A small butane lighter that’s the size and shape of a cigarette. That’s what this is. It even looks like a cigarette! Buy a new pack of cigarettes, take one out, light it with this lighter, then put the lighter BACK IN THE PACK!!! That way, you’ll always have a lighter with you but you won’t have to give up precious pocket space.

It’s a simple $1.50 solution to a not-so-complex problem. You’re on your own as far as finding somewhere to smoke is concerned, as you can no longer legally smoke inside, outside, underground, underwater, or in the future — only back in time and inside a smoking helmet.

Drinking his afternoon coffee, Jorge Padron usually lights a cigar that has his name on the side. The company founded by his late father Jose Padron back in 1960s has seen a constant growth for four decades in a row.

But now everything has changed. Cigar industry that provided thousands of workplaces for unskilled workers and supplied aficionados with fine products is coming across difficult times just due to the economic downturn. The implementation of bans on smoking throughout the nation and larger-than-life tax increase played a major role in the declined of cigar sales.

The largest plant to close to his moment has been the Hav-a-Tampa factory in Tampa that is going to stop production within two months and already began laying off workers. American Cigar Association chairman Norman Sharp, admitted that many companies are as well cutting on salaries and firing workers.

Cigars have been perceived as an integral part in lives of American people. Cigars are presented when kids are born or during the wedding ceremony. They have been smoked celebrating victories in NBA and NFL and on many other occasions.

However, currently average smoking rates are dropping as almost 20,000 American cities and localities prohibited smoking in public places. Moreover, more than 100 proposals to increase tobacco taxes have been introduced across the country.

Sharp said that although they have not made a comprehensive market research, reports demonstrate that sales had dropped by 10-12% last year, as people began cutting the expenses on cigars.

According to industry experts, the principal reason of the decline is enormous tax hikes.

The tobacco taxes have seen a massive increase on April 1, when the federal tax increase made large cigars cost 35 cents more. In addition, 12 states have approved tax hikes on tobacco while 25 are in the process of consideration.

Mitch Dolman, one of the editors of Cigarcyclopedia.com, confirmed that small cigars have been hurt the most, because they had been intended to be much cheaper than large counterparts but with a $1-per-pack tax hike the sales have fallen significantly. Premium cigars, which cost $20-30 have not been affected that much, since they are bought mainly by wealthy people.

Jorge Padron said that they have to pay approximately $40.000 for each shipment of 100.000 cigars, from the initial $5.000.

He added that they still use manual labor to roll several cigar brands and with the decline in sales he was forced to cut salaries for his workers. He said that if lawmakers hadn’t stopped considering cigars as a source of easy money it would become a devastation for the whole industry.

“They simply don’t understand that at the end they would not achieve their target – generating more taxes, if our sales continue to drop and we will be forced to fire people,” Pardon mentioned. .

American Cigar Association chairman stated that layoffs will be a disaster not just to the company owners but especially for those simple people, who had been working at the plants for decades. He said the overwhelming majority of the workers barely graduated school and would have hard times finding another decent job.

Mitch Dolman said that public health groups, which advocated for comprehensive smoking bans simply do not understand the difference between cigarettes and cigars, since a cigarette can be smoked in 2 minutes outside a bar, but it is not possible in case of cigars.

” Cigar smoking requires a quite and peaceful place, where people relax and think about the beauties of the world that surrounds them, .”

Almost all the countries banned smoking in public places. One of these countries is Japan. It has banned smoking from most public places, including many city streets, but one company has given shelter to the decreasing ranks of tobacco smokers, by opening smokers-only cafes.

