Scotland: Questions raised over cost of tobacco displays move

Figures given out by the Scottish Government stating how much it will cost newsagents to comply with a ban on tobacco displays have been questioned by a Dundee-based shop owner.

David Forbes, Scottish president of the National Federation of Retail Newsagents and owner of Forbes Newsagents in Clepington Road, said he has no idea where the government got its figures.

He was speaking after Dundee MSP and public health minister Shona Robison said it has been estimated that a solution could cost as little as £20 in a parliamentary written answer.

“I don’t know where they got their figures from,” said Mr Forbes.“It’s something we would welcome, but it has to be looked at and costed out. We are still against a display ban, but, if this is a way round it, then we will look at it.”

It’s been feared that having to change their displays could tip some struggling small businesses over the edge.

However, Ms Robison said in a parliamentary written answer to Labour’s Jackie Baillie MSP that officials have been working with retailers to minimise the cost of them complying with the ban.

“Draft regulations allow retailers to modify their gantries rather than having to refit their shop, significantly reducing the cost to comply with the legislation,” she said. “The least expensive option offered by the National Federation of Retail Newsagents would involve installing a white plastic fronting to each row on the gantry. It has been estimated that such a solution could cost as little as £20 for the materials for each fronting with minimal installation costs.”

Mr Forbes said being able to keep their gantries would be welcomed by shop owners.

He said the plastic fronting idea was “fair enough”, but the costs would have to be ironed out.

“I think it’s far more sensible than selling tobacco from under the counter,” he added. “It’s much safer, too. If you duck under the counter you don’t know what you could be faced with when you look back up — someone could have pulled out an iron bar — you just don’t know.

“I think plastic cards or fronting would be acceptable, but I’m not sure about £20 a shelf. That would have to be looked at. It’s a far superior idea to taking away gantries, which would be ridiculous. “The question is ‘who will pay for this?’ ”

Mr Forbes says he remains convinced that taking away tobacco from display won’t stop people smoking.

Ministers want to ban tobacco displays in shops as part of a raft of measures aimed at cutting the health toll from smoking in Scotland.

Nine in 10 retailers feel the Government has not listened to their concerns about the display ban, according to a poll conducted last year.

The survey was conducted for the Tobacco Retailers Alliance, which represents 26,000 UK shopkeepers and is funded by the Tobacco Manufacturers’ Association.

Source: Evening Telegraph - 14 January 2010
Link: http://bit.ly/8ajWuG

Wales: Cigarette costs driver £600

Smoking enforcement officers in Swansea are urging drivers of work based vehicles to avoid lighting up and smoking in their vehicles.

The advice follows a court case which resulted in a local taxi driver paying out over £600 after being found guilty of three offences relating to smoking in a smoke free place.

Smoking enforcement officers confirmed that the driver previously received a written warning and a fixed penalty for two offences in 2007 and 2008.

The latest offences occured between May and August 2009 and resulted in a fine of £525 and included further costs of £85 and a £15 victim surcharge.

Smoking in public places in Wales become illegal in April 2007. The ban includes pubs, restaurants and other public places where people congregate. The ban also includes work places and requires work based vehicles such as taxis and buses to be smoke free.

So far, Swansea Council has issued 53 fixed penalties to people for smoking in company and licensed vehicles and have had six successful prosecutions for the same offences.

John Hague, Cabinet Member for the Environment in Swansea Council, said: "Since the introduction of the ban on smoking in public places, the Council has taken its responsiblites very seriously in terms of ensuring people comply with the ban.

"We have noticed less compliance in the ban by some drivers of commerical and licensed vehicles.

"We would urge companies to remind staff who drive vehicles to remember that vehicles used for work are also considered a public place and the legislation covers these vehicles."

Source: News Wales - 14 January 2010
Link: http://bit.ly/6XGzyF

American Lung Association releases State of Tobacco Control 2009 report

The American Lung Association has released its State of Tobacco Control 2009 report, which grades the strength of federal and state laws to protect citizens from tobacco-caused illnesses. These illnesses are now at the heart of America's chronic disease crisis.

The report finds the federal government made major strides but still has significant room for progress. Most state governments, however, failed to enact critical measures to protect people from deadly tobacco products. Ten states made alarming cuts to their tobacco control programs.

Tobacco's toll continues to be devastating. Smoking-caused illness remains the number-one preventable cause of death in the U.S., killing more than 393,000 Americans each year and costing the economy more than $193 billion. Another 50,000 Americans die from exposure to secondhand smoke. The U.S. Surgeon General has declared there is no safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke.

