According to the latest study, if smoking was banned from all public spaces in the United States, there would be over 18,000 fewer heart attacks within the first year. The researchers looked at statistics from the 13 states in the U.S. That do not already have legislstion banning smoking in public places. They calculated that there would be an 11% decrease in heart attacks and a savings of $92 million in healthcare costs within a year of any federal ban being enacted. Lead researcher Dr. Mouaz Al-Mallah of the Henry Ford Hospital said that he would “encourage all states to institute a ban on smoking in public places to protect people from secondhand smoke. Authorities should do everything possible to prevent healthy individuals from being exposed to secondhand smoke, and one of the ways is by passing such laws.”

“Smoking and exposure to environmental tobacco smoke are well established and modifiable risk factors for heart attack, stroke and premature cardiovascular death,” says Dr. Gregg C. Fonarow of the University of California.

Dr. Fonarow is the director of the Ahmanson-UCLA Cardiomyopathy Center at the university and he agrees that “adopting a national comprehensive smoking ban would prevent cardiovascular events…and greatly improve the cardiovascular health of this nation.”

Other nations are also cracking down on smoking. In a press conference on May 20, Philippine Health Secretary Esperanza I. Cabral said that the labeling directive issued last May will take effect June 9 as planned. This directive states that tobacco companies must not only include a text health warning, similar to the US labeling regulations, but also must include a graphical warning.

The health department has 8 pictures for them to use on an alternating pattern. The picture must cover at least 30% of the front panel and 60% of the back panel on each pack of cigarettes sold.

Japan recently sent an advisory notice to all local government offices to recommend they set up local bans on smoking in public places. As of now, this is left up to the individual local governments but one official said, “our ministry plans to upgrade the current separation of smoking areas to a total ban on smoking, which is a global trend.”

It is clear that public sentiment has turned the tide on smoking and pressue is being brought to bear on governments as well as individuals to quit. Of course, as many have learned, quitting smoking is not as simple as putting that pack down and walking away. The nicotine is highly addictive but the enhancers added to tobacco products compound this problem.

The smoking cessation industry has burgeoned with the growing tide of anti-smoking legislation and the rise in stigmatization of those who continue to smoke. Those who desire to quit have a number of choices to aid them in their quest – gums, lozenges, patches and medications are all available. However, while each of these products has helped people quit successfully, none of them will work for every single person who desires to stop smoking.

In fact, none of these aids are suitable to help those who may have underlying health issues such as existing heart conditions, high blood pressure or other cardiovascular diseases. Fortunately, hypnosis has proven to be a highly effective alternative to the drugs found in other smoking cessation methods.

Hypnotherapy can be quite costly and rarely covered by medical insurance so many who could be helped through hypnosis have not been able to take advantage of this breakthrough method. Now there is a solution that is affordable for anyone with a product called Quit Smoking for Life.

This advanced hypnosis session has been recorded and is now available for anyone who wishes to quit smoking. As there is a 60 day moneback guarantee on the product, one can assume that it must work in a large percentage of cases and at $17, it is certainly much cheaper than most other methods.

With the rise in anti-smoking sentiment and legislation, more and more smokers are going to be quitting. Now there is an aid to those who cannot use the other smoking cessation products.

The number of women smokers has nearly tripled in Shanghai despite their claims to be against smoking, researchers said. After monitoring the smoking habits of 2,000 people over seven years, researchers from Fudan University found that 7.2 percent of women smoked in 2009, while the figure was less than two percent in 2002. There was no significant change among the smoking rate among men, which has continued to hover around the 48 to 50 percent mark throughout the same period.

“Increasing social tolerance of women smokers and tobacco companies using aggressive marketing tactics to target women are the main reasons for the change,” the lead researcher, Fu Hua, professor of public health at Fudan University, said at Thursday’s tobacco control conference, ahead of World No Tobacco Day, which falls on May 31 every year.

Meanwhile, the research also found that more than 90 percent of the women monitored by the study supported tobacco control measures, while the rate among men was 86 percent.

In March, the city began to enforce its first law banning smoking, which applies to 13 types of public venues, such as schools, hospitals, museums, shopping malls, game rooms, Internet cafe and elevators.

According to the law, public venues should establish designated non-smoking areas and people found smoking in banned areas face fines of 50 yuan ($7) to 200 yuan, if they refuse to put out their cigarettes.

