding. It's impossible not to move head, hips and feet in time to the relentless beat, and hum along as well.
This birthday show marked 20 years of solid, sometimes brilliant alt-country-rock with smiley vibes, old friends like Jack de Keyzer and fans that sang every word to Hasn't Hit Me Yet. A love-in for a band that despite its popularity, can get taken for granted.
 

Unscheduled landing
Smoker busted for puffing on flight
By CARY CASTAGNA, POLICE REPORTER Fri, December 24, 2004
A 33-year-old Ontario man is accused of flying into a rage Wednesday after he was allegedly caught smoking in a bathroom aboard a Jetsgo flight
The mid-air antics forced the aircraft's pilots to make an unscheduled pit stop in Winnipeg, where the man was taken into police custody.
The flight was to be non-stop from Toronto to Vancouver.
"He had been caught smoking in one of the washrooms and when confronted about it became combative with the staff on board and it was decided at that point to divert to Winnipeg," said Winnipeg police spokesman Const. Bob Johnson.
Officers with the Winnipeg police airport unit arrested James Miller shortly after 5:30 p.m. at Winnipeg International Airport.
Miller, 33, of Orillia, Ont., was charged with two counts of breaching the Aeronautics Act and failing to comply with the instructions of the flight crew, Johnson said.
Miller was detained in custody at the Winnipeg Remand Centre. He declined an interview request yesterday from The Winnipeg Sun.
Miller is slated to appear in Winnipeg court on Feb. 7.
A Jetsgo spokesperson was unavailable yesterday. But Brad Cicero, a rep with the low-cost carrier, recently told The Sun that it's "very infrequent" that flights have to be diverted due to disruptive passengers.
"It's up to the captain to decide what's best for the flight, both in terms of the crew and the passengers," he said.
Since June 2002, Winnipeg police have had to contend with five other major incidents of air rage that forced aircraft to land in the city.
And just last Friday, a Winnipeg-bound commercial plane had to be diverted to Bismarck, N.D., after a babbling passenger locked himself in a bathroom and took all his clothes off.
UNSTABLE PASSENGER
Police and FBI agents were called to the Bismarck Municipal Airport to help the flight crew remove an apparently unstable passenger.
After a failed attempt at negotiating with the 23-year-old California resident who had barricaded himself in the biffy, authorities broke the lock on the door and forced their way inside.
The man, who was discovered in an inappropriate state of undress, was arrested without incident. He was slated to undergo a physical and mental evaluation.
 

No one backing down on smoking ban
Last Updated Dec 24 2004 08:56 AM CST
REGINA – With a provincewide smoking ban a week away, no one is blinking in the dispute over how the ban will apply on Indian property.
On Thursday, Health Minister John Nilson said he intends to apply the Jan. 1 smoking ban everywhere in Saskatchewan – including Indian reserves and Indian-controlled casinos off-reserve.
But Saskatchewan chiefs say they'll only ask people to butt out in just over half of the indoor areas on reserves.
Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations chief Alphonse Bird says each reserve will create its own law.
"The issue is not whether smoking is good or bad. The issue is creating laws over territories and First Nations that have the ability to create their own laws," Bird said.
Bird said he's not concerned about bar owners who complain they'll be hurt by on-reserve smoking – there are already different rules for First Nations when it comes to cigarettes and gas taxes.
Nilson wasn't saying Thursday what he plans to do if smokers are still puffing away in casinos and bars on reserves.
Nilson added Saskatchewan people tend to obey the rules in this province and he doubts many tickets will be written in the first two months of the ban.
"We're law abiding people in Saskatchewan and people respect the law and it's actually been quite reasonable in how people have responded," he said.
A coalition of health groups is also telling the provincial government not to compromise on what they call an important public health policy.
The Tobacco Control Amendment Act prohibits smoking in all enclosed public places such as restaurants, bars, bingo halls, casinos, bowling alleys, taxis, and private clubs, effective Jan. 1.
 

Essays on the Anti-Smoking Movement

http://www.smokingsection.com/issues2.html


Obesity and Alcohol Abuse - Is there a "sneaky" link between these serious health risks and stopping cigarette smoking?

http://www.wellnessnet.com/obesity-smoking-press-release.html


Smokers: An Endangered Species

http://reliableanswers.com/patriot/?20040209


Where there’s no smoking, there’s fire  -MS

JOHN LARRABEE, Staff Writer12/23/2004

A lobbyist who led the charge to snuff out cigarette smoking in Massachusetts’ bars and restaurants is predicting any effort to change the law will likely fizzle.

 "I find it unlikely, if not impossible," says Diane Pickles, executive director of Tobacco Free Massachusetts, a coalition of groups that support anti-smoking efforts. "This is a law that is working very well. The Department of Public Health has certainly not been flooded with calls or complaints."

Those could be the first words in a knock-down tobacco row in the Statehouse, where a new legislative session begins in early January.
Bar owners and restaurateurs throughout the Blackstone Valley -- and in other small towns across the state -- have been organizing for months for a push to loosen the smoking ban during the next session. Several bills to amend the law have already been filed, including one that would exempt smaller establishments.
And the effort has picked up guarded support from state Rep. Jennifer Callahan, a former nurse and health administrator who originally supported the ban. The Sutton Democrat (whose district includes Uxbridge, Millville, Blackstone and Bellingham) has called the smoking bill "a good law that needs some tweaking."
The smoking ban, which took effect July 5, prohibits lighting up in any workplace, ostensibly to protect the health of employees exposed to cigarette smoking. Supporters cite a recent health study that reported the air in smoky bars and casinos contains 50 times more cancer-causing particles than are found on city streets at rush hour.
Taverns and eateries that once had smoking areas have been hit hardest by the law. Some establishments in the Blackstone Valley claim they’ve lost 30 to 40 percent of their business to members-only clubs, which are exempt from the law, or to bars in Rhode Island. While the neighboring state has adopted a similar smoking ban, it won’t take effect until March, and bars with fewer than 10 employees are exempt.
Not all Massachusetts bar owners have jumped aboard the
See BAN -- Page A-4
Continued from Page A-3
campaign, however. Boston and more than 60 other cities and towns in the state have municipal restaurant smoking bans, and most business owners in those communities support the state law. The Massachusetts Restaurant Association has taken no stand on the issue.
Pickles insists that Blackstone Valley establishment could soon see a boost in business, once customers learn to appreciate the cleaner atmosphere. "There is always a period of transition," she says. "It may take awhile for the general public and employers to get used to the changes."
And she doubts the amendment effort has much strength in the Statehouse. "There was broad support for this in both branches of the legislature, and the governor had no problem signing the bill into law," she says.
Callahan has said the economic impact on business owners is just one of her concerns. She has also heard from municipal officials, who charge the law has created enforcement problems in small towns. And neighbors living near bars have complained about noise problems caused by sidewalk smoking.
State Sen. Richard Moore, the area’s other legislator, has avoided questions about the law in recent weeks. The Uxbridge Democrat was one of the bill’s strongest supports; Recently, however, an aide refused to say if Moore will support or oppose amendments.
"He won’t have any comment until the legislation is taken up," aide Debra Montville says. "That’s when the senator will look at it."
During the last legislative session, Moore accepted sizable campaign contributions from lobbyists working for large tobacco companies.

http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=13613474&BRD=1712&PAG=461&dept_id=478996&rfi=6


Exercise 'can't end obesity risk'  

Dec. 24/04

Exercise is not enough to offset the increased death risk associated with being obese, research suggests.

A study of more than 116,000 women nurses found physical activity did not totally compensate for the higher death risk associated with being obese.

The Harvard School of Public Health researchers said the key was both to exercise and lose weight.

Nurses who were lean but inactive also had an increased death risk, they told the New England Journal of Medicine.