"Our leaders in Washington have made a strong start in confronting the tobacco epidemic and taking steps that ultimately will save millions of lives and hundreds of billions of dollars for the American economy. Ending the epidemic, however, will require more hard work," said Charles D. Connor, American Lung Association President and CEO. "Forty-six million adults smoke, and political leaders in the states need to stand up to the tobacco industry and enact policies proven to reduce the devastating death and disease caused by tobacco use."

To arrive at the grades published in State of Tobacco Control 2009, the American Lung Association compared policies against targets based on the most current, recognized scientific criteria for effective tobacco control, or policies considered the best in the nation.

FEDERAL RESULTS

The federal government took major and meaningful steps to curb the enormous burden caused by tobacco use in 2009. For two decades the American Lung Association has advocated giving authority to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to regulate tobacco products. Congress finally passed this legislation early in 2009. President Obama signed it on June 22.

Congress also more than doubled the federal cigarette tax, from 39 cents to $1.01 per pack. In addition, both chambers of Congress passed healthcare reform legislation that could expand coverage under Medicaid and private insurance for helping smokers quit (called cessation). As the House and Senate passed bills are reconciled, the Lung Association urges Congressional leaders to require state Medicaid programs to offer comprehensive cessation benefits.

The American Lung Association gives federal tobacco control grades for these criteria:

"A" for FDA Regulation of Tobacco Products—The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act was signed into law in 2009 and already the FDA has begun to implement the law. It has tremendous potential to reduce death and disease caused by tobacco in the U.S.

"D" for Federal Cigarette Tax—Congress agreed in February 2009 to raise the federal government's cigarette tax by 62 cents per pack of 20 to $1.01 in order to fund the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP). This increase has led many smokers to attempt to quit. The tax still falls short, however, of the "A" standard of $2.68 per pack.

"F" for Cessation—The federal government continues to fail to help smokers quit—an effort that would save lives and money. However, the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate have approved different versions of healthcare reform legislation that include an expansion of cessation coverage under Medicaid, Medicare and private insurance plans. At press time, it was uncertain whether a final bill would include these policies, and whether it would be passed into law; the House version provided broader coverage.

"D" for Ratification of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control—The Obama administration has not submitted the international tobacco control treaty to the Senate for ratification, leaving the U.S. unable to participate in negotiations to implement and enforce it. The treaty has been ratified by 168 nations representing 86 percent of the world's population.

STATE RESULTS

As states faced record budget deficits, many turned to cigarette taxes to increase revenues. Fourteen states and the District of Columbia raised cigarette taxes, a proven means to reduce smoking. These states are Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Kentucky, Mississippi, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Wisconsin.

Disturbing trends emerged, however. Ten states and the District of Columbia took a step backward by sharply reducing funding for tobacco control and prevention programs. This trend undermines other advances because robust tobacco control programs help sustain and even expand the impact of higher cigarette taxes and smokefree workplace laws. Wisconsin, for example, increased its cigarette tax by 75 cents but also slashed funding for tobacco prevention and cessation programs by more than half. New Hampshire raised its cigarette tax by 45 cents, yet it spends not a single state dollar on tobacco prevention and cessation programs. In addition, the pace for states passing comprehensive smokefree air laws slowed dramatically.

"Increasing tobacco taxes and requiring smokefree workplaces are two important steps in reducing the leading cause of preventable death in the United States," said Mary H. Partridge, American Lung Association National Board Chair. "But that is still not enough. Comprehensive cessation programs must also be made available to support them in quitting."

No Straight A's

No state received straight "A's" on its report card. Six received all "F's." They are Alabama, Kentucky, Missouri, South Carolina, Virginia and West Virginia.