Today thick cigarette smoke flies through the ‘Cafe Tobacco’ shops in the heart of Tokyo which is filled with office workers and shoppers looking to take a quick puff, a habit increasingly scowled upon in a country long seen as a smokers’ paradise.
Tadashi Horiguchi, a board director of the coffee shop operator Towa Food Service Co, said: “Nowadays smoking is considered an evil. That’s why we want to provide an oasis for smokers”.
Outside, a red sign with a picture of a smoking cigarette attracted more clients, approximately 600 a day.
In such cafes, smokers don’t have to feel guilty because they smoke and they feel freer because they are surrounded by other smokers, all of them aged over 20 as stipulated by a sign outside.
Not everyone, especially non-smokers, is as enthusiastic about the new tobacco-friendly cafes as are smokers. They reported that it is not healthy to extend smoking places.
For example, Yosuke Hagimori, a health ministry official, said that: “Tobacco contains toxic substances and increases health risks”.
However Japan’s smoking rate is on the decline but still higher than in other developed countries, with some 40 percent of men and 13 percent of women lighting up.
Instead many local governments and institutions have taken anti-smoking measures themselves. Central Tokyo districts have prohibited or strongly discouraged smoking on the streets except for designated areas.
Smoking has also been banned in most Tokyo taxis since last year and in railway stations as of earlier this year. Many bars, cafes and restaurants, however, still have smoking sections, to the annoyance of health campaigners.
Japanese law still stipulates the goal of a “healthy development” of the tobacco industry to evolve income and for stable tax revenue.
Cigarettes now carry warning labels, but they remain much cheaper in Japan than in most other developed countries, with a pack of 20 cigarettes selling for about three dollars.
In general smokers-only cafes help protect the health of those around the smokers but would it help smokers?

The impact of the latest federal excise tax (FET) increase on tobacco retailing was one of the hot topics discussed during the annual Convenience Store News Tobacco Best Practices Roundtable, held in New Orleans the day before the start of the Tobacco Plus Expo in May.

Guest speaker David Bishop, managing partner of Balvor LLC, a leading c-store consulting firm, presented the results of a new Balvor/CSNews Tobacco Retailing Survey that polled convenience retailers on their expected reactions to the April 1, 61-cent FET increase to $1.01 per pack of cigarettes.

When adding in the mean average state excise tax of $1.20 per pack, cigarette consumers pay $1.44 more per pack in taxes compared to what they paid as of Jan. 1, 2001, which doesn’t even reflect the increased cost associated with changes at the county or city level.

Near term (within the current calendar year) implications cited by Bishop included:

Retailers, especially smaller ones, will likely reduce tobacco inventory as higher inventory cost puts a strain on cash flow. The reductions will come from a combination of SKU rationalization and inventory optimization across all brands;

There will be greater attention paid to value brands as consumers respond to increased prices, especially during such a tough economic time; and,

Shelf space will be reallocated as retailers primarily attempt to capture further growth from the other tobacco products (OTP) side of the business.

For the longer term, Bishop told retailers at the roundtable to expect shifts in market share as some lower volume traditional retailers, namely supermarkets, exit the category at an accelerated pace. There also will be further supply side consolidation, whether via acquisition or internal restructurings, as U.S. manufacturers leverage further synergies to strengthen their bottom lines, he predicted.

Retailers discussed best practices in merchandising, promoting and staying in stock. Retailer guests included representatives from BP/ampm, Certified Oil, Mac’s Convenience Stores, Mother Hubbard’s Cupboard, Plaid Pantries, Royal Buying Group, Smoker Friendly and Worsley/Scotchman Stores.

The 2009 Tobacco Best Practices Roundtable was sponsored by McLane Co.

Retailers at the roundtable were highly vocal in their opposition to the government’s intrusion on the freedom of businesses to sell and people to use a legal product. They didn’t have to use their imagination to see where the cigarette category could go in the near future, and only had to look north to Canada, where much of the country has “gone dark” — meaning no tobacco product or signage can be visible to customers within or outside the store.

Peter Chappell, senior category manager for Mac’s Convenience Stores, based in Ontario, shared the “going dark” experience with roundtable participants from the perspective of someone who lived through it.

Displaying tobacco product or point-of-purchase advertising is now banned in almost every province and territory in Canada — with the product usually hidden from view behind blank flaps, cupboard doors or, in some cases, curtains. By the end of this year, only New Brunswick and Labrador are expected to still allow visibility of tobacco products in the store.

Chappell said Mac’s, a division of North America’s largest company-operated convenience store chain, Alimentation Couche-Tard, experienced some negative impact on sales for the first three months after going dark. He advised against decreasing the number of tobacco SKUs carried in the store, as this action just accelerated the sales decline after cigarettes were hidden in the Canadian stores.

Another frustration for Canadian retailers today is the decreasing opportunities for merchandising activities, noted Chappell.

The frustrations for customers are also obvious: longer service time than before as clerks have to search for the brand and product ordered, and the uncertainty of the product’s availability before ordered.