 Excess weight and physical inactivity together could account for about a third of all premature deaths, two-thirds of deaths from cardiovascular disease, and a fifth of deaths from cancer among non-smoking women, they estimate.

They defined excess weight as a body-mass index (weight in kg divided by the square of the height in meters) of 25 or more.

For example, a 5ft 2ins woman was considered obese if she weighed more than 160 pounds and lean if she weighed less than 135 pounds.

Women who did more than 3.5 hours per week of exercise were considered "active".

Compared with the lean, active women, varying degrees of obesity and inactivity increased the risk of an early death.

Double whammy

Lean women who exercised less than 3.5 hours per week increased their risk of early death by 55%.

Obese women who worked out for at least 3.5 hours a week increased their risk by 91% and those who were obese and inactive increased their risk of a premature death by 142%.

The researchers said the key to a long life, for both men and women, is to keep weight down and take regular exercise.

"Public health campaigns should emphasise both the maintenance of a healthy weight and regular physical activity," they said.

Lead author Dr Frank Hu said: "If you are overweight or obese, exercise is good for you even if you don't lose weight.

"For people who are lean and sedentary, it's really important for them to get out of the couch and exercise, even if they don't have to lose weight."

Professor Neil Armstrong, from the Children's Health and Exercise Research Centre in Exeter, said: "If you really want to do something about obesity, it really needs to be a two-fold process, which includes aerobic exercise and a reduction in energy intake.

"Obesity is related to many diseases, such as heart disease, high blood pressure and diabetes, so it's a very important issue.

"And of course the advantage of exercise is not just related to obesity.

"It reduces the risk of heart disease and in postmenopausal women the risk of osteoporosis.

"Plus it generally raises your quality of life."

Dr David Haslam of the National Obesity Forum said: "An obese person who is exercising and maybe getting a bit despondent because the weight is not falling off should take great comfort from the fact that they are at much less risk of heart disease and stroke than if they hadn't been exercising.

"Inactivity, like smoking, is a massive risk factor for heart disease in it's own right."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4120259.stm


Systems for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations I: Critical appraisal of existing approaches

The GRADE Working Group
David Atkins , Martin Eccles , Signe Flottorp , Gordon H Guyatt , David Henry , Suzanne Hill , Alessandro Liberati , Dianne O'Connell , Andrew D Oxman , Bob Phillips , Holger Schunemann , Tessa Tan-Torres Edejer , Gunn E Vist , John W Williams  and . The GRADE Working Group
BMC Health Services Research 2004, 4:38     doi:10.1186/1472-6963-4-38
2 December 2004

Abstract (provisional)

Background

A number of approaches have been used to grade levels of evidence and the strength of recommendations. The use of many different approaches detracts from one of the main reasons for having explicit approaches: to concisely characterise and communicate this information so that it can easily be understood and thereby help people make well-informed decisions. Our objective was to critically appraise six prominent systems for grading levels of evidence and the strength of recommendations as a basis for agreeing on characteristics of a common, sensible approach to grading levels of evidence and the strength of recommendations.

Methods

Six prominent systems for grading levels of evidence and strength of recommendations were selected and someone familiar with each system prepared a description of each of these. Twelve assessors independently evaluated each system based on twelve criteria to assess the sensibility of the different approaches. Systems used by 51 organisations were compared with these six approaches.

Results

There was poor agreement about the sensibility of the six systems. Only one of the systems was suitable for all four types of questions we considered (effectiveness, harm, diagnosis and prognosis). None of the systems was considered usable for all of the target groups we considered (professionals, patients and policy makers). The raters found low reproducibility of judgements made using all six systems. Systems used by 51 organisations that sponsor clinical practice guidelines included a number of minor variations of the six systems that we critically appraised.

Conclusions

All of the currently used approaches to grading levels of evidence and the strength of recommendations have important shortcomings.

http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6963/4/38/abstract


Doctors' fears over cigarette ads blitz  -UK

LEADING doctors claim tough new measures to restrict the advertising of cigarettes in shops, pubs, and clubs, will make little or no difference.
From today, the total space taken up in advertising for all tobacco companies at kiosks and other places selling cigarettes will be limited to an A5-sized area - around the size of a paperback book.
This space will also have to include a health warning taking up 30 per cent of the area.
The regulations also mean that vending machines will only be able to carry a picture of the products on sale.
The restrictions will be enforced by Trading Standards officers and violations will lead to fines of up to £5000 or five months in prison.
But the Royal College of GPs said that while the move was positive, it would do little to tackle the real problem.
Vice-chairman Graham Archard said: "We welcome this move but question whether it will make any real difference.
"People buy cigarettes because they are addicted, not because the machine or kiosk has a picture on it."
The Department of Health said the new regulations - part of the Tobacco Advertising and Promotion Act - were among the strictest in the world.
Health Secretary John Reid was expected to launch the new-look tobacco counter at an Asda supermarket in London today.
He said the new regulations would mean people were no longer "bombarded" by the large, colourful tobacco advertising at their local supermarket or corner shop.

http://news.scotsman.com/uk.cfm?id=1454592004


State-Specific Prevalence of Current Cigarette Smoking Among Adults—United States, 2003

JAMA. 2004;292:2966-2967.

MMWR. 2004;53:1035-1037

1 table omitted

Cigarette smoking causes approximately 440,000 deaths annually in the United States.1 To assess the prevalence of current cigarette smoking among adults, CDC analyzed data from the 2003 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) survey. This report summarizes the results of that analysis, which indicated substantial variation in cigarette smoking prevalence in the 50 states, the District of Columbia (DC), Guam, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands (USVI) (range: 10.0%-34.0%). To further reduce the prevalence of smoking, states/areas should implement comprehensive tobacco-control programs.

BRFSS is a state-based, random-digit–dialed, telephone survey of the U.S. civilian, noninstitutionalized population aged ≥18 years. In 2003, the median state/area response rate was 53.2% (range: 34.4%-80.5%). Estimates were weighted by age and sex distributions for each state’s population, and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. BRFSS respondents were asked, "Have you smoked at least 100 cigarettes in your entire life?" and "Do you now smoke cigarettes every day, some days, or not at all?" Current smokers were defined as those who reported having smoked ≥100 cigarettes during their lifetimes and who currently smoke every day or some days.

In 2003, the median prevalence of current cigarette smoking among adults was 22.1% in the 50 states and DC (range: 12.0% [Utah]–30.8% [Kentucky]) (Table). Smoking prevalence was higher among men (median: 24.8%; range: 14.0%-33.8%) than women (median: 20.3%; range: 9.9%-28.1%) in the 50 states and DC. Smoking prevalence for both men and women was highest in Kentucky (men: 33.8%; women: 28.1%) and lowest in Utah (men: 14.0%; women: 9.9%). In areas other than the 50 states and DC, the median prevalence of current cigarette smoking among adults was 13.6% (range: 10.0% [USVI]–34.0% [Guam]).

Reported by: J Bombard, MSPH, A Malarcher, PhD, M Schooley, MPH, A MacNeil, MPH, Office on Smoking and Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, CDC.

CDC Editorial Note:

Although the prevalence of current cigarette smoking among U.S. adults has declined, the rate of decline has not been rapid enough for the nation to achieve the 2010 national health objective of ≤12% of adults smoking cigarettes (objective 27-1).2-3 The median prevalence of adult smoking decreased 1 percentage point from 2002 to 2003, and the national objective for 2010 was achieved in Utah and the USVI. The high prevalence of current cigarette smoking in most of the remaining states/areas underscores the need for increased efforts to reduce tobacco use.

