C-stores reel as tobacco display ban is confirmed

The confirmation of plans to bring in a total ban on the display of tobacco were met with anger and confusion amongst retailers, as hopes of a recession-fuelled reprieve were dashed. 

The absence of proposals from last week's Queen's speech appeared to signal a let-off for the industry, with Business Secretary Lord Mandelson understood to have put pressure on fellow ministers to minimise the damage caused to retailers.

CTNs, C-stores and other small retailers were also unimpressed by the concession giving them until 2013 to remove the display, two years after the supermarkets must comply. And there was confusion as the government admitted it had not yet decided when to apply the ban to convenience shop owned by the multiples. The proposals refer to "larger shops" for 2011 and "smaller businesses" for 2013.

Tesco said it was too early to tell where Tesco Express would fit in, while a Department of Health said the criteria had yet to be decided. "It is very confusing but I don’t think they know how it is going to be worked out," said ACS CEO James Lowman. " it’s deeply frustration that while the Government is willing to dismiss robust expert evidence about the impact on retailers, it is willing to rely on inconclusive and flimsy evidence of the benefits of the measure."

The ACS has pledged to keep fighting the proposal. It still needed to go through parliament, said Lowman, as as the Tories did not support the measure, a general election could also have a bearing.

The BRC also lashed out at the proposals. "IT will impose thousands of pounds of pointless refit costs, ultimately met by customers, and create delays in stores," said director general Stephen Robertson.

Midcounties Co-op was alone among retailers in backing the ban. "As an ethical retailer we view this as vitally important in the fight against tobacco-related disease." said chief executive Ben Reid.

Source: The Grocer [print edition], 13 December 2008
 

Tobacco giants can be sued over low-tar cigarettes

The American tobacco industry faces another multi-billion-dollar flood of lawsuits after the US Supreme Court ruled that smokers can sue over the way that it promotes light and low-tar brands. 

The surprise 5-4 ruling was a victory for smokers who claim that the industry has perpetuated a massive fraud by fooling consumers into believing that light cigarettes are healthier than full-tar brands. Smokers may now use state consumer protection and deceptive marketing laws to sue the cigarette makers, because of data that shows low-tar cigarettes to be just as harmful as normal ones.

The US tobacco industry is already facing more than 30 class-action lawsuits from smokers and former smokers who are seeking billions of dollars in damages over claims that they were duped by these marketing techniques. More than 45 million Americans are smokers, with nearly 85 per cent using light cigarettes.

The case involved three residents from Maine, who had sued the Altria Group and its subsidiary, Philip Morris USA – the maker of Marlboro Lights – under the state’s law against unfair marketing practices. The cigarette maker had appealed against a lower court’s ruling that sided with the smokers.

The tobacco companies argued in the Supreme Court that they were protected by a federal law which, in essence, says that the health warning label that is required on cigarette packets prevents individual states from regulating – or passing laws over – any other aspect of cigarette advertising.

The smokers argued that they should be allowed to sue Philip Morris because, they claim, light cigarettes are just as harmful as full-tar brands – and that the tobacco companies have known this for decades. Although research into smoking rightly showed that the cigarettes emitted less tar when burnt, scientists now say that smokers of light brands inhale about the same amount of tar by taking longer puffs and smoking more cigarettes. The smokers claim that the tobacco companies knew about these “compensatory” techniques.

Justice John Paul Stevens, writing for the majority, said that the federal labelling law does not shield the tobacco companies from state laws against deceptive marketing. Yet he made it clear that the people suing the cigarette makers must prove still that the use of the terms light and low-tar actually violate the state antifraud legislation.

When the case was argued in October, Justice Stephen Breyer – who sided with the smokers in the ruling – said that allowing the federal health label law to shield the cigarette companies from state law would enable them to make blatantly false claims.

The doctrine under which state product liability lawsuits are thrown out under federal law is known as “preemption”. Mr Breyer, taking issue with the doctrine, said: “Somebody could advertise smoking 42 cigarettes a day will grow back your hair. That’s totally false [and yet] would be preempted.”

The biggest payout forced on tobacco companies came on November 23, 1998, when 46 US states settled their claims against America’s leading cigarette makers to recover tobacco-related healthcare costs. The settlements require the companies to make annual payments to the states in perpetuity, with total payments estimated at $246 billion (£160 billion) over the first 25 years.

Source: The Times, 16 December 2008
Link: http://tinyurl.com/5qz4rf

Teen depression, smoking may inhibit bone growth

In girls, depression, anxiety, and smoking may inhibit bone development during the critical bone growth phase of adolescence, study findings suggest.

Failure to obtain maximal bone density during adolescence, when nearly 40 to 50 percent of bone mass or density is attained in girls, leaves "a deficit in the bone bank," Dr. Lorah D. Dorn said.

This may increase vulnerability to late life skeletal bone loss and brittleness known as osteoporosis, said Dorn of the University of Cincinnati College of Medicine in Ohio.

Because of the strong link between osteoporosis and depression and smoking in adults, Dorn and colleagues looked for similar associations among adolescents,

The researchers examined bone mineral density and bone mineral content — both indicators of bone growth and health — among 207 girls, who were 11, 13, 15, and 17 years old. They also obtained information on depression, anxiety, and smoking. About 47 percent of the girls had smoked.

According to a report in Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, the investigators observed a significant association between higher levels of depressive symptoms and lower total body bone mineral content after factoring for age, height, weight, maturation, race, and the interaction between age and race.

Dorn's team also associated high states of anxiety with lower total body bone mineral content.

Girls who smoked daily had higher levels of depression and anxiety than girls who did not smoke, but bone health was similar between the two groups.

Further multiple analyses that factored for smoking status either enhanced or weakened associations with bone mass or bone density depending on the presence or absence of symptoms of depression and anxiety.

The complex associations identified in this study not only warrant further examination, but raise concern that depression, anxiety, and smoking potentially impact bone health during a crucial developmental period for adolescent girls, Dorn and colleagues conclude.

Source: FoxNews, 15 December 2008
Link: http://tinyurl.com/5ceevj

Singapore to extend smoking ban to all indoor public places

Singapore will extend the smoking ban to all indoor public places and some outdoor places by January 2009, the National Environment Agency (NEA) announced.

Singapore, renowned for its clean image and strict laws against littering, in July last year has already extended the smoking ban from all air-conditioned buildings to popular outdoor "hawker centers", air-conditioned karaoke lounges and nightclubs.

Smoking will be banned in all indoor places, irrespective of whether it is air-conditioned, such as multi-storey and basement car parks, lift lobbies, non air-con shopping centres and shops.

Some outdoor places, like playgrounds and exercise areas, will also be smokefree next year.

In addition, smoking will also be prohibited within 5 meters from entrances and exits leading to public buildings and facilities.

"It promotes an environment conducive to protect non-smokers from the harmful effects of secondhand smoke and discourages smokers from lighting up," said NEA.

The agency will also step up its enforcement efforts. It will double the number of enforcement officers from 50 to 120, who will spend 490 man-hours, a 300-man-hour increase.

Source: People's Daily Online, 13 December 2008
Link: http://tinyurl.com/5jccpm