I received the following note recently and thought it posed an interesting question. “My husband smokes a pipe and in our small scaled-down apartment we share an office. I know I am getting too much secondhand smoke. Can you discuss the difference between cigarettes and pipe smoke?” In addressing this, there are two issues. One is the impact of cigarette smoke versus pipe smoke on the smoker, and the second is the impact of each on those nearby who inhale the secondhand smoke.

First, let’s consider the smoker. Both cigarette and pipe smoking can be extremely damaging to health, greatly increasing the risk of heart disease, lung disease (chronic bronchitis, emphysema, etc.) and lung cancer. However, much depends on whether or not the smoke is inhaled and, if so, the amount smoked.

The “true” pipe smokers, those who have never smoked cigarettes, almost never inhale. Because they don’t inhale, the health risks drop substantially.

In fact, there have been several research studies that concluded moderate pipe smokers (no more than a few bowls of tobacco per day) who do not inhale live longer than nonsmokers. Why? There are several proposed reasons, such as that smoking is an excellent way to relax and beat stress, and pipe smokers tend to represent a higher socioeconomic class, which is more health-conscious, but nobody really knows.

This certainly doesn’t mean pipe smoking is a healthy thing to do. Although non-inhaling pipe smokers do not increase their risk of major lethal chronic diseases by much, they do increase their risk of mouth, lip and throat cancer. But since these are not likely to be lethal, they would not negatively impact longevity statistics. In other words, there is a health risk, but it probably won’t kill you.

Cigarette smokers, on the other hand, almost always inhale the smoke, and their risk of heart disease and lung cancer skyrockets accordingly. What’s more, when cigarette smokers quit cigarettes and switch to a pipe, they are likely to still inhale the smoke. This changes things radically, and inhaled pipe smoke provides similar health risks as inhaled cigarette smoke, and nothing is gained by switching.

Count Virginia as one more state that is taking action against roll-your-own (RYO) tobacco retail operations. According to the Virginia Legislative website, the state’s senators yesterday unanimously approved Senate Bill 74, a measure that declares any person who operates or maintains a roll-your-own cigarette machine at a retail establishment to be a manufacturer of cigarettes. The issue stems from the disparity of taxes collected on RYO vs. a pack of cigarettes bought in a convenience store or other retail location.

According to a report by WDBJ7.com, higher state and local taxes, fire-safe paper and the master tobacco settlement have all pushed the cost of retail cigarettes higher. For comparison, the price of 200 cigarettes produced on a RYO machine is about half the cost of a carton of cigarettes produced by a traditional manufacturer.

“We think everyone who operates a cigarette manufacturing facility in Virginia should play by the same rules, be subject to the same regulations and pay the same taxes on the manufactured cigarette products that the industry pays,” David Sutton, senior manager of media affairs for Altria, told the news outlet. The Altria Group, which calls Richmond home, is the parent company of Philip Morris USA.

Roll-your-own is also under fire in New York State, drawing the attention of Gov. Andrew Cuomo in his recent budget proposal. As part of the new budget, released on Jan. 17, Cuomo proposed taxing loose tobacco at the same rate as cigarettes, which in New York State is $4.35 per pack. In the case of loose tobacco, the levy would be $4.35 per ounce, as CSNews Online previously reported.

Emory’s tobacco-free policy has been in place since the first of the year, but now with students back on campus, the effects of the policy can be seen on a wider scale. So far, it appears that the policy will work smoothly within the Emory community and that the impact of the policy will be a positive one. We have noticed that students have been taking advantage of the temporary smoking zone near the library and that there have been fewer smokers on campus overall.

Additionally, we have taken note of instances around campus where an individual has suggested that someone who is smoking relocate to a smoking zone.

Accessibility to the University’s smoking cessation programs is wide, which is important for those looking to quit by the time Emory becomes completely tobacco free in the fall. These programs, however, would be better publicized using methods beyond bulk emails to the Emory community.

Despite positive and visible change, the tobacco-free policy is not without its flaws.
Information regarding the policy in general should be more widely distributed. As mentioned earlier, there have been bulk emails that include the information, but efforts would be better spent informing people in person instead of through easily-ignored emails. Since it is still near the beginning of the semester, there are many opportunities to inform the student body. For instance, Resident Advisors could hold mandatory hall meetings to inform their residents about the policy and pass out maps of the temporary smoking zones. The Tobacco-Free Task Force could have a booth to distribute information at the next Wonderful Wednesday. If those implementing the policy want to utilize public involvement as the tool for enforcement, it is important that the public is informed enough to do so appropriately.

While signs for the new policy can be seen throughout campus, such as a banner on the bridge over the train tracks and a proposed giant banner in Asbury circle, that the University is tobacco-free is well publicized. It’s important that the temporary smoking zones are equally as well-marked. The smoking zones are crucial for people to be able to comply with the policy, and as it stands, the signs are not visible enough for the location of the zones to be obvious around campus.