States and the District of Columbia are graded on the following:

• State Cigarette Taxes—Facing record budget deficits, 14 states turned to higher cigarette taxes to increase revenues. Nonetheless, only four states qualified for an "A" grade by imposing cigarette excise taxes of $2.68 or more. Of states that raised cigarette taxes, three (Hawaii, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin) and the District of Columbia cut funding for tobacco control significantly – by more than 25 percent.
• Smokefree Air—Only three states, Michigan, South Dakota and Wisconsin, met the American Lung Association's Smokefree Air Challenge in 2009 by passing strong smokefree air laws. This was slightly higher than the two states meeting the challenge in 2008, but represents a slowdown from 2006-2007, when a total of 16 states and the District of Columbia met the challenge. Evidence has shown that in states with strong smokefree laws, fewer adults smoke. Twenty-two states and the District of Columbia received "A" grades for smokefree air policies for 2009.
• Tobacco Prevention and Control Programs—Only two states, Alaska and North Dakota, received "A" grades for funding tobacco prevention and control programs at 80 percent or more of the level recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Forty-one states and the District of Columbia received "F's" for spending at less than 50 percent of CDC-recommended levels. The District of Columbia and the following ten states slashed spending by 25 percent or more: Colorado, Hawaii, Indiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Washington and Wisconsin.
• Cessation Treatments—No state received an "A" for offering comprehensive tobacco cessation treatments to its Medicaid recipients and to state employees. Thirty-one states received an "F" in this category. The American Lung Association urged full coverage of clinically proven smoking cessation treatments in a November report entitled Helping Smokers Quit: State Cessation Coverage 2009.

States continued to fail to enact these critical policy measures in 2009. Instead, state-level political candidates took in more than $7 million in campaign contributions from the tobacco industry in the 2007-2008 election cycle and more than $675,000 through the first 11 months of 2009, generally an off year for state elections.

The Tobacco Epidemic Persists

Despite a perception that smoking is a dying public health danger, the tobacco epidemic persists. It causes tragedy, staggering costs and devastation. In 2008, the latest year for which data is available, smoking in the U.S. failed to decline for the first time in years, staying right around 20 percent. Forty-six million adults smoke. The nation's progress in ending the epidemic has halted, according to the CDC.

The tobacco companies, meanwhile, continue exerting powerful influence and targeting kids in order to replace their dying customers. To hook a new generation of children, these companies have launched products that critics label "tobacco candy." Camel, for example, debuted its Camel Orbs, Strips, and Sticks in Columbus, Ohio; Indianapolis, Indiana; and Portland, Oregon in 2009. Camel Orbs, the size of Pez candies, are mint- and honey-flavored. Facing new regulations that could cut their profits, Reynolds American, Lorillard and some smaller tobacco companies also sued to overturn many marketing restrictions in the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, a lawsuit that is still pending as of press time.

The failure of the federal government and each state government to get all "A" grades for enacting strong and effective tobacco control laws comes at a critical time. Tobacco control policies are extraordinarily popular. But the tobacco industry is not letting up on its aggressive marketing and promotion strategies to spur increased smoking. Until elected officials overcome their fears of standing up to the tobacco industry, hundreds of thousands of lives will be tragically lost and billions of dollars will continue to be wasted.

Source: The Medical News - 12 January 2010
Link: http://bit.ly/8GbkvP

A nudge towards sobriety and health? Conservative Green Paper on public health released

If you picked up a bottle of wine and read on the label "The average British drinker drinks one glass of wine a night", would it make you think twice before refilling your glass?

The Conservatives believe it might - and that public information along those lines is one possible way to reduce binge drinking.

The party has been talking to the alcohol industry about using "social norms" to change behaviour.

In practical terms, that might mean a voluntary agreement that bottles of wine or beer would have labelling information telling you about what the average drinker does.

The idea is that, by telling people what their friends, neighbours or colleagues do, their natural tendency is to want to fit in and do the same.
So, if you claim "most people" do not binge drink, the argument goes that the public will follow that example.

It only works, of course, if most people's behaviour is something we ought to imitate.

Shadow health secretary Andrew Lansley, launching his Green Paper on public health, said the Conservatives were using academic research in social psychology and behavioural economics to underpin some policy proposals.

The paper cites the example of Northern Illinois University, which wanted to cut binge drinking.

It took out adverts and put up posters saying the average student consumed only four or five drinks at a party.

According to the document, students "went from a situation where they thought binge drinking was the norm, and everyone was doing it, to one where they understood that if they were getting drunk every night, they were completely abnormal and as a result, binge drinking fell significantly".

The Conservatives have been working with one of the authors of the book Nudge, behavioural economist Professor Richard Thaler of the University of Chicago.

In recent leaked e-mails from the party's strategy guru, Steve Hilton, Tories were invited to get in touch with Prof Thaler to discuss their policy ideas.

Prof Thaler's Nudge co-author, Cass Sunstein, has recently been appointed to a job in the Obama administration. The Tories plan to have Prof Thaler work with them if they win the next election.