 The findings in this report are subject to at least three limitations. First, the BRFSS survey does not sample persons in households without telephones, a population that might be more likely to smoke.4 Second, data for cigarette smoking are based on self-reports and are not validated with biochemical tests. However, self-reported data on current smoking status have high validity.4 Third, the median response rate was 53.2% (range: 34.4%-80.5%); lower response rates indicate a potential for response bias. However, BRFSS estimates for cigarette smoking are comparable with current smoking estimates from other surveys with higher response rates.5

Comprehensive tobacco control is effective in preventing and reducing tobacco use.6 CDC recommends the following evidence-based interventions as strategies within comprehensive tobacco-control programs: clean indoor air laws, telephone support quitlines, media campaigns, increased excise taxes on tobacco products, insurance coverage for cessation counseling and pharmaceuticals, and health-care system changes that support cessation.7 Substantial variation exists across states in their use of these strategies. For example, in 2002, two states offered Medicaid coverage for all recommended medication and counseling treatments for tobacco dependence, whereas 11 states covered no tobacco-dependence treatments.8 In addition, the average cost of a single pack of cigarettes (which includes state-based excise taxes) ranged from $3.10 in Kentucky to $5.54 in New York in 2003.9 The majority of states offer telephone support quitlines, and residents of all states soon will have access to a nationwide network of quitlines. Finally, only six states (California, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Massachusetts, and New York) have comprehensive statewide bans in effect on smoking in indoor workplaces and public places.

The more funds that states spend on comprehensive tobacco-control programs, the greater the reduction in smoking.6 However, the amount of money that states spend for tobacco control decreased 28% during the preceding 2 years to $541.1 million, which is less than 3% of the estimated $19 billion states expected to receive from tobacco excise taxes and tobacco settlement money in 2003.10 For fiscal year 2004 (i.e., July 1, 2003–June 31, 2004), only four states (Arkansas, Delaware, Maine, and Mississippi) were investing at least the minimum per capita amount that CDC recommends for tobacco-control programs.10 Efforts and resources must be expanded if more states are to reduce smoking prevalence to ≤12% by 2010.
REFERENCES
1. CDC. Annual smoking-attributable mortality, years of potential life lost, and economic costs—United States 1995-1999. MMWR. 2002;51:300-303. MEDLINE

2. CDC. Cigarette smoking among adults—United States, 2002. MMWR. 2004;53:427-431. MEDLINE

 3. US Department of Health and Human Services. Healthy people 2010 (conference ed, in 2 vols). Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services; 2000. Available at http://www.health.gov/healthypeople

4. Nelson DE, Holtzman D, Bolen J, Stanwyck CA, Mack KA. Reliability and validity of measures from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS). Soz Praventivmed. 2001;46(suppl 1):S3-S42. ISI | MEDLINE

5. US Department of Health and Human Services. Women and smoking: a report of the Surgeon General. Rockville, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Office of the Surgeon General; 2001:24-25.

6. Farrelly MC, Pechacek TF, Chaloupka FJ. The impact of tobacco control program expenditures on aggregate cigarette sales: 1981-2000. Health Econ. 2003;22:843-859.CrossRef

7. Task Force on Community Preventive Services. Guide to community preventive services: tobacco use prevention and control. Am J Prev Med. 2001;20(Suppl 1):1-87.

8. CDC. State Medicaid coverage for tobacco-dependence treatments—United States, 1994-2002. MMWR. 2004;53:54-57. MEDLINE

9. Orzechowski W, Walker RC. The tax burden on tobacco, volume 38. Arlington, VA: Orzechowski and Walker; 2003.

10. Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids; American Heart Association, American Cancer Society, American Lung Association. A broken promise to our children: the 1998 state tobacco settlement five years later. Washington, DC: Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids; 2003. Available at http://www.tobaccofreekids.org/reports/settlements/2004/fullreport.pdf.

 http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/292/24/2966


Ingested Arsenic, Cigarette Smoking, and Lung Cancer Risk

A Follow-up Study in Arseniasis-Endemic Areas in Taiwan

Chi-Ling Chen, PhD;Lin-I Hsu, PhD; Hung-Yi Chiou, PhD; Yu-Mei Hsueh, PhD; Shu-Yuan Chen, PhD; Meei-Maan Wu, PhD; Chien-Jen Chen, ScD; for the Blackfoot Disease Study Group
 

JAMA. 2004;292:2984-2990.

ABSTRACT

Context  Arsenic has been documented as a lung carcinogen in humans in only a few follow-up studies, which were limited by a small number of cases or the lack of information on cigarette smoking.

 Objectives  To elucidate the dose-response relationship between ingested arsenic and lung cancer and to assess the effect of cigarette smoking on the arsenic–lung cancer association.

Design, Setting, and Participants  A total of 2503 residents in southwestern and 8088 in northeastern arseniasis-endemic areas in Taiwan were followed up for an average period of 8 years. Information on arsenic exposure, cigarette smoking, and other risk factors was collected at enrollment through standardized questionnaire interview.

Main Outcome Measures  The incidence of lung cancer was ascertained through linkage with national cancer registry profiles in Taiwan (January 1985-December 2000). The joint effect of arsenic and cigarette smoking was estimated by both etiologic fraction and synergy index.

Results  There were 139 newly diagnosed lung cancer cases during a follow-up period of 83 783 person-years. After adjustment for cigarette smoking and other risk factors, there was a monotonic trend of lung cancer risk by arsenic level in drinking water of less than 10 to 700 µg/L or more (P<.001). The relative risk was 3.29 (95% confidence interval, 1.60-6.78) for the highest arsenic level compared with the lowest. The etiologic fraction of lung cancer attributable to the joint exposure of ingested arsenic and cigarette smoking ranged from 32% to 55%. The synergy indices ranged from 1.62 to 2.52, indicating a synergistic effect of ingested arsenic and cigarette smoking on lung cancer.

Conclusions  There was a significant dose-response trend of ingested arsenic on lung cancer risk, which was more prominent among cigarette smokers. The risk assessment of lung cancer induced by ingested arsenic should take cigarette smoking into consideration.

http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/292/24/2984


Judge rules Big Tobacco doesn't have to pay farmers
Court: Companies also due a refund

By Michael Felberbaum Associated Press

RALEIGH, N.C. — The tobacco-quota buyout approved by Congress this year releases cigarette companies from making payments to Kentucky farmers and others that had been required by a landmark 1998 settlement, a North Carolina judge ruled yesterday.

The millions of dollars in Phase II payments have compensated tobacco growers for losses they were expected to suffer under higher cigarette prices resulting from the agreement between Big Tobacco and the states.

Cigarette companies contend they weren't obligated to make a final $189 million payment this month to farmers in 14 states because Congress approved a $10.1billion tobacco buyout this fall.

North Carolina Business Court Judge Ben Tennille agreed and also ruled that the companies should get a refund on payments made earlier this year.

Though the suit was being heard in a special state court in North Carolina, the ruling will apply to tobacco companies and farmers in other tobacco states.

An appeal of the ruling is likely, which would delay a final decision for months.

In 1999, the four major tobacco companies agreed to make $5.15 billion in Phase II payments over 12 years to compensate growers and quota holders for losses stemming from the $206billion tobacco settlement approved the previous year.

Tobacco growers were counting on the final payment at the end of 2004, before the buyout takes effect.

Some expected to use the money to pay off operating loans, said Ed Bissette, a director of the North Carolina Phase II board and a fourth-generation tobacco farmer in Nash County.

Attorneys for the boards in the 14 states, as well as the trustees at JPMorgan Chase, argue that the companies aren't relieved of the Phase II payments until they actually make payments for the buyout to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. That won't happen until early 2005.

Tennille's decision was posted late yesterday on the court's Web site and dated Dec. 23.

http://www.courier-journal.com/localnews/2004/12/23ky/A1-tob1223-7157.html


Tobacco farmers' group files notice to appeal judge's decision

A group overseeing payments to tobacco farmers and quota holders from a 1999 settlement said Thursday that it will appeal a judge's decision that cigarette companies don't have to make the last of those payments.By ESTES THOMPSON, Associated Press Writer, The Associated Press

December 23, 2004

The board overseeing distribution of the payments, called Phase II funds, filed the notice of appeal in North Carolina Business Court.