Overall, the policies have been seamlessly implemented on Emory’s campus. In the past, the Task Force has been very receptive to feedback from their website and to additional concerns of the community. As long as the trend of listening to the public’s opinions and ideas is followed, the policy will be a successful addition to Emory’s health-conscious efforts.

The amount of contraband cigarettes seized in Singapore last year hit a new low of 1.9 million packets, marking a decline for the third consecutive year. The Singapore Customs said the 17.4 per cent fall in illegal cigarettes seized in 2011 (down from 2.3 million packets in 2010) is a result of strong enforcement efforts by the authorities. Conversely, the amount of duty collected from legal cigarettes has gone up by 4.6 per cent last year to S$917 million, compared to S$877 million in 2010.

Singapore Customs said the supply of legal cigarettes has gone up by 31.6 per cent since 2007.

It said stepped up enforcement efforts have led to more smokers buying duty-paid cigarettes.

However, street demand for contraband cigarettes persisted in 2011.

The number of smokers caught buying illegal cigarettes rose 1.6 per cent last year to 5,977.

Singapore Customs said it noticed the presence of new illegal brands such as “Moon Mountain”, which were sold at lower prices in the black market.

It warned the public that all “Moon Mountain” cigarettes are illegal in Singapore.

The number of illegal cigarette peddlers who were caught in 2011 fell 34.8 per cent to 458.

Singapore Customs said peddlers have become more creative and discreet in hiding their contraband goods.

They have tried to outwit Customs officers by hiding their goods in rubbish bins, drains and even toilet bowls.

Maryland officials aren’t doing enough to stop smoking among those with the health-threatening habit or to prevent youngsters from ever starting, according to a new report that gave the state two failing grades for smoking cessation efforts. Nationwide, without greater pressure from state governments, gains in anti-smoking campaigns will be reversed, according to a report released yesterday by the American Lung Association. The advocacy group dinged Maryland for not providing enough funding to help smokers quit, fight tobacco-related diseases or prevent teens from starting in the first place.

With about $6 million dedicated to preventing tobacco use in Maryland, the state falls $57 million short of what the Center for Disease Control recommends as a “best practice.”

Also, health insurance plans for Maryland’s poor include barriers to getting help to pay for programs to quit smoking, the study said.

Across the country, states are generally doing less to keep kids from smoking, the study found.

“I really wish I had better news to report today,” American Lung Association President and CEO Charles Connor said in a conference call with reporters. “I wish I could say that the states are in a race to the top. A plunge to the bottom is nothing short of a disaster when lives are at stake.”

The organization said that in Maryland, tobacco causes an estimated 6,861 deaths each year and costs the economy an estimated $3.6 billion in health care and lost productivity.

“There can always be more done,” said Elin Jones, spokeswoman for the Anne Arundel County Department of Health. Jones added that the county has anti-smoking programs that are not reflected in the state budget, including partnerships with local hospitals for free quit-smoking classes.

Although smoking has been on the decline, efforts to further curb smoking have stalled “even though tobacco remains the most common, preventable cause of cancer in the country,” Connor said.

The organization’s “State of Tobacco 2012″ report gave letter grades to federal and state governments based on laws and investments the association believes help limit tobacco use, including requiring insurance companies to cover smoking-cessation services, high taxes on tobacco products and laws banning smoking in public places. No state received straight A’s, only four received passing grades and six states earned straight F’s.

About 15 percent of Maryland adults smoke, as do 12 percent of high-schoolers. The state did get top marks for laws that mandate smoke-free public places, and a “C” for the state’s cigarette tax, which was recently raised to $2 per pack.
Gov. Martin O’Malley yesterday proposed hiking the tax on cigars and smokeless tobacco to match that of cigarettes, a move to raise about $19 million.

The state chapter of the American Lung Association said the state should also further raise the tax on cigarettes. New York has the country’s highest tax on cigarettes at $4.35 a pack. The organization’s study gave an “A” to states that taxed cigarettes at $2.92 per pack.

“If Maryland pursues smart strategies identified in the report for better protecting its citizens from tobacco’s dangers, it will save countless lives,” said Dennis Alexander, the Maryland chapter’s regional executive director of the American Lung Association in Maryland.

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo has put loose tobacco on the state’s tax radar in this year’s budget proposal. As part of the new budget, released yesterday, Cuomo has proposed taxing loose tobacco at the same rate as cigarettes, which in New York State is $4.35 per pack. In the case of loose tobacco, the levy would be $4.35 per ounce, according to the Associated Press. The move would effectively close a loophole that makes it cheaper for adult smokers to buy loose tobacco and roll-your-own (RYO) cigarettes. It remains to be seen what impact the proposed tax increase would have on RYO businesses across the state.

RYO stores have come under fire lately in several states, including New York. Just recently, New York City’s legal department initiated a lawsuit against the owners of Island Smokes in Staten Island for tax evasion. According to the city’s lawsuit, the store takes advantage of the tax loophole Cuomo is now trying to close.

Loose tobacco is taxed by the federal government at $2.80 per pound, compared with $25 per pound for tobacco made exclusively for cigarettes, as CSNews Online reported.