During the first two months of the law being enforced, random checks found that most establishments were complying with the law, including posting No Smoking signs and designating no-smoking areas.

The city is attempting to hold the first smoke-free World Expo in the history of the 159-year-old event.

The Fudan Media and Public Opinion Research Center polled 510 residents in the city over the issue and found that 96.8 percent of residents supported the effort.

There’s a whole lot of crazy going on in this world.  Today’s hot internet buzz is about the smoking toddler in Indonesia that was caught on video by a visiting reporter.  Ardi Rizal, age 2, apparently is addicted to cigarettes; his father, who gave him his first cigarette when he was 18 months old, claims the toddler throws a tantrum if they don’t comply.  The Indonesian toddler smokes up to 40 cigarettes a day.

Although this alone is disturbing, consider this overwhelming statistic:  25% of Indonesian children between the ages of 3 to 15 have tried smoking.  3.2% of these are active smokers, and the trend is on the rise.  25% of boys ages 13 to 15 are addicted to smoking.

Indonesians love their cigarettes, and tobacco companies love Indonesians. They are the third largest tobacco consumer in the world. 33% of Indonesians smoke, including 63% of all males.  200,000 Indonesians die from smoking-related diseases yearly.  The economic disparity is significant in this country, with 21% of the population subsisting on less than US$1.25 per day.  Single cigarettes can be purchased for a couple of cents, and packs are only a dollar.

Many have expressed outrage at this video, calling for the parents to be jailed. But in Indonesia, tobacco companies have absolutely no restrictions; they can advertise on television and on billboards. Tobacco companies sponsor scholarships for youth, popular sporting events, and even concerts aimed toward kids.  Kelly Clarkson recently got heat for allowing a cigarette company to sponsor her concert; they were dropped finally because of pressure.

US based Philip Morris International is one of the top tobacco sellers in Indonesia and they have been guilty of the same advertising practices. Even though this type of advertising was banned in the United States over 30 years ago, Philip Morris still has no qualms about advertising towards kids when they can get away with it.  They tried to sponsor Alicia Keys, having ads on billboards promoting the singer.  After she denounced them, they finally took the ads off under pressure.

Some have introduced bills banning this type of advertising in Indonesia; because of strong opposition from the tobacco industry, they have not had much success.

In the US, many are opposed to governmental regulation of business.  Robert, a Chicagoan, believes that regulations restrict free trade, and the market will correct itself eventually.  But without regulations, corporations answer to one call – their stockholders and their profits.  Regulations are necessary to prevent business from putting profits before public safety and health.  Consider BP, Johnson & Johnson, and Wall Street; consider that Philip Morris should know better than to peddle their products to little kids that don’t know any better.  We can’t rely on all businesses to do the right thing.

British Columbia and Manitoba are the only Canadian provinces to allow tobacco sales in pharmacies. On the week leading up to World No Tobacco Day, Physicians for a Smoke-Free Canada is calling on the government of British Columbia and Manitoba to bring their public health laws up to the standards of other Canadian provinces and to ban the sale of tobacco products in pharmacies.

“Tobacco kills. Selling tobacco in pharmacies gives false and dangerous credibility to cigarettes,” states Dr. Milan Khara Clinical Director of the VCH Tobacco Dependence Clinic and member of Physicians for a Smoke-Free Canada “Tobacco is not compatible with health and the role of the pharmacist is not compatible with that of tobacco vendor.”

“We can no longer allow the role of the pharmacist to be compromised by large chain stores who cannot decide if they want to be part of the solution or part of the problem,” said Murray Gibson, Executive Director of the Manitoba Tobacco Reduction Alliance (MANTRA). “It is time for legislative action to protect the integrity of our health professionals and the health of the public.”

Physicians for a Smoke-Free Canada has campaigned since the early 1990s for an end to the sale of tobacco products in pharmacies. The first Canadian province to adopt legislation to end this harmful practice was Ontario, where the ban came into effect in early 1995. In the past 15 years, New Brunswick (1997), Quebec (1998), Nova Scotia (2000), Nunavut (2004), Newfoundland and Labrador (2005), Prince Edward Island 92006), Northwest Territories (2007), Alberta (2009) and Saskatchewan (2010) have amended their laws and practices.