Judge Ben Tennille angered farmers Wednesday when he ruled that cigarette companies didn't have to make final annual payments to growers because the 1999 settlement was superseded by Congress' approval of a $10.1 billion tobacco buyout this fall.

In 1999, the four major tobacco companies agreed to make $5.15 billion in Phase II payments over 12 years to compensate growers and quota holders for losses stemming from the $206 billion tobacco settlement.

The final payments under the settlement would have totaled $430 million in 14 tobacco-producing states.

Farm advocates said the ruling, if it holds up under appeal, means farmers who were counting on a check this month won't have money to buy supplies for the 2005 crop or to pay debts.

"I hope Judge Tennille has a merry Christmas," said Larry Wooten, president of the N.C. Farm Bureau. "Yesterday's ruling makes it hard for North Carolina farmers to truly have a merry Christmas. His ruling will cause many farmers and communities in rural North Carolina to suffer."

John Davis, executive director of the state's Phase II Tobacco Certification Entity, said the appeals would delay any payments for a few months.

In addition to rejecting the demand that the last payment be made into the fund, Tennille told the states to work out a plan to refund previous payments being held until the Dec. 31 payout date.

The appeal puts that refund plan on hold, Davis said.

Cigarette maker Philip Morris USA said in a statement Thursday that when the trust was created it was "with an understanding by all parties that the companies' payments would cease if a tobacco quota buyout funded by the companies was passed."

Philip Morris expects the buyout payments to start next year.

The ruling is a blow to farmers, said Johnston County farmer Jimmy Lee.

"It's going to be a hard lick because most farmers went in anticipating to get a payment," said Lee, president of the Contract Tobacco Growers Association. "I know that we've got this buyout coming, but that's in 12 months. It might be the law, but it's not the right thing to do."

Farmers affected are in North Carolina, Kentucky, Tennessee, South Carolina, Virginia, Georgia, Ohio, Indiana, Florida, Missouri, West Virginia, Alabama, Maryland and Pennsylvania.

http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=13618000&BRD=2212&PAG=461&dept_id=465812&rfi=6


Award Upheld to Flight Attendant in Secondhand Smoke Case
Catherine Wilson The Associated Press
12-27-2004
A state appeals court upheld a $500,000 award to a flight attendant who blamed secondhand smoke on airliners for her bronchitis and sinus trouble -- a decision Wednesday that could clear the way for damage trials on up to 3,000 similar claims.
The ruling for former TWA attendant Lynn French was a test case interpreting a $349 million settlement reached in 1997 between the tobacco industry and nonsmoking attendants.
The flight attendants blamed their illnesses on smoke in the cabin before smoking was banned on domestic flights in 1990.
"The court agreed with us, and we're happy with it," said Marvin Weinstein, French's attorney. "Based on this, I think there are a lot more they're going to be paying."
After the tobacco industry agreed to settle, a system of mini-trials was set up for each flight attendant to decide whether he or she deserved compensatory damages.
Under the ground rules, each jury was to presume that secondhand smoke causes several diseases; the attendants had to prove only that they suffered from one of those diseases and that their exposure to smoke occurred on the job.
The c


Posted at 11:08 am by looped_ca
Comments (1)

Tuesday, December 21, 2004
SCIENCE AND NEWS

Lung lobby lambastes smoking stars

Aykroyd under fire over on-screen prop

Sunday, December 19th, 2004

By Chris Cobb

OTTAWA -- The American Lung Association is shining a critical spotlight on Hollywood stars in a high-pressure effort to get them to butt out on screen. And one of the first targets on the association's new anti-smoking website launched this week is Canada's own Oscar winner Dan Aykroyd, who has incurred the wrath of clean-lung advocates for puffing on a pipe towards the end of Christmas with the Kranks.

The association rates movies with icons of lungs -- black for heavy depictions of smoking and pink when none of the characters smoke. Aykroyd's neighbourly Kranks movie gets a light grey rating.

In other reviews of the week's top 10 movies and DVDs, SceneSmoking.org also has harsh words for Andy Garcia and his cigar-chomping Ocean's Twelve character Terry Benedict.

"There won't be an Ocean's Thirteen if some of the thieves and Benedict don't quit their cigar habits," notes one of the 50 young people the association has hired in the Sacramento, Calif., area to monitor smoking content in newly released DVDs and movies.

Other stars are on the black list for either smoking in movies or flaunting their personal smoking habits during interviews. High on the list are Ben Affleck, Jennifer Aniston and her husband Brad Pitt, Ann Archer, Lara Flynn Boyle, Drew Barrymore, Tom Arnold and Aykroyd's sometime singing partner Jim Belushi, who has a well-advertised liking for cigars. Even Humphrey Bogart, the most famous screen smoker of all time, gets some posthumous negative comment on the website. Bogart died in 1957 of throat cancer in an era when smoking was at its most glamorous and few suspected it could kill.

The lung association campaign is deadly serious and is motivated by recent U.S. studies that offer the most conclusive evidence yet that tobacco use by popular actors and actresses has a direct and pervasive influence on youngsters. According to the studies, conducted at Dartmouth College in New Hampshire, smoking is increasing among North American teenagers and at least half of those who start smoking say they were influenced by movie stars or other celebrities.

"Star power sells movies," says the association on its website. "It can also sell tobacco use."

The lung association is trying to get cigarettes, cigars and pipes banned as movie props unless the subject of the film is a real person or historical figure.

"If the movie was about Winston Churchill, it would be acceptable to portray him smoking cigars," said Shelley Mitchell, senior project manager for the Thumbs Up, Thumbs Down anti-smoking project.

-- CanWest News Service

WINNEPEGFREEPRESS.COM


Blowing smoke I

By PAUL MOLLON
Saturday, December 18, 2004 - Page A26

Owen Sound, Ont.-- Re Ontario Unveils Smoking Ban (Dec. 16): It's so comforting to know that Ontario Health Minister George Smitherman is looking after us and plans a complete ban on smoking. After all, banning alcohol in the Twenties was such a rip-roaring success, and aren't we all so happy that the current "war on drugs" has stamped out the use and abuse of all other mind-altering substances?

The nanny state once again rides to the rescue. I'm quickly going to my cookie jar to flush all the high-fat, high-sugar goodies down the toilet. Mr. Smitherman will surely be coming for them next.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20041218/LETTERS18-13/TPHealth/


Blowing smoke II

By D. GRIFFIN
Saturday, December 18, 2004 - Page A26 Toronto -- Wouldn't it be great if the anti-smoking legislation, scheduled to take effect May 31, 2006, roughly coincided with the retirement of 100,000 nursing staff (One-Third Of Nurses Close To Retirement -- Dec. 15)? If the legislation actually accomplished its goal, we might not need that many replacement nurses after all

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20041218/LETTERS18-14/TPHealth/


The anti-smoking gun

Friday, December 17, 2004

The campaign to discourage smoking and to protect the health of non-smokers is admirable, but the legislation proposed this week by Ontario Health Minister George Smitherman is so absolutist that it risks trampling fairness and common sense.

Consider the case of Toronto. In 1999, the Toronto Board of Health drafted abylaw to ban smoking completely inbars and restaurants by 2001. The politicians found this to be extreme. They brokereda deal between an anti-smoking coalition and the bar and restaurant industry that permitted the existence of enclosed,separately ventilated designated smoking rooms. The city council passed the amended bylaw (which also extended the deadline for bars) by a vote of 50 to 1. Many of Toronto's bars and restaurants, fearful of driving away customers who chose to smoke, invested between $20,000 and $300,000 in such rooms.

In May of this year, the Toronto Board of Health went over Toronto's head, urging Mr. Smitherman to close down the city-sanctioned smoking rooms by 2007. Mr. Smitherman, whose Liberal government had come into office keen to crack down on smokers, this week introduced provincial legislation that he said would, among many other controls, "eliminate so-called designated smoking rooms." (The bill would also ban smoking in Legion halls but permit it in nursing homes. Oh, the whims of power.)