Although some Tories are reported to have derided the e-mail briefings and ideas as waffle, front-benchers are using the theories to develop policies in a variety of areas, from the environment to taxation.

Nudge's intention is to get individual members of society to behave responsibly, without the state having to take heavy-handed action.

The Conservative public health document also suggests that public health results could, under a Tory government, be put online.

They could be used as an "open source" to encourage new public health ideas, offering prizes for the best suggestion for a campaign.

Some Conservative frontbenchers speak of the "post-bureaucratic age".

They believe that, for consumers, creating the equivalent of price comparison websites for public services could be a profound cultural change.

Labour ministers, too, have been talking about ideas for a "smarter state" which harnesses the contributions of local communities.

It could be argued that these grand theories are academic ways to confront the problem any future government will face: putting policies into practice while money is tight.

But is relying on the herd instinct enough to get people to behave how governments would like them to?

Source: BBC News- 13 January 2010
Link: http://bit.ly/8WfdqO

FDA can't block importing of 'electronic cigarettes'

A federal judge ruled Thursday that the Food and Drug Administration may not block the importation of "electronic cigarettes," battery-powered versions of conventional smokes.

The FDA has confiscated imports of the devices since at least 2008, and two suppliers, Smoking Everywhere and Sottera, sued to halt the agency's action.

In ruling for the companies, U.S. District Judge Richard J. Leon determined that electronic cigarettes are tobacco products and are not subject to such restrictions.

"This case appears to be yet another example of FDA's aggressive efforts to regulate recreational tobacco products as drugs or devices," Leon wrote in a 31-page opinion that granted the companies' request for a temporary injunction against the FDA.

The judge called the FDA's efforts a "tenacious drive to maximize its regulatory power."

In a statement, the FDA said it was reviewing the ruling. "The public health issues surrounding electronic cigarettes are of serious concern to the FDA," the statement said.

In court papers, the FDA said it considers the devices, also known as e-cigarettes, to be unapproved drug-delivery gadgets. E-cigarettes are the size of regular cigarettes and deliver a vaporized nicotine mixture to users.

It contends that e-cigarettes are not traditional tobacco products and that the products promise, among other things, to "alleviate nicotine withdrawal symptoms." The FDA compares the devices to nicotine gum, which it regulates because suppliers promote the gum's ability to help people kick smoking habits. FDA officials are also concerned that e-cigarettes could increase nicotine addiction and tobacco use by children.

Leon, however, sided firmly with attorneys for the makers of e-cigarettes who argued that the product is just another type of a cigarette and not a drug or device subject to strict regulations. They said the FDA should treat e-cigarettes just like Marlboros or Camels.

"We want people to smoke electronic cigarettes as long as they smoke regular cigarettes," said Kip Swartz, an attorney for Smoking Everywhere. "It's just another nicotine delivery system without combustion and without the tar."

Source: The Washington Post - 15 January 2010
Link: http://bit.ly/6sJZIu

Coventry: Recession and smoking ban leads to noisy neighbours complaints

The recession and the smoking ban were blamed this week for a rise in complaints about noisy neighbours in the city.

Figures released by the council this week revealed officers had launched investigations into 409 complaints about noisy neighbours up to December 22 in 2009, compared to just 240 in the whole of 2008.

The figures came to light after Bob Ainsworth revealed a major rise in complaints from his Coventry North East constituents about noise from neighbouring homes - from barking dogs to loud music.

Mr Ainsworth said he had written to the council to highlight the problem, and find out whether the council had sufficient powers to tackle noisy neighbours.

"This is a most frustrating and annoying problem for people, who often are worried about tackling their neighbours themselves," Mr Ainsworth said.
"It does, for understandable reasons, take local authorities a long while to obtain the appropriate evidence to take offenders to court."

Speaking to The Observer, Lee Millar, the city council's public health enforcement team leader, confirmed there had been a marked increase in complaints about noisy neighbours - with more than 7,000 complaints in the financial year 2009/2009.

He believed the increase was a result of residents staying at home more and being more aware of how to complain.

"With the financial situation and the smoking ban people stay at home, which causes more noise and also means people are more affected as they're in their house a lot more," Mr Millar said.

"Also we have found some people go to work and leave their dog, and the dogs bark because they're bored.

"We do have powers to deal with the problems, but people must realise it is not a quick fix," he added. "We have a legal process to go through and we have to visit the location and witness the noise before we can take any formal action."

[...]

Source: The Coventry Observer - 14 January 2010
Link: http://bit.ly/5jTM8F