In its review of Health Canada data of pharmacist counseling of smokers, Physicians for a Smoke-Free Canada found no support for the pharmacies’ argument that selling cigarettes was one way to encourage smokers to seek counseling from pharmacists about ways to quit. During the most recent survey year (2008), tobacco was sold in pharmacies in the four western provinces. In those provinces where tobacco sales were permitted, smokers were LESS likely to speak with a pharmacist about quitting (40% vs. 52%).

“The refusal of British Columbia and Manitoba to protect the interests of individual pharmacists and the health of their communities and to yield to pressure from the large chain drug stores is a black mark for government,” said Cynthia Callard, Executive Director of Physicians for a Smoke-Free Canada. “There is no reason but commercial greed and political weakness to explain the continued sale of tobacco in pharmacies in British Columbia and Manitoba.

The World Health Organization (WHO) on Thursday urged Asia-Pacific countries to protect women and girls from aggressive efforts by tobacco firms to induce them to start smoking. In a statement ahead of World No Tobacco Day on May 31, the WHO’s regional office in Manila warned that smoking among women and girls was increasing in the Asia-Pacific. It found that more than 8 per cent of girls from 13 to 15, or around 4.5 million, are using tobacco products in the region, the WHO said. “Starting early results in addiction that later translates to a life of nicotine dependence, poor health and premature death,” warned Shin Young-soo, the WHO’s regional director for the Western Pacific.

Shin said bans on advertising, promotion and sponsorship were needed to protect women and girls from deceptive messages that portray smoking as glamorous or fashionable.

“The truth is, smoking is ugly and harmful to health,” he said.

“Currently, only half of the countries in the Western Pacific have complete bans on advertising.” Shin added that smokers should not be tricked into believing that cigarettes labelled as light or mild are safer or less harmful.

“Misleading cigarette descriptors are meant to conceal the fact that all cigarettes contain 4,000 hazardous chemicals and 60 known carcinogens,” he said. “No cigarette is safe or less harmful.” The WHO also expressed alarm that close to half of all women in the Asia-Pacific are exposed to secondhand smoke in their homes or workplaces.

Secondhand smoke has been classified as a carcinogen in several countries and is known to cause lung cancer, heart disease and respiratory conditions. But women and girls are sometimes forced to endure secondhand smoke because of cultural and social norms, the WHO said.

“For example, in China, 97 per cent of smokers are men and more than half of all Chinese women of reproductive age are regularly exposed to second-hand smoke,” it said.

A study in Shanghai of 72,000 non-smoking women found that exposure to their husbands’ habit increased their risks of dying from lung cancer, heart disease and stroke by up to 50 per cent.

Cancer campaigners have renewed calls for smoking to be banned in all public places in the lead-up to World No Tobacco Day next Monday. Queensland’s Cancer Council CEO Jeff Dunn said they had written to Queensland mayors and called for a smoking ban in all public spaces, including malls, bus stops, ferry terminals, and taxi ranks.

“Banning smoking in public places will not only help to improve community health and general productivity, it will also improve the appeal of our regions and promote increased use of public space for recreational and tourism purposes,” he said.

“Furthermore, a total ban will help reduce the costs of environmental damage from cigarette litter, raising Queensland’s reputation as a great location in which to live and holiday.”

But the proposal has had a mixed response from south-east Queensland mayors. Gold Coast Mayor Ron Clarke said he would like to see smoking bans in all public places, but councils were limited in what they could legally do.

“This council is supportive of these sorts of bans,” he said. “I agree that people have a democratic right to smoke, but they also need to not to gather and cause a problem for other people that don’t smoke. It’s a matter of balancing those issues.”

Cr Clarke said the tide of public opinion had shifted considerably in recent decades and that would likely continue.

“When smoking was banned in some offices in the 1970s, it was considered controversial but now it’s legislated,” he said. “At that stage, they were still smoking in theatres, smoking in planes it’s a different world now.”

Ipswich Mayor Paul Pisasale said his council had already taken steps, including banning smoking in the mall. But he thought a blanket ban could be counter-productive.

“If you start using the big hammer approach, the moment you try to force young kids to give up smoking, they just react the other way,” he said. “It is human nature – it almost becomes cooler to smoke because it’s not allowed.”

However, Professor Dunn said local regulations would help stop or discourage young people smoking.