Tobacco is an addictive, health-destroying substance. But as long as it remains a legal product, the crusade to ensure that an Ontario region can't even let adult smokers light up in an enclosed, separately ventilated room is punitive law, not good law. There may be an argument that smokers who retire with their drinks or their food to those rooms shouldn't expect regular service there -- the health of the waiters is at issue -- but such subtleties don't seem to be a factor in the government's crusade. Neither does the good faith in which establishments built their separate rooms to comply with the Toronto bylaw.

Mr. Smitherman this week proudlydescribed his government's proposed legislation as the "toughest, most comprehensive and far-reaching" in North America. He may well be right. Certainly his crusades have had an evangelistic zeal to them; consider his blanket ban, since aborted, on the sale in Ontario of sushi and other raw fish. What's missing is a sense of proportion.

http://globeandmail.workopolis.com/servlet/Content/fasttrack/20041217/ESMOKING17?section=Travel


Canada's highest court to hear tobacco companies' appeal of legislation

Greg Joyce Canadian PressDecember 19, 2004

VANCOUVER (CP) - The long-standing fight between British Columbia and three tobacco companies moved to the judicial big leagues Thursday after the Supreme Court agreed to hear an appeal by the companies.

The nation's highest court agreed to hear an appeal of B.C. legislation known as the Tobacco Damages and Health Care Costs Recovery Act.

Several provinces have been watching the case with a view to launching similar legislation of their own. However, the Supreme Court hearing means it could be years before any costs are recovered.

The B.C. Court of Appeal, in a unanimous decision last May, ruled the B.C. government's legislation is constitutionally valid.

"It's important and it's (the Supreme Court appeal) the right thing to do," said Dave Laundy, spokesman for the Canadian Tobacco Manufacturers' Council, which is also a part of the appeal.

In May, the province's Liberal government got a green light to proceed with the lawsuit that seeks to recover $10 billion in health-care costs from tobacco companies.

The lawsuit names Imperial Tobacco Canada, Rothmans, Benson and Hedges, JTI-Macdonald, the tobacco council and several foreign tobacco companies.

Attorney General Geoff Plant said the case is important to the province.

"I think the stakes are high for British Columbia because we believe that the actions of the tobacco companies in not telling the truth about their products have cost the health-care system billions of dollars over the years."

The attorney general may prod other provinces to get involved.

"We may well encourage other provinces to intervene in the Supreme Court of Canada decision here."

The B.C. Appeal Court ruling overturned the decision of the B.C. Supreme Court, which twice previously - dating back to 1998 - had declared the legislation unconstitutional.

Laundy said the legislation is unfair to the tobacco manufacturers because its wording restricts the industry from gaining evidence on health-related issues, including how many people have become ill from smoking.

But Plant disagreed.

"I don't think that's a fair characterization of what the provincial statute tries to do," he said.

"It certainly tries to change some of the usual rules about evidence but it does so in the context of a completely new kind of lawsuit."

The legislation alleges tobacco manufacturers failed to warn consumers of the dangers of smoking, marked light cigarettes as safe and targeted children in their advertising and marketing.

A policy analyst and lawyer with the Canadian Cancer Society also said the case was of great importance to both sides.

"Other provinces are watching this closely so a judgment by the Supreme Court that is favourable will really give a green light to provinces to move ahead with their own legislation," said Rob Cunningham.

"Clearly, the stakes are high on both sides of the issue."

In 1998, B.C.'s former NDP government became the first government in Canada to attempt to sue tobacco companies, but the suit was rejected by the courts as too broad.

The suit said tobacco companies should be held liable for the tobacco-related illnesses that cost British Columbia an estimated $500 million a year in health costs.

http://www.canada.com/health/story.html?id=941120d0-4a97-4528-8eed-db32e4e9e586


Italy's Smoking Ban Plan Meets Resistance

Published Monday, December 20, 2004 By ALESSANDRA RIZZO
Associated Press Writer ROME
A cigarette with that Chianti? No more - at least not in most of Italy's restaurants and bars, starting next month.
In this cigarette-loving country, a new law to ban smoking in public places has won support from nonsmokers. Restaurant owners, however, are fuming because it requires them to report diners who flout the law and light up.
They worry their new policing role will sour relations with customers.
"We are being asked to become informers, but we don't want to give up our relation with customers," lamented Edi Sommariva, the director general of the Italian federation that groups bars, restaurants and other public places.
If the law isn't changed, he said Monday, the association will go to court.
The new legislation goes into force Jan. 10. It was originally expected to take effect at the end of this month, but officials agreed to postpone enforcement to allow smokers a few last puffs on New Year's.
"We will not allow any more delays," Health Minister Girolamo Sirchia said over the weekend. "Those who want to smoke can do so in the streets or in their homes, not around those who do not tolerate it."
The legislation is the centerpiece of Sirchia's efforts to curb smoking in Italy. Italian regulations already restrict smoking in many places, although these laws are often ignored and rarely enforced. About 26 percent of the adult population lights up, according to Health Ministry figures.
The law bans smoking in all indoor spaces unless they have a separate smoking area with continuous floor-to-ceiling walls and a ventilation system. It raises fines by 10 percent for violators and envisages stiff penalties of up to $2,900 for personnel who do not report to authorities when a customer is smoking.
The outcry made headlines in many Italian newspapers Monday. Corriere della Sera, the country's largest daily, ran a front-page editorial headlined "The Sheriff's Trattoria."
Reporting violations is "the job of the state and of its public officials. A bartender and a restaurateur are not guards," said the editorial.
Sirchia - a prominent doctor before taking up the ministry job - shrugged off the protests, saying personnel "must merely invite the customer to avoid smoking if it's not the right area."
He received support Monday from the Codacons consumers' group, which said it would "unleash its inspectors in bars and restaurants to make sure the ban is enforced."
But even some members of the governing coalition distanced themselves from Sirchia's anti-tobacco campaign.
Ignazio La Russa, a prominent lawmaker in the National Alliance government party and an ex-chain smoker, said the law would stigmatize smokers as "people with a plague." Another lawmaker from the same party, Alberto Arrighi, said Sirchia "is a great doctor, but he seems to me a Taliban member on the political level," according to the ANSA news agency.
Italy's law follows a similar effort in Ireland, which forced a ban on smoking in all enclosed workplaces, including pubs, earlier this year. The move has caused 7,000 people to quit smoking and 10,000 to decrease their frequency, according to the European Union's top health official, David Byrne.
The British government said last month it was also seeking to impose a smoking ban in most public places, including restaurants and any pub or bar that serves food.
In Italy, only 10 percent of restaurants deemed it convenient to create a smoking area, according to Sommariva's association. The rest will become entirely nonsmoking.
"The law is exaggerated, and it's based on a terrorist approach I don't agree with," said Claudio Ferrari, a 27-year-old archaeologist - and smoker - sipping coffee in a bar in central Rome. "I don't share the idea that it's up to the state to educate citizens. A little common sense is all it takes."

http://www.theledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041220/API/412200849


Lawyers Argue Over Tobacco Payments

 December 20, 2004

GREENSBORO -- More than 200 tobacco growers watched Monday afternoon as attorneys for cigarette companies and farmers squared off over whether Big Tobacco should make one last payment to leaf growers.

North Carolina Business Court Judge Ben Tennille told lawyers he hoped to make his ruling by Wednesday or Thursday.

That ruling would have a big impact on thousands of growers in 14 states.

These so-called "Phase Two" payments have compensated tobacco growers over for losses they were expected to suffer as a result of higher cigarette prices following the 1998 settlement.

Cigarette companies say they aren't obligated to make a payment this month because Congress approved a tobacco buyout this fall.

