New regulations giving the Food and Drug Administration more control over the tobacco industry go into effect today. Cigarette makers are no longer allowed to use terms like “light,” “low” or “mild” when advertising cigarettes and smokeless products. Proponents of the law say labels such as “low-tar” give the false impression that some cigarettes are less harmful than others. Illinois U.S. Senator Dick Durbin says the law will save lives and protect kids.

DURBIN: The tobacco companies — still very profitable, with billions of dollars to spend — are setting out to find a new class of customers, a new class of addicts. And they’re going after our kids.

Sales of cigarettes to minors under 18 are now a federal violation. Tobacco companies won’t be allowed to sponsor athletic or cultural events. And they can no longer offer free samples or sell cigarettes in packages of less than 20.

From wbez.org, by Travis Truitt, June 22, 2010

Alberta is second-worst in Canada when it comes to refusing tobacco sales to teenagers.
That’s the warning from the province’s Action on Smoking and Health organization. What’s worse, the group says, significantly more Alberta stores are willing to break the law than just a few years ago.
“Alberta is the only province without any provincial legislation to curb youth access to tobacco,” says Stuart Adams, the group’s provincial spokesperson. “We believe that this omission is contributing to higher smoking rates among young people.”

Undercover “shoppers” found 17 per cent of Alberta’s retailers were willing to sell tobacco products to under-age customers illegally last year, the group reported, compared with 10 per cent in 2006. In British Columbia, just six per cent of the retailers broke that law.
And Alberta storekeepers were second-worst when it came to selling to older-looking 17-year-olds, without asking for photo ID, the group said. Yet Alberta is one of the best when it comes to halting liquor sales to people under 18.
“We would like to see the controls on tobacco sales brought more in line with controls on retail liquor sales in Alberta,” said Adams.
Alberta’s gaming and liquor commission is already responsible for enforcing sections of the provincial Tobacco Reduction Act as well as the Tobacco Tax Act, he points out. But it has no control over tobacco sales to minors.
“Alberta can do a better job of protecting kids from the predatory marketing practices of the tobacco industry,” says Les Hagen, executive director for Action on Smoking and Health.
Teens are the highest-risk group for starting to smoke, he points out.
“The industry is trying to entice kids to use its deadly products through candy flavourings, price discounts, colourful packaging and ‘slim’ cigarettes,” Hagen said. “We need to counter these objectionable marketing practices with strong laws to prevent more kids from falling prey to the tobacco companies.”
While the Alberta government had no immediate response to the group’s recommendations, a federal agency has announced plans to counter the increase in teen smoking in this province. Health Canada will spend more than $800,000 to create a “culturally sensitive” awareness campaign aimed at First Nations youth, recognizing tobacco’s ceremonial role in native culture.
That task will be undertaken by personnel at the University of Alberta, where another project will see more than 1,600 of the province’s health-care providers offered tobacco reduction and cessation training. Potentially 600,000 Alberta smokers will be asked about their tobacco use and advised of its serious risks to health and life expectancy.

From lethbridgeherald.com, June 18, 2010

The reason there is no such thing as an “ex-Marine” is because they are the best of the best, toughest of the tough, etc. of the etc. Despite that, I became concerned about the United States Marine Corps officer who was quoted as saying that President Barack Obama “likes to smoke a couple cigarettes before he gets on the copter.” That account, from Marine Sgt. Bradley Kelle, was buried in a nice feature article about the 2004 Wauconda High School graduate a few weeks ago. Sgt. Kelle is the helicopter crew chief for “Marine One,” the name given to whatever chopper transports the president from the White House to Andrews Air Force Base; or as we saw last week, between O’Hare and Soldier Field for the Obama’s’ Memorial Day weekend trip.

I know just from his training that Sgt. Kelle could take out a squad of al-Qaida militia with one wave of his M-16A2 rifle. It would be reflexive for him to stop a solo aggressor by driving the heel of his hand straight into a nostril.

But Washington’s offensive measures may be less defensible.

Aggrieved political figures have been known to douse careers for seemingly minor comments or infractions.

Offering a public play by play of the commander-in-chief’s preflight cigarette routine might result in a reprimand, if not more.

Or so I thought.

After all, Mr. Obama’s smoking has been something of an “issue” from the day he declared for president.

One of his wife’s prerequisites for supporting his candidacy was that he quit smoking.

Although there were suggestions early in his administration that he’d actually kicked the habit, White House reporters knew better and that facade was quickly dismantled.

Obama has publicly claimed that he doesn’t smoke every day. “I get this question about once every month or so,” he said. “And, you know, I don’t know what to tell you, other than the fact that, like folks who go to (Alcoholics Anonymous), once you’ve gone down this path, then … it’s something you continually struggle with.”

