ASH Daily News for 28 November 2006

102 Clifton Street, LONDON, EC2A 4HW.   

Tel 020 7739 5902 Fax 020 7613 0531

 

 

There are no half measures for heavy smokers wanting to minimise the risk that their habit will lead to their early death, research suggests. Scientists found no evidence that heavy smokers who halve their daily cigarette intake cut their premature death risk.

 

The long-term Norwegian study, of more than 51,000 men and women aged between 20 and 34, found stubbing out was the only way to cut the risk.

 

The study is published in the journal Tobacco Control.

 

The participants were assessed for cardiovascular risk factors at the start of the study, and then monitored for an average period of more than 20 years.

 

They were classified into various groups, including non-smokers, moderate smokers (up to 14 cigarettes a day), and reducers, who smoked more than 15 cigarettes a day at the start of the study, but who had cut back by more than half by the second check.

 

Men who had cut back had slightly lower death rates from all causes than heavy smokers during the first 15 years.   However, after that death rates were comparable.

 

Women who cut back actually had higher death rates from all causes combined than heavy smokers - although the researchers said this could simply be a chance finding.

 

Researcher Dr Kjell Bjartveit said there was evidence to show smoking just one to four cigarettes a day increased the risk of dying from heart disease dramatically.

 

He said: "It is widespread to offer smokers a last resort: 'If you are unable to quit, cut down'.

 

"In our opinion, this advice may offer people false expectations. There is only one safe way out: To quit smoking entirely."

 

Amanda Sandford, of the anti-smoking charity Action on Smoking and Health, said: "This study reinforces the evidence that simply cutting down does not alter the risk of premature death from smoking.

 

"However, there is good evidence to show that cutting down while using nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) significantly increases the chances of successfully quitting smoking.

 

"For smokers who are not yet ready to quit but want to cut down, we recommend that they use NRT, otherwise there is a danger that their cigarette consumption will quickly return to previous levels."

 

Simon Clark, director of the smokers' lobby group Forest, said it was important to take into consideration the fact that many smokers tended to lead a generally unhealthy lifestyle, eating a poor diet, and not taking exercise.

 

He said: "Unfortunately, campaigners prefer to emphasise the 'quit or die' message, which is a gross exaggeration, but if you are a heavy smoker it is surely better to reduce consumption, combining that with a healthy diet and plenty of exercise, than not cut down at all?"

 

Source: BBC News Online, 28 Nov. 2006

Link to article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6187388.stm

Also reported in The mirror, Scotsman

Study link:   http://tc.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/15/6/472

 

 

 

Another study published in Tobacco Control reports that  future smokers may be programmed in the womb to take up the habit later in life.

 

Scientists in Australia have discovered that children of women who smoked during pregnancy were more likely to become smokers than other youngsters.

 

They suggest nicotine from cigarettes passes through the placenta and may act directly on the developing brain of the unborn child.

 

"Our findings suggest a direct effect of maternal smoking during pregnancy on young adults' development of regular smoking and provide yet another incentive to persuade pregnant women not to smoke and to discourage young women from ever taking it up," Dr Abdullah Al Mamun, of the University of Queensland, said in the study published in the journal Tobacco Control.

 

The researchers studied the smoking patterns of more than 3,000 mothers and their children who took part in a long-term study in Brisbane, Australia.

 

Children of the 1,000 women who had smoked during pregnancy were three times more likely to start smoking by the age of 14 and twice as likely afterwards compared to other children.

 

The researchers said their results were consistent with findings of earlier studies into the impact of smoking during pregnancy on the child.

 

The charity ASH (Action on Smoking and Health) welcomed the research, saying it stresses the importance of health education and of dissuading all women of child-bearing age from smoking.

 

"It does seem there is a pharmacological influence on the developing foetus which underlines yet again the importance of women stopping smoking as soon as they know they are pregnant," a spokesperson said.

 

In addition to influencing the developing foetus, researchers have also shown that heavy smokers have lower odds of becoming pregnant through IVF (in-vitro fertilisation), even with a donated egg, because smoking makes their womb less receptive to the embryo and reduces the chances it will implant.

