A TAX on high-fat food and effective government regulation similar to what happened to the tobacco industry is how the obesity epidemic needs to be addressed, according to a leading south-west health expert. Professor James Dunbar, director of the Greater Green Triangle University Department of Rural Health (GGT UDRH) based at Deakin University in Warrnambool, said effective policy intervention was needed. “The government did a very good job regulating and controlling tobacco, they just need a similar approach,” he said.

“The government needs to move along the lines of implementing salt and nutritional standards and taxing unhealthy foods.

“This needs the support of the population. Anything is possible if you have the support of the people’s will.”

Professor Dunbar’s comments follow state government figures which revealed 35 per cent of men and 27 per cent of females in Warrnambool are overweight

Two Finnish experts will speak at a forum at the Warrnambool campus on Thursday and Professor Dunbar said Australia needed to follow the example of Finland, which dramatically reduced a high rate of heart disease

“During the 1970s Finland had the highest rates of heart disease in the world,” he said.

“In half of every classroom there were children without fathers. The people said it doesn’t have to be like this. The government listened and Finland had the fastest rate of decline in heart disease.”

Through two programs, GGT UDRH is targeting people not in paid employment to help them join community-based physical activity and healthy eating programs, while strengthening the capacity of local government to do this work.

GGT UDRH research fellow and Get Active Glenelg2Grampians project co-ordinator, Nathalie Davis, said the two projects were trying to engage people in high-risk groups.

“We are trying to improve the physical activity levels and healthy eating of people with a disability, carers, Aboriginal people and those from low socio-economic status backgrounds,” she said.

A local university doesn’t plan on completely banning the use of tobacco on its campus – at least for now.
Wheeling Jesuit University spokeswoman Maureen Zambito said her school currently is not pursuing a policy to expand its tobacco policy on campus. The issue came about after it was revealed during a recent Wheeling-Ohio County Board of Health meeting that the health department had sent letters to three local colleges, encouraging administrators to pursue imposing campus-wide no tobacco use policies. This would include chewing tobacco and cigarettes.

Officials at both West Virginia Northern Community College and West Liberty University said they already were exploring such a ban prior to being contacted by the health department.

Zambito this week provided a statement in response to inquiries about her school’s plans:

”Wheeling Jesuit University is always looking at expanding and improving our policies and programs, but we have nothing further to report at this point and time,” said Jim Holt, vice president for Institutional Advancement.

WJU’s campus currently is smoke-free except for limited designated areas, Holt noted.

Administrator Howard Gamble said the health department is willing to help any business or organization aiming to expand their tobacco policies.

In Ohio County, the board of health already prohibits smoking inside buildings and bars. The board had been considering expanding its own rule to include spaces currently exempt – video gambling parlors, video gambling areas inside bars, and table and video gambling areas inside Wheeling Island Hotel-Casino-Racetrack. However, after much public debate, the board said there was not enough public support to expand the rule, ultimately tabling it indefinitely.

”We continue to be in contact with both WVNCC and WLU concerning their efforts to go tobacco free. In the near future we will again reach out to WJU to discuss going tobacco free and the assistance we can provide them at that time. The (health department) works with all three institutions on a variety of issues and will continue to be a partner with them in regards to health and public health issues,” Gamble said.

According to the American Lung Association, 258 colleges and universities across the nation have gone tobacco free, including the West Virginia School of Osteopathic Medicine. Schools in Ohio that are tobacco free include: Ashland University, Hocking College and Mount Vernon Nazarene University.

While some individuals are continuing to create New Year’s resolutions, Marshall University’s Student Health Program is in an effort to make smoking cessation an option for campus. According to the West Virginia Division of Tobacco Prevention’s website, tobacco use is the single most preventable cause of death in the United States. The website also states that smoking harms nearly every organ of the body, causing many diseases and affecting overall health.