Chappell said Mac’s experience varied by province. In Saskatchewan, which went dark in 2006, the chain had a marginal sales decrease in the first four weeks following the effective date of the dark market. Four weeks after, sales remained on the national trend.

With the product now behind flaps, Mac’s utilizes the space for more promotional signage of other products, such as chips and beverages, said Chappell.

Other advice from Chappell:

Make the store a destination for tobacco.

Do not cut down the selection of brands. Keep the same listing as before the dark market because product availability will become the first criteria in the store selection for a customer, followed by price.

Instruct store staff on legislation to avoid fines.

Set retail prices low prior to the dark market because customers will remember the low price and return for future purchases.

While going dark on tobacco is not an immediate concern to most U.S. convenience store retailers, the panelists at the roundtable were certainly not totally discounting the possibility — especially under the current Obama administration and its very aggressive stance in favor of increased government regulation of practically everything — from the auto industry, banking and even food ingredients.

Jesus Delgado-Jenkins, CEO of Mother Hubbard’s Cupboard, a regional c-store chain in the Quad Cities area of Illinois and a former government official himself at the Treasury Department, was at a loss to explain the rationale for the ever-increasing taxes on tobacco products. “If you keep increasing the tax on cigarettes, fewer people will buy them, which means sales in the store will decrease,” observed Delgado-Jenkins. “Retailers have to make up that sales decline somewhere. What are they going to do, raise gasoline prices? By taxing cigarettes, you’re also supporting an indirect gas tax hike — is that something you want to do in this economy?”

Of almost equal concern to retailers as taxes was the likelihood of increased theft and security issues as the value of a carton of cigarettes skyrockets — CSNews’ 2009 Forecast Study projects the manufacturer list cost for a carton of cigarettes to top $31 this year, with retail prices in high tax states such as New York soaring above $95 per carton.

To combat shrinkage of this expensive inventory, Mother Hubbard’s started doing surprise audits of the category in April. “Every shift there’s a cigarette count,” said Delgado-Jenkins.

In the process, Mother Hubbard’s reduced inventory by $10,000 to $15,000 per store and taken days of supply down to an average of about three to four weeks for the 13-store chain, although three or four of the stores are operating at two-and-a-half weeks supply, which is the goal.

On a similar note, Worsley/Scotchman Stores also instituted new security policies for better oversight of deliveries in an effort to reduce theft, said Karl Beem, marketing manager.

Asked to name a few of the best-selling new products in the category, most retailers seemed to agree on Camel Crush, a regular cigarette that contains a small capsule in the filter that when crushed, transforms the cigarette into a menthol. However, one retailer said the novelty of the product appears to be waning in his markets.

In terms of pricing strategies, Delgado-Jenkins reported how his strategy has turned 180 degrees from what it was a year ago. “In 2007, we did a lot of promotions. The previous owner took every allowance he could get. Last year, we decided not to promote as much and we saw our total transactions and volume in cigarettes dip,” explained the convenience store retailer. “This year we are going back to the old way and taking every allocation. So far, sales are up 2 percent to 3 percent — not including the price increase.”

Jeremy Weiner of Smoker Friendly said value packs, such as “two-fors,” are selling out for the Colorado-based tobacco chain. Bishop noted many retailers are successfully offering a third pack at a price of $3.99 when the customer buys two at regular price. Chappell said Mac’s in Canada promotes two packs for $17.99, while single packs sell for $10.25. “Fifty-five percent of my cigarette sales are in two-packs,” he noted.

Wayne Wills, merchandising manager for Columbus, Ohio-based Certified Oil, said his convenience stores offer state minimum pricing on cigarettes.

Retailers also discussed the growth of the OTP category (see story, page 35) and the newest category sensation, the electronic cigarette or e-cigarette.

Available from a handful of suppliers, the e-cigarette is a battery-powered device that provides inhaled doses of nicotine through a vaporized solution. It also provides a flavor and physical sensation similar to smoking a regular cigarette, but no tobacco or smoke is involved.

Weiner of Smoker Friendly noted even at the high price of between $57 and $70 for a starter kit containing the device and several refill cartridges, e-cigarettes are “flying off the shelf.” Smoker Friendly sold 67 starter kits in a recent three-week period, said Weiner, who added margins on the starter kit are about 20 percent and margins on the cartridge refills are as high as 40 percent.