 

Male smokers are also more likely to suffer from impotence.

 

Link to article: http://tinyurl.com/yysfm5

Study link in Tobacco Control:   http://tc.bmj.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/6/452

 

 

 

Anti-tobacco forces are opening a new front in the war against smoking by banning it in private places such as homes and cars when children are present.

 

Starting Jan. 1, Texas will restrict smoking in foster parents' homes at all times and in cars when children are present, says Darrell Azar of the Department of Family and Protective Services.

 

Vermont, Washington and other states and counties already prohibit foster parents from smoking around children in their homes and cars.

 

Arkansas and Louisiana passed laws this year forbidding anyone from smoking in cars carrying young children. Courts are ordering smoke-free environments in custody and visitation disputes.

 

"We are very rapidly moving to protect children from secondhand smoke," says John Banzhaf, executive director of Action on Smoking and Health. "Even from their own parents and grandparents."

 

Former surgeon general Richard Carmona said in June that children exposed to secondhand smoke suffer an increased risk of respiratory ailments and sudden infant death syndrome.

 

Most smoking bans apply to workplaces and spots like bars and restaurants.

 

Smokers' rights groups liken banning smoking in private to the "Salem witch hunt," says Gary Nolan, spokesman for The Smoker's Club, Inc. He says secondhand smoke is not dangerous. "If we don't reverse this, they'll be telling us what we can eat and what we can feed our children," Nolan says.

 

Former smoker Bob Mathis, a Democratic state representative in Arkansas, sponsored a law that bars smoking in a car carrying a child young enough to require a car seat. It took effect in July. A violator can be fined $25 but can get out of it with proof of participation in a smoking-cessation program. A similar law took effect in Louisiana in August.

 

"We have laws on the books in every state of the union against child abuse," Mathis says. "This is a form of child abuse."

 

At least six states and some counties prohibit foster parents from smoking when foster children are present, says Kathleen Dachille, director of the Legal Resource Center for Tobacco Regulation, Litigation & Advocacy at the University of Maryland School of Law. "There are times when it's appropriate to regulate what people can do in their home," she says. "The state is responsible for that child."

 

Some courts are ordering parents in custody and visitation disputes not to smoke around their kids.

 

Initially, courts considered restrictions when children had ailments such as asthma that are exacerbated by smoke, says Linda Elrod, a law professor and editor of Family Law Quarterly. Now, they're more willing to restrict smoking even when there are no obvious health problems, she says. It generally comes up when one parent complains about the other's smoking.

 

Source: USA Today, 27 Nov 2006

Link to article: http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2006-11-27-smoking-bans_x.htm

 

 

 

A spokesman for Philip Morris has defended the tobacco company's sponsorship deal with Ferrari, despite the existence of a continent-wide advertising ban in Europe.

 

Even though the rival brands Mile Seven and Lucky Strike have called time on their F1 forays, it is understood that the Ferrari deal has increased in value to $175m for 2007, even though the 'Marlboro' logo will not appear on the car at many grands prix.

 

The deal, which will see the Maranello based cars painted mainly plain-red and white and has angered some of its now tobacco-free rivals, extends through to 2011.

 

Explaining that Philip Morris would find 'innovative ways' to advertise with Ferrari, international spokesman Tommaso di Giovanni told the IHT newspaper: "We still believe it's appropriate for us to be involved (in F1)."

 

A spokesman for Renault, meanwhile, admitted that the French team's new sponsorship with 'ING' is less lucrative than Japan Tobacco's long standing Mild Seven dollars. One reason for this is that tobacco companies were willing to pay more because their advertising options elsewhere were limited.

 

But Jean-Francois Caubet insisted: "The problem we had with a tobacco company is that it was difficult to build a global communications strategy around it."

 

Source: UpdateF1.com   27 Nov, 2006

Link to article: http://tinyurl.com/ylk6g8

----------------------------------
To unsubscribe from ASH Daily News, simple follow the link below:

Public subscribers: http://www.ash.org.uk/html/maillist/unsubscribe.php
Globalink members: http://member.globalink.org/nbuk
----------------------------------