The Student Health program will be offering smoking cessation classes beginning in February. The classes will be available to students by contacting Student Health offices.
Amy Saunders, coordinator of the Student Health Education Program, said after doing research, the majority of data proves over the past three years, students do want a smoke-free campus.
“We continue to do research on this topic,” Saunders said. “For example, on Assessment Day in April we will conduct online surveys and look closely at those results. Our results in the past have indicated the majority of students are tobacco-free on campus,”
The Student Health Education Program has also formed a committee to look at smoke-free campuses and tobacco prevention. The committee is currently working with not only Marshall’s campus, but the Tri-State region as well. The program is interested in helping Huntington High School receive smoke detectors for their restrooms to help decrease smoking on school grounds.
Along with their work in this area, the committee is also planning to attend the Tobacco Free Day at the Capitol on Friday, Feb. 24.
A tobacco quit-line is also available to those who seek help to stop smoking. The West Virginia Tobacco Quitline was established in July 2000 and since then has enrolled more than 50,600 individuals. Those interested in participating in individual phone coaching to cease tobacco use can call 1-800-QUIT-NOW. Participants will also receive free nicotine replacement therapy, which includes patches and gum.
Teresa Mills, with the Cabell-Huntington Health Department, said the quit-line is free to individuals 18-34 years of age, and other ages depending on insurances.
“This specific population covers Marshall students and offers them an opportunity to receive free and easy access to help,” Mills said.
Smoking is prohibited in any Marshall building, including dormitories. In order to light a cigarette, an individual must be within at least 10 feet away from a building on campus.

I am disappointed to see North Bay City Council taking such a narrow view to the issue of First Nations tobacco. At this week’s meeting, the once progressive Council has taken a stance aimed at demonizing First Nations rights and worldview. Tobacco was the first gift given to the Anishinaabe as a means of praying to our Creator. We have been trading asaamaa (tobacco) since time immemorial. That’s how tobacco was first introduced to the settlers. Today, Anishinaabe people continue to trade in tobacco as a means of making a living for our families. Our governments assert that First Nations have the right to sell tobacco as we have for millennia.

Let’s be honest, this isn’t about health issues or tax fairness. This is about making money. If this was about health issues, then tobacco would have been banned long ago. Would City Council would ever think about advocating choking off the supply of non-native tobacco? Truth be told, this is about convenience stores, big tobacco companies and the tax man not making as much money as they have in the past. Now that First Nations are making some of that money, that same activity that was so lucrative, is now branded “contraband” or “illegal”.

The so-called taxpayer lobby, tobacco companies and the convenience store association regularly use these demonizing words in their messaging, which is now becoming common vernacular. Today this is all synonymous with the anti-First Nation sentiment, leading to further racism, intolerance and propagation of unfair, contemporary stereotypes.

I’m not saying this tobacco market shouldn’t be regulated. Let’s work with First Nations to legitimize and regulate this market. Let’s include prohibitions against advertising and curbing tobacco-only smoke shops. Let’s equalize the prices of tobacco products by including a First Nation Health Tax to fund poverty-reduction programs, affordable housing and First Nations health care.

I’m not involved in the tobacco business, I am not a smoker, and in fact, I personally oppose the sale and abuse of such a beautiful, spiritual gift that tobacco is. But let’s not continue to demonize all Anishinaabe people and legitimate First Nation businesses. To you, it might be contraband, to me, it’s our right and part of our economy. To you, they may be smugglers, to me, they’re my friends. To you, they may be an illegal retailer, to me, they’re my family. We are not involved in organized crime, nor do we sell tobacco to minors, lace our tobacco with rat pooh, or steal your children in the night. We’re businesspeople, just like Mr. Bain and Mr. Vaillancourt, making a living, raising our families.

Why St. Clair County has the highest percentage of smokers in the U.S. is not for certain, but the statistics do show that 27.4 percent of the county’s population smokes. Statewide 19.06 percent of the population smokes and the national average is at 17.9 percent, according to a report from the St. Clair County Community Health Program.

The St. Clair County Health Department has its work cut out for them, said Health Education and Planning Director Susan Amato.

“We don’t know why,” she said. “We are still scratching our heads at that one.”