Maybe he just smokes before flying, which would be somewhere between zero times a day to numerous times a day.

“He likes to smoke a couple cigarettes before he gets on the copter,” Kelle said in that feature that was published in a couple of Illinois newspapers early this month.

“He’s a little nervous about flight,” Kelle added.

Figuring it might be difficult to contact Sgt. Kelle through official Marine Corp methods, I decided to work the backchannels.

Knowing that a young, single, strong man with a great job would be socially astute, I searched, found him on Facebook and sent him a message.

I asked Kelle whether he had been reprimanded for the chopperside smoking quote.

“No, I haven’t received any type of flack from anyone about that; although it is always possible I will in the future, but I doubt it,” he replied.

Obviously Kelle is wise to the ways of Washington and knows that politicians sometimes wait for the right moment to strike.

“Honestly, I don’t think anyone at my command even knows about the article, and if those at the White House do, it obviously didn’t bother them too much!” Sgt. Kelle wrote.

I’m sure there is a bothered woman at the White House whose initials are M.O. but that is for the Obamas to handle.

The tabloids and paparazzi still have quite a bounty on any photo of Obama actually smoking. The one showing him smoking as a college student is the last known picture although there are many fakes on the Internet.

It is a good thing that Sgt. Kelle only provided the feature writer with a picture of him and his father in front of the president’s chopper and not a cell phone photo of Mr. Obama with a KOOL dangling from his lips.

That picture would have resulted in a much wider-read story and Sgt. Kelle would even have received a note from his commandant.

But it wouldn’t have offered congratulations.

It would have been headlined: TRANSFER ORDER.

And Okinawa can be very hot this time of year.

From dailyherald.com, June 17, 2010

To psychiatrists the term DENIAL, DENIAL, DENIAL is noted everyday. Big tobacco also practices this faulty mechanism. Think of the Marlboro man astride his mount or from decades past, white coated physicians with a lighted Camel in hand. Tobacco‘s effective advertising leading to hundreds of thousands of deaths yearly is okay for them. But the fatal effects of smoking on a poster, they deem offensive. I trust the courts will apply rational thinking to refute the insane mockery by the tobacco industry.

As much as I wish the city’s messages will be more than marginally effective, people don’t quit smoking simply by looking at a poster. Rational thought doesn’t do it no matter how graphic the photos.

One of my colleagues, a professor of pathology and someone who holds dead tissue daily, was a smoker. Putting up posters and giving out the patch for free are not nearly as effective as treating smoking addiction like the medical condition that it is. No physician would use a single program to treat an ulcer, asthma, cancer or any other disease.

While the city’s efforts have been valiant and any initiatives to get individuals to quit smoking should be applauded not challenged, they don’t often work and can be dangerous. For example, giving the patch to someone with high blood pressure can be detrimental. Additionally, the dosage of the nicotine should be different for every smoker. Nicotine dependency is a specific illness requiring one on one, selective treatment for each patient. One treatment does not fit all.

Doctors and behavioral therapists have the tools and they are effective. However, most medical insurance programs do not pay for smoking cessation therapy. Some patients are covered because unfortunately, they already have a diagnosis such as chronic bronchitis or emphysema caused by smoking. These insurers will put out $200,000 for lung replacement but not a penny to prevent smoking-related diseases such as, lung and other cancers, heart disease, skin conditions and a new ailment from smoking comes to light virtually every year.

Medicine has the ultimate solutions to the fatal smoking scourge destroying hundreds of thousands of lives yearly. Perhaps the city should use their smoking cessation funds on individuals and not posters.

From huffingtonpost.com, June 15, 2010

A Rudd government decision to hike the tax on cigarettes has passed the Senate with broad support from all parties. Labor raised by $1.80 to more than $14 the cost of an average pack of 25 cigarettes in April without formal legislation to formalise an excise increase. The coalition backed the measure with Liberal frontbencher Concetta Fierravanti-Wells saying the move would reduce the long-term strain on hospitals and healthcare services. ”This coalition, when elected at the next election, will continue this commitment to the Australian people,” she told parliament on Tuesday.

Independent Nick Xenophon said he supported the government’s decision to increase the excise.

“I do welcome that cigarettes are more expensive,” Senator Xenophon said.

However, the measure should be seen as one plank only in a policy to reduce smoking.

Subsidising nicotine replacement therapies and improving prevention methods needed to be funded.

Senator Xenophon called for details about the uptake of teenage smoking to be published annually and better surveying of the indigenous population to assess the effectiveness of the move.