Tennille ruling's may be appealed to a higher court.

http://www.wxii12.com/news/4011989/detail.html


Hwy. Dept. kicks off litter hotline-AR
With roadside litter an escalating problem throughout the state, now over 60,000 cubic yards collected per year, the Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department (AHTD) has announced a new violator reporting system and 24-hour, toll-free hotline to ask for motorist assistance in helping solve the problem.
After the Tuesday, Dec. 14 launch, highway officials are encouraging motorists who spot a littering violation along any street, road or highway to call 1-866-811-1222 to report the situation. All types of trash and all types of vehicles are subject to be reported, whether a cigarette butt or whether thrown from a commercial vehicle, as long as the license plate number is provided.
Litter reporting phone calls will be answered 24 hours a day by an office of the Arkansas Highway Police (AHP) who will record the incident. A letter will then be sent to the registered owner of the vehicle regarding the violation. "Information about recurring violations reported from the same vehicle will be tracked and may eventually result in a visit by an Arkansas police officer to investigate the problem," said AHP Chief Ron Burks. "Our goal is to let citizens know this is a problem we take seriously and will pursue thoroughly the enforcement of Arkansas' litter laws," added Burks.
Reporting a litter violation will be quick and simple, while allowing the caller to remain unidentified. Motorists using the reporting system will need to provide the date and location that the littering occurred, a description of the vehicle including the license plate number and a description of the item discarded. Roadway signs currently in place to forewarn motorists of potential fines for littering will now include the toll-free number asking motorists to report people who litter.
"We expect three benefits by implementing the new Litter Reporting System," said Director of Highways & Transportation, Dan Flowers, at a launch event held at the AHTD Central Offices. "Motorists who see the signs or become aware of the program will be reminded that they can be reported for littering by any other motorist and, then, may be more conscious of their own littering behavior. Second, the program will give citizens who see littering happen some remedy to the frustration of watching careless motorists trash the natural beauty of our state, and third, we hope that any person who receives the letter will be more thoughtful of their littering habits and will change their behavior."
"Currently there are eight other states that have implemented similar violator reporting systems with great success, so it's time for Arkansas to begin a serious effort to curtail this escalating problem," said Highway Commission Chairman Prissy Hickerson. "Not only will a reduction in roadside litter improve the enjoyment of residents and visitors who travel our highways, but it's a great preservation of our natural environment and will save taxpayer money being spent on cleaning up the discarded trash of careless motorists," added Hickerson.
The AHTD's violator reporting system is part of a comprehensive plan to curtail roadside litter in Arkansas. At the request of the Arkansas Highway Commission, the 2003 Litter Task Force was formed from federal, state and local governments and associations to review current litter prevention and removal activities and identify areas of improvement. Action teams were then established to focus on the areas of education and outreach, litter pick up, enforcement and legislative funding. In addition to the AHTD spearheading the litter reduction effort, representatives from associations and state agencies such as the Highway Police, Arkansas State Police (ASP), Chiefs of Police & Sheriffs Associations, the Departments of Environmental Quality and Parks & Tourism, Game & Fish Commission and the Keep Arkansas Beautiful Commission have diligently worked together to solve Arkansas' litter control problem.
Additional programs and policies are still in development as a result of the Litter Task Force efforts to create incentives for litter enforcement and clean up activities. A recognition program for law enforcement officers who are highly involved in anti-litter efforts, a program for corrections facilities that utilize prisoners in highway clean up efforts and highly publicized enforcement priority weeks will greatly raise the level of litter control action across Arkansas.
Also, an anti-litter citation guide is being distributed for easy reference by law enforcement officers, ASP will include litter laws on the inside cover of the Arkansas Drivers Manual and The Arkansas Law Enforcement Training Academy will include a section on litter law enforcement in their training curricula.

http://www.sherwoodvoice.com/Pages/12-16-04/Hwy.%20Dept.%20kicks%20off%20litter%20hotline.htm


The contribution of smoking, diet, screening and treatment to cancer mortality in the under-75s

20 Dec 2004

Cancer is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in England and Wales with 223,609 new cases of cancer registered in 2000. A new briefing paper The contribution of smoking, diet, screening and treatment to cancer mortality in the under-75s published by the Health Development Agency (UK) today reviews the impact that various measures have had in the treatment and reduction of certain types of cancer.
For men, lung, prostate and colorectal cancers account for about 50% of all cancer deaths and for women breast, lung and colorectal cancers account for 46% of all deaths. Lung, breast, colorectal, stomach and prostate cancers cause most deaths and it follows that public health approaches should focus on these cancers.
In addition to tobacco related cancer deaths, which account for one third of all cancer deaths, other lifestyle factors are significant risk factors for many cancers. For instance, it has been estimated that changes in diet could help prevent a third of all cancers. It is estimated that changes in diet could help prevent a third of all cancers. It is estimated that cancer mortality, attributable to specific factors or groups of factors in developed countries was tobacco 30%, diet and obesity 30%, alcohol 3%, inactivity 3% and occupational factors 5%. Research shows that overall, primary prevention seems to be around seven times more effective than secondary prevention.
Professor Mike Kelly, Director of Evidence and Guidance at the Health Development Agency said:
‘Primary prevention such as media campaigns or government legislation are effective with cancers such as lung cancer where not starting to smoke will drastically reduce your chances of developing lung cancer, whereas secondary disease detection, such as screening is not effective with lung cancer.
‘It is known after five years, men with lung cancer have a survival rate of only 5-7 %, as there is no really effective treatment for lung cancer. Whereas with breast cancer, treatment combined with screening (secondary prevention) can have a positive effect on survival rates.'
Incidence and survival have an impact on mortality rate. Incidence is a measure of the number of new cases in any given time period. Survival is a measure of the time from diagnosis to death. This complex interaction between incidence and survival provides the key to determining the extent to which primary or secondary prevention, or treatment, provide the most appropriate approach to tackling this disease.
The majority of people (65%) diagnosed with cancer are over the age of 65 and cancer is predominantly a disease of older people, this will affect future mortality and morbidity trends. We have an ageing population and it is important that strategies for prevention and treatment take this into account.
Possible implications on policy based on the reviewed patterns of cancer mortality include:
-- Different types of cancer need to be separated and the relative importance of incidence and survival examined if we are properly assess varying importance of factors such as smoking, diet, inactivity screening and treatment to cancer mortality.
-- An aggressive approach to reduce smoking will continue to drive down numbers of lung and other cancers. This will also impact on coronary heart disease. There should also be greater emphasis on smoking reduction in deprived areas as smoking is an inequalities issue. In poorer areas people are more likely to die form smoking related diseases than they are in richer areas.
-- Primary prevention of cancers associated with diet, lack of exercise, obesity and exposure to the sun could be effective.
-- Screening programmes for breast and cervical cancer should continue but the evidence does not support screening for lung or prostate cancer.
-- Treatment options need to be continually developed in areas where, up to now there has been limited success.
On the basis of the existing evidence and exposure trends, primary and secondary prevention have already reduced cancer mortality by almost 13% in comparison to the rates which would have been reached in the absence of these measures. In the next 20 years, a further reduction of about 29% is potentially achievable, mostly through primary prevention.
ENDS
Notes to editors:
1 The briefing paper is available on the Health Development Agency website: http://www.hda.nhs.uk.
2 The Health Development Agency is the national authority on what works to improve people's health and to reduce health inequalities. We work in partnership across sectors to support informed decision making at all levels and the development of effective practice.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=18079