Helping people give up a tobacco addiction to improve the quality of their life is one of the county health department’s roles. To play their role, the county recently scouted out six people during a contest called the Great American Smoke-out. The winners received a chance to try another option for quitting by local psychologist, William Miskell, Ph.D. Miskell joined the St. Clair County Smoke-Free Team after he recently moved to the area. He said he has worked with hundreds of patients to help them lose their nicotine habit through a process called “Change Your Mind.” The process is based around hypnosis.

The six participants submitted their top five reasons for wanting to quit smoking and why they believed hypnosis might help. Amato said the reasons for quitting were similar among the entrants, with the most frequent reason to be a better role model for their children and grandchildren. The smell, cost, health benefits and even the challenge were also commonly stated top reasons. Amato said one entrant stated, “because I am tired of quitting!”

“We know that there’s a lot of different ways to quit and one method will work with one and not the other,” she said. “But after they’ve taken the patch, medication, classes and support groups, they may agree to hypnosis. It is not harmful but could be helpful.”

Amato said Miskell places the subject in a relaxed state and then addresses their subconscious mind to look at themselves as a non-smoker.

The free sessions, would have cost the participants $249. After the sessions, they will be contacted to find out how they are doing. They will check back again in three, six and 12-months.

Miskell said most people think of hypnosis as a mystical experience, a time when subjects are put in a hypnotic trance to do embarrassing things in front of an audience. He maintained this is not the case for his work though.

South Australia yesterday called on new Attorney-General Nicola Roxon to lead the charge. But British American Tobacco accused the former health minister of a stunt in bringing to Australia anti-smoking lobbyist Matthew Myers to stir up the states and distract attention from a High Court battle over plain packaging laws. South Australian Health Minister John Hill yesterday met with Mr Myers, a lawyer who advised 50 US state attorneys-general in lawsuits against Big Tobacco for smoking-related healthcare costs in the late 1990s.

Mr Myers, who this week also met the NSW and Victorian governments, impressed Mr Hill, who said South Australia would back the real possibility of individual suits or a class action by states against tobacco companies.
Mr Hill said Ms Roxon, as the new attorney-general, would be expected to take a leadership role in bringing other states on board for any legal action.

“I think legal action is worth exploring,” he told The Australian yesterday.

“The reality for us is we know that one in two people who are long-term smokers are going to die from smoking, and lung cancers for example cost the health system buckets of money, so why shouldn’t those who cause this be responsible for paying for it?

“Australia is not that different from America in common law.

“If you can make the connection between smoking and related diseases, and if tobacco companies are prepared to compensate in another jurisdiction,” legal action should be considered.

South Australia would be prepared to offer resources in any legal fight, he said.

Ms Roxon yesterday refused to answer questions about the cost to taxpayers of bringing Mr Myers to Australia, referring The Australian to the Health Department.

A department spokeswoman said: “Minister Roxon invited Mr Myers to Australia at a time when tobacco companies are bringing litigation against the Australian government, to share his extensive experience in tobacco-related litigation with the Australian government and with interested state and territory governments.”

It is understood that it is too early to know the full costs of Mr Myers’ taxpayer funded trip.

A spokeswoman for Ms Roxon said the minister was “heartened by the support of such an esteemed anti-tobacco expert”.

Lighting up a cigarette at Whitley County’s Health Department facilities will be out of the question come Jan. 1, 2012, when its smoking ban takes effect. The Whitley County Health Department will soon join the bandwagon, like Knox and Laurel County facilities, to extinguish smoking and the use of all tobacco products. Laurel County Health Department became a smoke-free facility under the City of London smoking ban ordinance passed in 2009, and the Knox County Health Department implemented its own smoke-free policy this past January.

“We want to be a good example in the community because we are educating the community about the dangers of second-hand smoke and how exposure to it will affect your health,” said Kathy Lay, health educator for the Whitley County Health Department. “We want to be examples of that in our agency and reflect that we are changing our policies in our health department. We know how important it is to educate about the dangers of second-hand smoke, so we want to protect the health of anyone who comes to our health department.”