“Evidence shows that the regulation of smoking in public places can help to reduce the prevalence of smoking and prevent tobacco related deaths in the future,” he said.

Professor Dunn said about 32,000 school children, aged between 12 and 17, smoked in Queensland every week.

“Recent Federal and Queensland Government progress on tobacco control has been significant, but we need to take tougher action on tobacco control to save lives,” he said. “With the cooperation of councils, we can create a smoke free Queensland and end the tragic toll of nearly 3,500 tobacco related deaths each year.”

Comment was also sought from Brisbane Lord Mayor Campbell Newman and Moreton Bay Mayor Allan Sutherland.

Starting with the next January, China will ban smoking in all public places, whether indoors or outdoors, and including public transport facilities and work areas. This is a significant expansion of smoke-free areas in China. Under the prior, local tobacco regulations, smoke-free areas were basically only public spaces, not workspaces. On May 10, officials of the Ministry of Health claimed in a media conference that this new regulation was based on the request of the “Framework Convention on Tobacco Control” of the World Health Organization (WHO). Smoking kills, which is the basic reason for this ban. However, these new regulations are perhaps somewhat unrealistic, and it will be quite difficult for this ban achieve tangible results.

First of all, the implementation cost will be very high. There are 350 million smokers in China. It is difficult to impose a strict prohibition on the daily habits of such a large population. Shanghai has been running its own “smoking ban” since March.

However, the prohibition exists only in name, as smokers are keeping to their usual habits.

The effective implementation of the regulations relies on strict enforcement, which requires the support of personnel, staffing and funding.

It will take a lot of time and manpower to enforce these regulations nationwide. As the funding comes from fiscal income, this will once again increase the burden on taxpayers.

China is a huge cigarette market, and one keyed to cultural habits. Smoking and drinking social customs, and cigarettes are a symbol of identity and status. The more expensive your brand, the more weight you carry, especially in official circle and the business world.

Tobacco is also considered an important source of revenue by some local governments. On January 14, a spokesman of the State Tobacco Monopoly Administration said proudly that its business revenue reached 513.11 billion ($75.15 billion) in 2009, an increase of 55.93 billion ($8.19 billion), up 12.2 percent over the previous year. Taxes (including State-owned enterprises’ income) made up 416.34 billion ($61.07 billion) of this, up 26.2 percent from the previous year.

Tobacco thus makes up a significant proportion of government revenue. Unless the government’s tobacco monopoly is broken, it seems unlikely officials will take serious steps to enforce smoking bans and reduce the consumption of cigarettes.

Cigarettes are small, but they have very deep roots. Without changes in the tobacco financial system, the “smoking ban” will be invalid.

China signed the “Framework Convention on Tobacco Control” at the UN Headquarters in 2003.

Article 11 of the Convention says that health warnings must be printed on the packaging and labels of tobacco products. They should take up 50 percent or more of the principal display area but shall be no less than 30 percent of the principal display areas.

This requirement has not even been implemented yet. To the contrary, the design of cigarette packaging in China has become more and more attractive and splendid.

Ironically, the packaging and design of Zhonghua cigarettes meant for export is totally different from the familiar domestic red boxes. On the upper front of the boxes for export, there is a picture of a smoker, vividly depicting his ulcerous lips and the blackened remnants of his teeth. The Zhonghua logo is printed in the cramped space below.

Therefore, the seemingly strict smoking ban is actually aimed in the wrong direction. Policymakers certainly face little risks: The people this disadvantages are China’s 350 million smokers. And they cannot stand together to react effectively to the policy. But on the supply side, tobacco companies are well organized interest groups with plenty of connections.

So these regulations will do little to actually control smoking in China, especially given the lack of enforcement. Rather than singling out the vulnerable group, the smokers, we instead need to target China’s tobacco monopoly.

We should start mandating large health warnings and other measures designed to reduce sales instead of merely restricting where people can smoke. Otherwise, the national commitment to reducing smoking looks weak, and the government’s authority will be damaged.

Cigarettes smoke is harmful even for non-smokers, a lot of studies found. “I know my cigarette smoke will affect people who don’t smoke around me but I didn’t know it was so serious,” declared Nguyen Van Dung from northern Hai Duong Province, who is being treated for lung cancer at Hospital K in Ha Noi. Diep claimed that he didn’t know how many people would be affected by his habit.