Wills said Certified Oil — a more traditional convenience store format than the tobacco outlet Smoker Friendly — sold 80 of the starter kits in its 45 top stores.

Retailers did express concerns that FDA regulation of tobacco could put the brakes on the sale of the product as the government agency investigates it more.

Given all the other governmental and regulatory hurdles in the tobacco category, such a move would hardly surprise these convenience and tobacco retailers.
© Csnews

When President Obama signed legislation in mid-June to bring tobacco under FDA regulation, few seemed outraged that the legislation had been co-written by Philip Morris USA. The bill was designed, critics say, to stabilize the place of cigarettes in our society: to diminish the threat of health-related lawsuits, to prevent competitive yet possibly safer products from being introduced, and to lock in Philip Morris’ market share.

It’s not just the Harvard School of Public Health leveling these charges but even Sen. Bob Bennett, Republican of Utah, a supporter of the intent of the bill who was nonetheless “convinced we would do better if we told Philip Morris to stay out of the process of writing tobacco legislation.”

But the bill Obama signed is actually the second half of a legislative push, or maybe a putsch, that Philip Morris and its parent, Altria (MO), have been shepherding through Congress for more than a decade. In 2004, President Bush signed the first half of the legislation, which had to do with tobacco production rather than consumption. That bill, the Fair and Equitable Tobacco Reform Act of 2004, eliminated the quota system for tobacco farmers that had been in place since the 1930s. Similar to its other crop insurance programs, the government had created a system to guarantee a minimum price for tobacco farmers by limiting the amount that could be grown each year.

In what is a familiar refrain, the buyout was sold to Congress and anti-smoking groups as something that was necessary to help impoverished small tobacco farmers get out of the business. “Tens of thousands of farmers will struggle to survive and many, including whole communities, will not make it,” testified Matthew Myers, head of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids and an early supporter of the bill. (He withdrew his support once the buyout was uncoupled from the FDA legislation for that year.) In 2004 it was Ken Cook, president of the Environmental Working Group, who tried to pull back the curtain. He said at the time, “The House buyout plan is an incredible rip-off of the taxpayer, mostly to benefit a handful of large tobacco interests and tobacco companies.”

Five years after the tobacco buyout, and with the second prong of tobacco legislation newly passed, it’s worth checking in. As with other crops, the government had for years been paying some farmers not to grow tobacco to maintain prices for those who did. By the time 2004 rolled around, nearly 85 percent of tobacco permit holders weren’t growing tobacco at all. The permits were being bought and sold for their annual cash payments, like some sort of strange tobacco bond. The quota system, which could have been used to end domestic tobacco production altogether, worked in that it kept prices high and kept small farmers in business.

Under the law, the USDA, which had paid billions to permit holders for nearly 60 years, had to end the quota system. A “user fee,” or tax, of $9.6 billion was levied on tobacco companies and paid for the buyout.

One might think the impoverished tobacco farmer is still down there in Marlboro country, wandering his barren plantation, as if Sherman himself had risen only to come and burn it all over again. Or that the buyout helped reduce the use of American farmland to grow tobacco, especially given the recent price spikes in food crops, like wheat, soybeans, and corn. One would think provisions were put in place to help permanently reduce the amount of tobacco production in the United States. But one would be wrong.

In fact, while many small tobacco farmers took their buyouts and got out of family farming, many sold their land to large industrial farmers who simply took their places. And plenty weren’t even farming to begin with. The Washington Post story that quoted Ken Cook noted that “holders of a quota to market tobacco—which has been bought and sold for decades—live in all 50 states.”

The South, after a few years of production declines adjusting to the new market dynamics, is again growing plenty of tobacco. And tobacco acreage, after declining following the buyout, has jumped up by more than 20 percent, including in some states where tobacco hasn’t been farmed in 100 years, like Ohio and Illinois.

According to one story on the buyout, some farmers have stopped growing commodity crops like corn and wheat to switch to the wildly more profitable tobacco crop. “A reasonable profit for an acre of corn is about $100. For tobacco,” T.J. Vaughan said in that story, “it’s $1,000 to $1,500.”

But isn’t domestic tobacco consumption declining? Why would there be such an increase in demand? The price supports were simply making American tobacco too expensive for the marketplace. By removing them, the tobacco companies got what they wanted: cheaper domestic tobacco. The cheaper supply, of course, lowered the cost of making their product.