National Academies news: Gulf War and Health

21 Dec 2004

The available evidence is too sparse or of insufficient quality to determine whether the majority of health problems that may be experienced by Gulf War veterans could be associated with exposures to fuels for military vehicles, propellents in Scud missiles, or substances given off by combustion sources such as oil-well fires, exhausts, and tent heaters, according to the latest report on the Gulf War and health from the Institute of Medicine of the National Academies. However, data from studies of occupational and environmental exposures to air pollution, vehicle exhaust, and other combustion products led the committee that wrote the report to conclude that exposure to such substances is associated with an increased risk of lung cancer.
"Studies of people exposed to air pollution, vehicle exhaust, and burning of coal or other heating and cooking fuels consistently show that such exposures are linked to an increased risk for developing lung cancer," said committee chair Lynn Goldman, professor, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore. "This provides sufficient evidence that exposure to combustion products during the Gulf War could be associated with lung cancer in some veterans." Military personnel may have encountered combustion products from diesel-fueled heaters in poorly ventilated tents, cooking stoves, vehicle exhaust systems, and oil-well fires. "It should be emphasized that smoking is the major culprit for lung cancer, accounting for 80 percent of all cases, according to the American Cancer Society," Goldman added.
The committee also found some evidence that exposure to combustion products is linked to asthma and cancers of the nose, mouth, throat, and bladder, as well as to low birth weight and premature births in women exposed while pregnant; the data were weaker in these cases, however. The data on whether the majority of cancers, neurological problems, and other health problems are associated with exposure to fuels, propellants, or combustion products were inadequate to draw conclusions. "While we would like to have more definitive answers to questions about the specific diseases that may be associated with these substances, in most cases the evidence simply is not strong enough or does not exist," Goldman said.
Because scant information exists on actual exposure levels experienced by individual service members -- a critical factor when assessing health effects -- the committee could not draw specific conclusions about Gulf War veterans' chances of developing lung cancer or any other health problems as a result of exposures. No systematic monitoring of air contamination from oil-well fires was conducted in the Persian Gulf region until May 1991, and this monitoring did not measure levels of contamination produced by other combustion sources, such as heaters or engines. Moreover, no data are available that would allow comparisons between levels of exposure to air contaminants during the Gulf War and exposures to similar contaminants in civilian occupational and environmental settings.
Veterans who have experienced chronic health problems following their service in the Persian Gulf region are asking whether exposure to various chemical, biological, or environmental agents might be responsible. This IOM report is the third in a series that responds to requests from the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and Congress to examine the health effects of potentially harmful agents to which Gulf War veterans might have been exposed. The first report focused on potential health effects from depleted uranium, pyridostigmine bromide, sarin, and vaccines; the second centered on insecticides and solvents. These reports did not directly assess whether health effects could occur as a result of service in the Gulf War.
For the current report, the committee evaluated the published, peer-reviewed research on exposure to unburned fuels, combustion products, and hydrazines and nitric acid -- components of the propellant used for Scud and other missiles -- for any evidence of links to specific cancers, neurological effects, or other health problems that persist after exposure. More than 600 oil-well fires were ignited in Kuwait by retreating Iraqi troops during the Gulf War conflict, sending up large plumes of smoke that occasionally remained low to the ground. Troops also may have been exposed to combustion products through vehicle exhaust, heaters in poorly ventilated tents, and cooking stoves. Military personnel may have had contact with hydrazines and nitric acid when they disarmed or disposed of Scud missiles or were downwind of a missile explosion. They also may have come into contact with fuels when refueling ground vehicles, aircraft, and equipment.
Of the approximately 800 studies reviewed in detail for this report, most involved individuals who were exposed to these agents in occupational settings over long periods of time. Only a small number actually studied veterans who may have been exposed while serving in the Persian Gulf. The committee carefully assessed the quality, limitations, and relevance of each epidemiologic study, and used five categories to describe the strength of the evidence.
SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE OF A CAUSAL RELATIONSHIP, the strongest level of evidence, means that many studies have established a clear link between exposure to an agent and a health outcome. Among the other requirements, there must be a plausible biological explanation for the relationship. None of the compounds evaluated in this report met these criteria.
Evidence that establishes a link between exposures and a health outcome with reasonable certainty, but fails to meet the higher standard of proof needed for causality, is characterized as SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE OF AN ASSOCIATION. The evidence for an association between lung cancer and combustion products falls into this category.
When a limited number of studies suggest that a link exists, but without reasonable certainty, the evidence is said to be LIMITED OR SUGGESTIVE OF AN ASSOCIATION. This category describes the evidence for links between combustion products and nasal, oral, laryngeal, and bladder cancers; asthma; and low birth weight and preterm births by women exposed while pregnant. Likewise, the evidence for an association between hydrazine exposure and lung cancer fits this definition.
If several studies of adequate quality consistently fail to show a positive association at any level of exposure, the evidence is described as LIMITED OR SUGGESTIVE OF NO ASSOCIATION. And evidence that lacks sufficient quality, consistency, or statistical power to draw any conclusion is judged to be INADEQUATE OR INSUFFICIENT TO DETERMINE WHETHER AN ASSOCIATION EXISTS. The majority of the evidence on fuels, combustion products, and propellants falls into this final category.
The study was sponsored by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. The Institute of Medicine is a private, nonprofit institution that provides health policy advice under a congressional charter granted to the National Academy of Sciences. A committee roster follows.
A pre-publication version of GULF WAR AND HEALTH, VOL. 3: FUELS, COMBUSTION PRODUCTS, AND PROPELLANTS is available on the Internet at HTTP://WWW.NAP.EDU. Reporters may obtain a copy from the Office of News and Public Information (contacts listed above).
[ This news release and report are available at HTTP://NATIONAL-ACADEMIES.ORG ]

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=18117


Potentially fatal toxicities occur with off-label use of cancer drugs

21 Dec 2004

Food and Drug Administration policies prevent pharmaceutical manufacturers from informing patients about potentially fatal toxicities that occur with some cancer drugs -- policies that should be revised immediately, according to Northwestern University researchers.
Andrew M. Evens, D.O., instructor in medicine, and Charles L. Bennett, M.D., professor of medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, have called for an immediate revision of these FDA policies, particularly because the drug thalidomide, which was approved by the FDA as an off-label cancer treatment in 1998, has been reported to have caused potentially fatal blood clots in the legs and the lungs in over 190 cancer patients.
Virtually all patients who have received thalidomide over the past six years have received the drug for cancer, making this drug the only one in the country whose use is exclusively off label.
The FDA strictly restricts discussion or dissemination of information to physicians and patients to "on label" indications, which prevents the pharmaceutical manufacturer from advising cancer patients about the side effects of thalidomide when it is used to treat cancer.
Moreover, despite an FDA mandate that all health care personnel and patients involved with thalidomide treatments participate in the preventive System for Thalidomide Education and Prescribing Safety (STEPS), the program does not provide patients, pharmacists or health care providers with information on thromboembolisms.
Evens presented the RADAR (Research on Adverse Drug Events and Reports) data on the thalidomide-associated blood clots on at the 46th Annual Meeting of the American Society of Hematology in early December.
The Northwestern study identified the occurrence of potential fatal blood clots in the legs and the lungs in up to 20 percent or more of cancer patients who received thalidomide.
The highest rates of thromboembolism occurred in patients who received concurrent treatment with thalidomide plus chemotherapy (18 percent) versus blood clots associated with thalidomide-corticosteroid combinations (13 percent) and single-drug treatment (5 percent).
Thalidomide, banned initially in 1962, has had a remarkable resurgence since 1998 for cancer, although its formal FDA approval is as a treatment of skin complication of the rare illness, leprosy.
"Given the current controversies about the FDA and pharmaceutical safety, our findings provide additional evidence that dramatic changes in the way the FDA address patient safety are needed," Even said.
Evens and Bennett are faculty physicians in the department of medicine, division of hematology/oncology, at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine and researchers at The Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University. The RADAR project, led by Bennett, is supported by a $5 million grant from the National Cancer Institute.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=18111