The 58-year-old man went to the hospital almost every week to have his health checked. He smoked over the past 30 years, burning one cigarette package per day and there were a lot of non-smokers that were around him while he smoked.

“Fortunately my two daughters don’t smoke, but maybe there are people who suffered from my cigarette smoke. I tried to stop smoking many times but I was not successful,” said Diep.

Do Dinh Khoa, 50, who began smoking in 1966 is being treated at the same hospital as Diep. He has quit smoking after being diagnosed with cancer.

Another patient, Hoang Trong Tai, began smoking in 1978 during his time in the military. Tai claimed to have never gotten sick before, but discovered he had cancer after he started coughing up blood.

Tran Van Thuan, director of Hospital K (cancer), said that more than 80 per cent of patients of the hospital suffered lung cancer.

“Right now the hospital is overloaded. Every day we receive more than 1,000 cancer patients who want to be treated at the hospital. Many cancer patients at the hospital are secondhand smokers,” Thuan said.

Every year, 150,000 people are diagnosed with cancer and 80,000 people die from cancer in the country.

According to Dr. Luong Ngoc Khue, Director of the Medical Services Administration and Standing Office for Viet Nam Steering Committee on Smoking & Health, 50 per cent of adults in the country are smokers, which means that there are approximately 17 million smokers in the country.

“It is obvious that the number of smokers is lower than that of non-smokers. We should not let more than 60 million people be exposed to second hand smoke,” Khue said.

A recent survey conducted in Viet Nam shows that more than 40,000 people die of diseases related to smoking every year. That means every day more than 100 people die from tobacco-related illnesses.

The hospital along with the Ministry of Health is dedicated to building a smoke free environment at the hospital. Several courses on preventing smoking have been organised to educate the hospital’s staff members and patients’ relatives.

A recent project by the Centre for Research and Community Development Services (CDS) in northern Ha Long City received strong support from tourists and the community.

“We intend to turn HaLong City into a smoke free city. Although there are manys challenges that have arisen during the pilot project, we have seen encouraging results,” Tran Quoc Binh, director of the centre said.

The project has received strong support from tourists and local hotels. The project was followed by Government Decree No 1315. Many training courses were organised for the directors of hotels and restaurants in the city.

“Restaurants’ owners were afraid they would lose business from guests who smoke, but finally every thing is ok because they may lose one smoking guest but they get five non-smoking customners,” Binh said.

The pilot project was carried out by the WHO and CDS and will be expanded to other provinces.

Diep said he regreted the habit while he limped home. “If there was more information about the harm that smoking brings to myself and other smokers, I would quit.”

“If a few people die in a traffic accident, the media will cause an uproar, but thousands of people die from smoking and not many articles have been published about that,”Diep said.

A crackdown on smoking has begun within Irvine shopping centers, part of a voluntary city-backed effort to snuff out cigarette use near local businesses. The Irvine Co. earlier this month set up “smoke free” zones within more than two-dozen shopping centers, city officials announced on Tuesday.

The Irvine City Council last year agreed to work with private property owners to restrict smoking within 50 to 100 feet around city shopping centers. The voluntary smoking ban was proposed by Councilman Larry Agran in order to reduce the danger of secondhand smoke.

As owner of the vast majority of Irvine shopping centers, the Irvine Co. was a key partner in the no smoking effort. Senior Irvine Co. Vice President Mike LeBlanc said shoppers have been cooperative.

“So far, so good,” LeBlanc argued.

Throughout the cities history, Irvine leaders have taken a lead role in smoking crackdowns, beginning with a successful 1987 campaign to restrict smoking in Irvine restaurants, nearly a decade before the state adopted similar measures.

Irvine leaders in recent years have also banned smoking in city parks and recreational areas, including the Great Park.

“Its hard to believe now that it was considered bold and in many quarters objectionable when we talked about dividing up restaurants into smoking and no smoking sections, which we did, and which in turn proved to be very popular,” Agran said.

The city’s next step may be looking at smoking within city apartment units.

Newer apartment buildings tend to be divided into smoking and no smoking units, and bar smoking in outdoor common areas. But city leaders also asked for a review of how smoking is regulated in older developments.

“I’m not suggesting that we ought to regulate this, but I do think it is an important consideration for many in our community,” Agran declared.