In a memo dated Aug. 18 released to the Times-Tribune that was distributed to health department employees, the Whitley County Board of Health approved the smoking and tobacco free policy at its board meeting on Aug. 15. The memo states, “In order to assist any employees adversely affected, we will again provide free Cooper-Clayton or other stop-smoking classes in October. These classes will be provided during work hours in order to assist those who desire to attend.”

Lay said there is currently about seven employees who are participating in the Cooper-Clayton program that is a 13-week cessation program as they wanted to start preparing their employees for the transition.

The policy states employees who violate this policy are subject to health department disciplinary action, including verbal and written warnings. Repeat violations of the policy will be treated as insubordination and will result in termination of employment.

The smoking and tobacco free policy includes both of its Corbin and Williamsburg offices.

The policy states the use of tobacco is prohibited on all property owned, leased or operated by the Whitley County Health Department. This includes all buildings, grounds, exterior open spaces, parking lots, sidewalks, and in all health department owned or leased vehicles.

The definitions of smoking or tobacco use as stated in the policy include the burning of tobacco or any other material in any type of smoking equipment, cigarettes, cigars, pipes and electronic cigarettes. Dip, chew, snuff or pouches are also included.

Visitors or clients who violate the policy may be denied access to the health department campuses and may ultimately be subject to arrest for criminal trespass.

Kicking the nicotine habit can be one of the hardest things a person can do. Tobacco companies have spent billions of dollars researching on the best ways to keep users addicted to their products. Most already know and understand the negative impact tobacco use has on us but few actually understand why. In cigarettes, there are over 4,000 chemicals that have been added to the already highly processed tobacco leaves. Even the paper wrap has a lot of additives and chemicals added to it.

All tobacco products are dangerous and addictive. Unfortunately the tobacco companies are spending a great deal of time, research and effort to create new tobacco users and to keep the current tobacco users using!

Tobacco companies have focused their attention on teens. Flavoured tobacco products like cigarillos are directly targeted to teens. These are tobacco products that are wrapped in tobacco leaves and can be sold as a single instead of a pack. This makes it very affordable for a teenager to buy. A 2007 Canadian Tobacco Use Monitoring Survey found that cigarillo use is a major form of tobacco use in Canada. Teens are at a three times higher risk of having smoked a cigarillo in the past month as Canadians over 25. Cigarillos are unfiltered so teens will inhale more toxins from the cigarillo than someone who smokes a cigarette. If you would like to report any business selling tobacco products to minors please call the Health Canada Enforcement Specialist at 780-495-3305.

Smokeless tobacco is thought to be a product that can enhance performance and is harmless because there is no smoke. However, like cigarettes, the body will close off the capillaries as a defense mechanism to ensure that oxygen gets to the brain and other organs when one uses smokeless tobacco products. Also, a person who used 8 – 10 dips per day receives the same amount of nicotine as someone who smokes 30 – 40 cigarettes a day!

Where does one go if they want to kick the nicotine habit? Many will go to their local pharmacist as they have a wealth of information on various tobacco cessation products. The family doctor can also help with prescriptions and other information on tobacco cessation products. Kim Ruptash is an addiction counsellor specializing in tobacco cessation. Her number is 780-842-7619 (available through the Rite line 310-0000). There is also a 24-hr Addictions help line at 1-866-332-2322

The Mental Health Capacity Building in Schools Initiative (MHCB) is an integrated, multidisciplinary team approach providing promotion, prevention and early intervention addiction, health and mental health services to children, families and communities. The VIBE Program is one of the 38 projects involved in this initiative led by Alberta Health Services Addiction and Mental Health in partnership with Alberta Education and funded by Alberta Health and Wellness.For more information on the benefits sleep and other health & wellness related topics please contact your VIBE Coach, or the Program Coordinator Pat Calyniuk at 780-853-3718.