Mobile phone radiation harms DNA, researchers say

21.12.04 1.00pm

MUNICH/AMSTERDAM - Radio waves from mobile phones harm body cells and damage DNA in laboratory conditions, according to a new study majority-funded by the European Union.
The Reflex study, conducted by 12 research groups in seven European countries, did not prove that mobile phones are a risk to health but concluded that more research is needed to see if effects can also be found outside a lab.
The $100 billion (51 billion pound) a year mobile phone industry asserts that there is no conclusive evidence of harmful effects as a result of electromagnetic radiation.
About 650 million mobile phones are expected to be sold to consumers this year, and over 1.5 billion people around the world use one.
The research project, which took four years and which was coordinated by the German research group Verum, studied the effect of radiation on human and animal cells in a laboratory.
After being exposed to electromagnetic fields that are typical for mobile phones, the cells showed a significant increase in single and double-strand DNA breaks. The damage could not always be repaired by the cell. DNA carries the genetic material of an organism and its different cells.
"There was remaining damage for future generation of cells," said project leader Franz Adlkofer.
This means the change had procreated. Mutated cells are seen as a possible cause of cancer.
The radiation used in the study was at levels between a Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) of between 0.3 and 2 watts per kilogramme. Most phones emit radio signals at SAR levels of between 0.5 and 1 W/kg.
SAR is a measure of the rate of radio energy absorption in body tissue, and the SAR limit recommended by the International Commission of Non-Ionising Radiation Protection is 2 W/kg.
The study also measured other harmful effects on cells.
Because of the lab set-up, the researchers said the study did not prove any health risks. But they added that "the genotoxic and phenotypic effects clearly require further studies ... on animals and human volunteers."
Adlkofer advised against the use of a mobile phone when an alternative fixed line phone was available, and recommended the use of a headset connected to a cellphone whenever possible.
"We don't want to create a panic, but it is good to take precautions," he said, adding that additional research could take another four or five years.
Previous independent studies into the health effects of mobile phone radiation have found it may have some effect on the human body, such as heating up body tissue and causing headaches and nausea, but no study that could be independently repeated has proved that radiation had permanent harmful effects.
None of the world's top six mobile phone vendors could immediately respond to the results of the study.
In a separate announcement in Hong Kong, where consumers tend to spend more time talking on a mobile phone than in Europe, a German company called G-Hanz introduced a new type of mobile phone which it claimed had no harmful radiation, as a result of shorter bursts of the radio signal.
- REUTERS

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/index.cfm?c_id=5&ObjectID=9004133


Pfizer Pulling Advertising for Celebrex
12.20.2004, 03:43 PM
Pfizer Inc. says it will immediately pull advertising for its top-selling arthritis pain reliever Celebrex, whose safety was called into question last week after a study found an increased risk of heart attacks in patients taking high dosages of the drug.
Pfizer spokesman Andy McCormick said the company was suspending Celebrex ads in newspapers, radio, TV and magazines. He said the company made the decision in discussions with the Food and Drug Administration.
McCormick also said Pfizer plans to have its sales staff meet with doctors to explain the findings of the survey, which were made public on Friday. He said Pfizer plans to keep Celebrex on the market.
The FDA said Friday it was considering warning labels for Celebrex or withdrawing the drug from the market. Celebrex is in the same class of drug, called a cox-2 inhibitor, as Vioxx, a rival pain reliever that Merck & Co. pulled from the market earlier this year after a study found the drug doubled the risk of heart attack or stroke.
For the first nine months of the year, worldwide sales of Celebrex more than doubled from a year earlier to $2.3 billion, accounting for 6 percent of Pfizer's total sales of $37.6 billion during that period.
Last year, Pfizer spent $87.6 million to advertise Celebrex, according to TNS Media Intelligence/CMR. It recently launched a new campaign for the drug and placed full-page ads in newspapers touting Celebrex's safety in the wake of Vioxx's recall.
The heart attack risk in the study disclosed Friday occurred when patients took the drug at two to four times the usual dose for many months.
News of the increased heart risk for Celebrex patients came in one of two long-term cancer-prevention trials.
On Monday, the FDA said it had asked Pfizer to suspend its consumer advertising of Celebrex while the agency evaluates new and conflicting information on the drug.
The National Cancer Institute, which was conducting the study for Pfizer, said patients in the clinical trial taking 800 milligrams of Celebrex had a 3.4 times greater risk of cardiovascular problems compared with a placebo.
For patients in the trial taking 400 milligrams of Celebrex, the risk was 2.5 times greater. The average duration of treatment in the trial was 33 months.
Pfizer's shares, which fell hard on Friday following the release of the news, fell another $1.48 or 6 percent to $24.27 in heavy trading Monday on the New York Stock Exchange.

http://www.forbes.com/business/services/feeds/ap/2004/12/20/ap1721635.html


Germany Tells Some Patients to Stop Using Celebrex

Mon Dec 20, 2004 11:43 AM ET

FRANKFURT (Reuters) - Germany's drug regulator on Monday told patients with cardiovascular risks to stop using Pfizer's arthritis drug Celebrex after new data emerged linking it to an elevated risk of heart attacks.

The drug regulator said in a statement it was not "justifiable" to treat patients with a history of heart attack and stroke with Celebrex.

The regulator urged the use of alternative drugs or to cut down the dose if a patient cannot be treated without Celebrex.

Pfizer last week said Celebrex more than doubled the risk of heart attack in a large cancer-prevention trial, a setback that comes just weeks after Merck & Co. recalled its similar Vioxx drug due to heart safety risks.

Pfizer said doctors should be made aware of the health risks in prescribing Celebrex to their patients, but the company does not plan to recall its popular arthritis drug.

Celebrex is one of Pfizer's biggest products, with 2003 sales of $1.9 billion.

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=7141603


Genetic Mutations Not Being Detected Early Enough In Families with Hereditary Colorectal Cancer

According to the results of a study recently published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology, a genetic mutation that can cause colorectal cancer is not being detected early enough. These findings have led to the recommendation that families at risk for developing colorectal cancer be more closely monitored.

Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer related deaths in the United States. Colorectal cancer is a malignancy that involves both the large intestines (colon) and a distal portion of the colon known as the rectum. Hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) is a syndrome caused by specific genetic mutations that is characterized by an increased risk of colon cancer, as well as other cancers such as ovarian, stomach, liver, brain and skin. Genetic abnormalities among 4 genes (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2) can be detected by genetic testing and those found to have HNPCC have an 80% lifetime risk for developing colon cancer. The average age for colorectal cancer diagnosis among this group is 44. MLH1 and MSH2 mutations account for approximately 90% of all patients diagnosed with HNPCC. Mutation of the MSH6 gene occurs in 7-10% of families with HNPCC and mutation of the PMS2 gene accounts for less than 5% of families diagnosed with HNPCC. Patients with HNPCC typically undergo colonoscopy every 1-2 years starting at ages 20-25, or starting at 10 years younger than the youngest person to have developed colon cancer in the family. Patients with HNPCC who have a family history of cancer outside of the colon undergo rigorous and frequent screening for that type of cancer beginning at a young age.

In this recent study, the goal was to more closely evaluate the involvement of the MSH6 mutation in families suspected of HNPCC. Patients were chosen from 706 families who had been identified as not having an MLH1 or MSH2 mutation, but were suspected of having a form of HNPCC from family history of cancer. These patients were then subjected to MSH6 testing. This information was then compared to data collected from families with MLH1 and MSH2 mutations.

Results of the study found 27 families with 24 different MSH6 mutations, which represented 3.8% of the total families. The average age of onset for colorectal cancer in these patients was 10 years later (54years) than for patients with MLH1 and MSH2 mutations. When compared to other malignant tumors, colorectal cancer was less frequent among MSH6 families than those with MLH1 and/or MSH2 mutations; however, non-HNPCC associated tumors were increased.

Researchers concluded that the later onset of colorectal cancer as well as the lower incidence, may contribute to the lower number of identified MSH6 mut