The Australian Greens also supported the legislation.

Greens senator Rachel Siewert said more should be done to target the most vulnerable groups of smokers, including Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders who smoked at more than double the rate of the rest of the population.

A proportion of the revenue should be made available for people to quit and discourage those considering taking it up.

The federal government is waiting on recommendations on which nicotine replacement medications will be available through its Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme.

The Excise Tariff Amendment (Tobacco) Bill 2010 and a related bill now await royal assent.

From news.smh.com.au, June 15, 2010

WASHINGTON – With the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act due to take effect June 22, tobacco companies are lightening up their packaging colors on “light” or “mild” cigarette brands, USA Today reports. The act prohibits the use of the words “light” or “mild” on cigarette advertising or packaging. Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) and the American Lung Association have accused the tobacco companies of being disingenuous for using lighter colors to convey the “light” or “mild” brands. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued guidance that found many smokers think cigarettes called “light” or “mild” have fewer health risks.

The color changes are “a transparent attempt by the tobacco industry to evade the law and mislead consumers,” said Waxman.

“The tobacco industry is masterful in its knowledge of consumer behavior and marketing,” added Paul Billings, vice president for national policy for lung association.

R.J. Reynolds countered that the “smoking experience” is what smokers enjoy about “light” cigarettes. Coloring the packaging on those brands will alert smokers that the taste they enjoy is still available, said David Howard of R.J. Reynolds, which makes the Salem brand.

Salem cigarette packages had been the same green shade but now “lights” are housed in a lighter green and white, while “ultra lights” come in a pale gray and white. “The bottom line is there is no safe cigarette…and that is certainly well-known among adult cigarette consumers,” said Howard.

FDA spokeswoman Kathleen Quinn said the ban encompasses “mild,” “light” and “low” but that the agency would look into any probably violations on a case-by-case basis.

nacsonline.com, June 15, 2010

The average consumer won’t recognize a pack of counterfeit cigarettes, but they might recognize the taste is different.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has been seeing an increase in counterfeit cigarettes, which mimic brand-name products, according to Teresa Merhige, resident agent in charge of the ATF’s Norfolk office. Raids this week targeted those cigarettes or other tobacco-related offenses.
Federal authorities announced Thursday they had made arrests in Hampton Roads involving people charged with counterfeit and untaxed cigarettes. Local law enforcement also raided stores on Wednesday that were believed to be selling untaxed cigarettes after being tipped off by federal authorities.

The average consumer won’t recognize a pack of counterfeit cigarettes, but they might recognize the taste is different.The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has been seeing an increase in counterfeit cigarettes, which mimic brand-name products, according to Teresa Merhige, resident agent in charge of the ATF’s Norfolk office. Raids this week targeted those cigarettes or other tobacco-related offenses.

Federal authorities announced Thursday they had made arrests in Hampton Roads involving people charged with counterfeit and untaxed cigarettes. Local law enforcement also raided stores on Wednesday that were believed to be selling untaxed cigarettes after being tipped off by federal authorities.

Eight individuals were suspected in the trafficking operation, which the U.S. Attorney’s office said originated in New Jersey and New York under two different criminal enterprises. The investigation began in June 2009.

Federal authorities said that the groups received the contraband cigarettes in exchange for more than $4 million in cash and other counterfeit goods, such as tax stamps and postage stamps.

ATF believes many of the counterfeit cigarettes might be coming in from overseas. “You’ve got to really be trained,” Merhige said. “Some of these counterfeits are pretty doggone good.”

Mike Campbell, a spokesman for ATF, said on Wednesday that these crimes are on the rise because the profit margin is quite lucrative for traffickers. “The tax on a pack of cigarettes in New York is considerably higher than in Virginia,” Campbell said. Campbell said local law enforcement officials helped in some of the undercover portions of the federal investigation.

“For example, we’ve had people come to Northern Virginia and pay for cigarettes with two kilos of cocaine,” Campbell said, illustrating the worth of the untaxed cigarettes. Campbell said that there is a state tax on cigarettes and different cities also have taxes on them as well.

Merhige said that retailers selling the untaxed cigarettes, which should have a tax stamp affixed to them by the wholesaler, is a regionwide problem that affects all of Hampton Roads.

By Austin Bogues, dailypress.com, June 11, 2010

Starting next week, smokers will find it a little less convenient to pick up a pack of cigarettes in Everett.
Hoping to deliver another blow against smoking, the Board of Health on May 24 voted unanimously to ban the sale of tobacco products in pharmacies. The ban, which takes effect next Tuesday, also applies to business establishments that include pharmacies, according to Heidi Porter, Everett’s public health director.
“Pharmacies and drugstores that sell tobacco products are essentially approving of the purchase and use of tobacco. And we think that sends a mixed message to consumers who are going to these pharmacies really for health care services,’’ Porter said, of what prompted the ban. “The bottom line is that these pharmacies are health care establishments.’’