Debate has been rife over whether smokers can receive state-paid healthcare benefits, which I argue they should. In light of Jakarta Governor Fauzi Bowo’s proposal to exclude smokers from free healthcare in Jakarta, it is timely to review the reasons why this plan can’t be justified. One of the most cited justifications for the governor’s proposal is an economic argument. Smokers, proponents of the plan say, are not poor or can’t be considered poor and therefore do not deserve benefits intended for the poor.

But how do we define and measure poverty? Can smoking be included in the measurement?

One way to look at poverty is by measuring consumption levels. The World Bank defines poverty as the inability to fulfill a certain level of consumption for basic needs, such as food or healthcare. Thus, proponents say, smokers deprive themselves of basic needs by spending money on cigarettes. Spending money on cigarettes is a waste indeed, but this argument only holds true if the counterfactual holds: that they would otherwise spend this money on basic needs. But would they?

Proponents also argue that the proposal serves as a disincentive to smokers so they would give up smoking in pursuing a free healthcare. It is a sort of punishment for smokers, albeit a weak and dishonest one.

The addictive property of nicotine has made efforts to encourage people to quit smoking far from easy. Most smokers fail in their attempts to stop. Many have struggled, sometimes for years, and succeeded, but they often relapse. In addition, successful cessation is often linked to increased access to assistance to quit smoking rather than preventing smokers from seeing doctors.

Not only is this punishment not evidence-based, it is also deceitful. It is like changing the rules of the game when the ball is already rolling. Where were we when these smokers took a puff on their first cigarettes? Did we tell them then they were going to lose their access to free healthcare?

Lastly, there is my favorite fairness argument — that it would be fair to place the burden of smoking-related illnesses on those individuals who smoke and relieve the rest of the society, the non-smokers, from paying for their illnesses. Smokers, indeed, are more susceptible to some diseases and are likely to use more healthcare services compared to non-smokers. This argument is correct, but only superficially.

In saying that an individual is held responsible for his/her actions, we are claiming that the action is completely voluntary and based on complete information of what such action would cause. In the case of smoking, is it fair for us to say this behavior is completely voluntary and deliberate?

Most smokers started smoking when they were young; some when they were just toddlers. I would argue that the initiation of smoking, for many, is not a voluntary decision made following a careful deliberation on complete information covering what health hazards smoking causes. In fact, most smokers hardly have complete information. The small warning box neither tells them how likely they are to suffer from those conditions nor warns them how cigarette smoking will affect their household finances.

The lack of information is aggravated by the aggressive cigarette sales promotions. Smoking role models have long been established — from the infamous Marlboro man to a successful architect. At schools, peer pressure plays an important part in smoking initiation. Worse still, our soccer league is named after a famous cigarette brand. So don’t we, society and the state, allow all this to happen and shouldn’t we be held responsible for these individuals’ smoking?

Fairness demands that we treat smokers and non-smokers equally. But we can’t be completely fair on smokers unless we can be certain that “the punishment fits the crime.” Smokers smoke differently and non-smokers suffer from diseases causally linked to smoking, too. How can we correctly quantify the contribution of smoking on the development of those diseases? Is banning smokers, let alone their families, from free healthcare a proportionate and fair punishment?

In sum, excluding smokers from free healthcare has no strong justification. It certainly has no prior evidence, or perhaps even hypothesis, that it would succeed to change smokers’ behavior.

I am a strong believer that smoking is evil, but I also believe that imprudent public health policy, such as this, will only see the most disenfranchised suffer further.

Moreover, by adopting such a policy we risk going too far. If smokers are banned from getting free healthcare services, shouldn’t we move on and ban patients from receiving treatment in severe head injury cases resulting from speeding collisions without a helmet or seat belt? What about diseases related to a lack of exercise or salt consumption?

As a nation, we ought to care about the poor, including those who smoke. Rather than further depriving these people of services they need the most, the state should proactively help them to quit smoking, for example by giving them access to smoking cessation programs.

After all, the state should be held responsible, at least partly, from failing to protect its citizens from being smokers in the first place.