In the face of the legal challenge, the owners of Island Smokes have chosen to close its doors as of Feb. 1. Jonathan Behrins, the lawyer for Island Smokes, said the store’s owners agreed to settle because they wouldn’t have been able to afford a legal battle that would likely have carried a six-figure price tag.

Progress made but too many still fall victim to smoking-related illness
Today is Weedless Wednesday, a day created to promote a “one day at a time” approach to quitting smoking.
The idea is that, while the thought of giving up cigarettes might be a daunting prospect for most smokers, many might be willing to try it for a day . . . and one day is a start. As anyone who has given up tobacco knows, it always starts with that first day.

Weedless Wednesday is part of National Non-Smoking Week, which has been observed for more than 30 years. It was established in 1977 by the Canadian Council for Tobacco Control, and its goals included to educate Canadians about the dangers of smoking and to help people quit. It also works toward creating a smoke-free society in Canada. Since the week was introduced, great strides have been made in that regard.
The Canadian Public Health Association says on its website that the first real strides toward establishing smoking restrictions began in the early 1970s when non-smokers became more assertive about demanding clean air to breathe. This push was fuelled by a growing realization of the harm secondhand smoke could cause to non-smokers.
Today most public places are smoke-free, a significant change from a few decades ago when smokers could, and did, light up at public events, in workplaces and in restaurants, to name a few. But while things are better for non-smokers these days, there are still too many Canadians falling victim to the health consequences of tobacco. The Canadian Cancer Society says lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death, and smoking is linked to 85 per cent of those cases. Smokers are about 10 to 20 times more likely to develop lung cancer than non-smokers, says the Cancer Society.
The positive news is the declining smoking rate, which has been aided by increasing knowledge and education about the dangers of tobacco. That has brought about huge changes in the promotion of tobacco products. In 2008, an exhibit was held in New York which featured hundreds of print ads and television commercials dating from a time when smoking was an accepted practice. The exhibit featured ads such as one which stated “More doctors smoke Camels than any other cigarette.”
How things have changed. Today the organization Physicians for a Smoke-Free Canada works to discourage people from smoking.
The CPHA says Canada has made more progress in the area of tobacco control in recent years than most other countries, and from 1999 to 2008, there has actually been a decline in the overall smoking rate among Canadians aged 15 years and older from 25 per cent to 18 per cent. Even more remarkable is the smoking decline over the past four decades. In 1965, a whopping 49 per cent of Canadians over age 15 were smokers.
So progress has been made, and continues to be made . . . but there’s still work to be done. As Cheri Langhofer from the Lethbridge branch of the Cancer Society noted in a letter to the editor in Tuesday’s Herald, flavoured tobacco products threaten to ensnare a new generation of smokers.

The government of Saskatchewan has reaffirmed its commitment to reducing tobacco use in the province along with helping those trying to quit. The pledge comes during National Non-Smoking Week. “National Non-Smoking Week provides an opportunity to recognize tobacco reduction efforts undertaken by the Ministry of Health and provincial tobacco reduction stakeholders,” stated Health Minister Don McMorris. “We have introduced important legislation to reduce smoking and the harmful effects of environmental tobacco smoke, and we continue to support cessation.”

One piece of legislation makes it illegal to smoke in a vehicle with children under the age of 16. Smoking is also banned on school grounds in the province.

The government also added two smoking cessation prescription drugs – Champix and Zyban – to the provincial drug plan last year.

An estimated 720 people in Saskatchewan die each year from lung diseases caused by smoking.

Read it on Global News: Government looking to reduce tobacco use in province

It’s reported Premier Alison Redford would have the support of most Albertans if she raises tobacco taxes, according to a new poll. An online survey by Ipsos Reid, which questioned 809 Albertans between Dec. 20 and 26, found 70 per cent of respondents support a $2-per-pack tax hike on cigarette prices if the proceeds are used to reduce tobacco use and promote healthy living, says the Herald. Not answered, of course, is what would the result be if the question was: Do you support a $2-per-pack tax increase on cigarettes if the cash is wasted?

Clearly the government wouldn’t use the extra millions of dollars a year trying to wean smokers off their guilty indulgence. The money would be collected and burned up just like any other dollar. Just like gas taxes aren’t spent on promoting public transit and liquor taxes aren’t spent on discouraging people from enjoying a drink after work, cigarette taxes are simply a source of revenue — a necessary one to a large extent. God help us if people stop smoking. Where would the lost revenue come from? So don’t expect the Alberta government to pump every dollar it gets from higher cigarette taxes into stop-smoking initiatives, as noble an initiative as it would be.

The government needs the money, of course. It’s got all sorts of services to provide and must look after dedicated public servants, such as the city’s own Lindsay Blackett. He’ll have spent a full four years doing the bidding of voters, and after choosing not to seek re-election this spring, he’ll receive just $183,000 as a transition allowance. When you know where the money is going, you don’t mind paying higher taxes.