The ban, which took the form of a revision to the board’s tobacco regulation, prohibits tobacco sales in any health care institution or establishments containing them, with “health care institution’’ defined to include pharmacies and drugstores.

Porter said since hospitals and medical offices in this area do not sell tobacco products, the ban on tobacco sales in pharmacies and businesses containing them was the key change. The revised ordinance also bans tobacco vending machines except in private clubs.

Everett becomes the fifth Massachusetts community to bar the sale of tobacco in pharmacies.

Boston led the way in December, 2008 when it became the second city in the country — the first was San Francisco — to adopt such a ban. The Boston ban, which took effect in February 2009, was part of a larger tightening by the city of its tobacco restrictions.

Similar bans on tobacco sales in pharmacies followed in Needham, Uxbridge, and Newton, according to Jason Dodd, director of the 5-City Tobacco Control Collaborative, a partnership among the health boards of Cambridge, Chelsea, Everett, Revere, and Somerville that works to develop and enforce anti-tobacco policies.

He said the Somerville Health Department is expected to put the idea of a ban in that city before its board after the start of the new fiscal year July 1.

Dr. Sean F. Connolly, chairman of the Everett Board of Health, said the board felt “it is hard to justify the paradox of a health care institution — which these pharmacies and stores with pharmacies are defined as — that is practicing good health and making people healthy through medications, being able to sell cigarettes, which are known carcinogens.’’

But Jon Hurst, president of the Retailers Association of Massachusetts, said his group opposes the bans that have been adopted in Everett and the other communities.

“As long as it’s a legal product, it seems to me consumers ought to have the choice of buying it at the store that they like to shop at,’’ he said, adding that communities adopting such rules ought to lose some of the funding they receive from the state’s cigarette tax to pay for anti-tobacco programs.

Everett has three pharmacies or establishments with pharmacies that have permits from the board to sell tobacco products, according to Porter.

She said the three — Walgreens, on Ferry Street; Rite-Aid, on Broadway; and Costco, on Mystic View Road — are being notified that they must remove tobacco products from their shelves by next Tuesday.

At an April 20 hearing the board held in considering the regulation, and at the May 24 meeting, representatives from Costco and Walgreens spoke against the change. Connolly said the two companies raised concerns about the financial impact of the ban on their establishments. He said the Costco representatives also noted that it would be virtually impossible for a minor to purchase cigarettes at Costco because it is a member-only business.

But Connolly said those arguments did not sway the board, which he said was focused on public health considerations.

“I see on a daily basis in my office the effects of cigarette smoking,’’ said Connolly, a podiatrist. “So it doesn’t take much to convince me that this is the right idea.’’

Kevin Horst, general manager of the Everett Costco store, said, “We certainly support the idea of stopping teens from smoking, but at this time we don’t have a comment on this specific regulation as it is written. We are exploring options.’’

Robert Elfinger, spokesman for the Walgreens corporation, said, “We intend to comply with the new law.’’

Speaking in favor of the ban at the hearing were members of Teens in Everett Against Substance Abuse, a local youth group that advocates for measures to address substance abuse issues in the city.

Members of the group, an initiative of the Cambridge Health Alliance, offered statistics on the negative impacts of tobacco on human health, and spoke of the disconnect between tobacco products and a pharmacy, said program director Jean Granick.

By John Laidler, June 10, 2010, from boston.com

Exactly one year ago this month, the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act was signed into law by President Barack Obama. This act gives the Food and Drug Administration unprecedented authority to regulate tobacco like any other consumer product. Big Tobacco has been the most unregulated consumer product on the market, but this new law removed those special protections. Why should we care? Because every day, 3,500 kids try a cigarette for the first time.

A year later, we are starting to see results of the act.

Candy flavorings that appeal to youths are no longer allowed to be added to cigarettes.

Mild, light and low-tar adjectives are banned.

Tobacco sponsorship of sporting events has been banned.

Locally, the North Texas community is taking action with the North Texas Coalition Against Tobacco to educate about the dangers of tobacco use.

This coalition also encourages smoke-free ordinances to be adopted by cities in our area.

I want to thank Congress, Obama and the public health community for standing up to Big Tobacco and fighting to make this landmark legislation.

June 8, 2010, by dallasmorningviewsblog.dallasnews.com