As tobacco costs continued to decline, thanks to the consolidation of farms and use of industrial farming techniques, the price of American tobacco became competitive on the international market. Now, nearly 60 percent of our entire domestic crop is being exported to other regions where smoking is on the rise, mostly in Africa, the Middle East, and Asia. Philip Morris USA, which, according to Joe Nocera, came to the negotiating table chastened by its past behavior of denial and obstruction, has still managed to do a solid for its corporate cousin Philip Morris International.

By introducing competition to the supply market, the two companies have simply re-created the old slavery triangle trade route. Sell cigarettes to Africans, use the profits to buy American tobacco, and manufacture cigarettes in lightly regulated countries like Romania and China. Forget exporting carbon; we’re now exporting cancer.

And the competition seems to be working exactly how the Philip Morris twins intended. In Kentucky, 85 percent of burley tobacco, the main kind of tobacco found in cigarettes, is exported. Burley tobacco has a harsh taste that has to be masked by flavors like cherry and vanilla—flavors that were just banned under the 2009 legislation. Tobacco growers, in other words, won’t have much of a domestic market—but they will have a buyer trying to meet ever-growing foreign demand in Philip Morris International. That’s why exports are rising and tobacco is one of the biggest export cash crops in the United States today. The whole scheme could be considered a blow to the idea that farmers need any government price supports at all.

So, five years later, the first prong of the tobacco legislation effort spearheaded by Philip Morris USA and supported by the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids has consolidated, boosted, and industrialized American tobacco farming and removed the price supports that made American tobacco exports unattractive on the open market. The only problem is that now that Philip Morris International is using so much American tobacco, its profits had fallen last quarter due to the stronger American dollar. But before some congressman jumps to Big Tobacco’s rescue, as they seem to love to do these days, I should note that the dollar is already weakening once again.

A pparently, President Obama and I share the same regret over our teenage stupidity.

When signing our nation’s toughest anti-smoking law to date on Tuesday, Obama said he has been struggling with his addiction to cigarettes his entire adult life and rued the day he smoked his first cigarette as a teen. He was very critical of the tobacco industry and chastised companies for marketing their products to children and young adults, who are too naive and too confident of their own mortality to understand the severe consequences of becoming a smoker.

“The decades-long effort to protect our children from the harmful effects of smoking has finally emerged victorious,” Obama said while signing the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. The new law allows the Food and Drug Administration to ban “low tar” and “light” labels on cigarettes, outlaw candy flavoring and order tobacco companies to reduce nicotine in tobacco products. It also allows the FDA to regulate ingredients in tobacco products, make those ingredients public and prohibit marketing campaigns that target children.

I applaud Obama’s effort to tighten tobacco laws because I, too, share his regret of becoming a smoker as a teen. I tell my three children constantly that starting to smoke is the single biggest regret of my life, and I have struggled to quit numerous times over the past 20 years. I am ashamed to admit that I still find it hard to stop completely.

So I cannot help but commiserate with Obama when he talked about his continuing efforts to stop smoking. Two years ago, he promised his wife, Michelle, he would quit if she agreed to let him run for the presidency, but admitted he still occasionally “falls off the wagon.”

“I constantly struggle with it. Am I a daily smoker, a constant smoker? No. I don’t do it in front of my kids, I don’t do it in front of my family, and I would say that I am 95 percent cured, but there are times where I mess up,” Obama said.

Almost 90 percent of people who smoke began at 18 or younger, according to national surveys. In Illinois, 29 percent of teens smoke, compared to 23 percent of Illinois adults. Almost every smoker I know said they started the bad habit when they were between 12 and 15 years old. No one I spoke with started smoking as an adult, most likely because adults understand the health risks and costs involved. Teens are much more vulnerable to tobacco marketing because they view themselves as invincible.

“I know – I was one of those teenagers,” Obama said Tuesday. “I know how difficult it is to break this habit when it’s been with you for a long time. This legislation will protect our kids and improve our public health.”

It took 10 years for the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act to become law. Tobacco companies no longer will be allowed to create and sell teen-friendly cigarette flavors such as “Caribbean Chill” and “Twista Lime,” or design teen-attracting cigarette packages that look like mp3 players or cell phones.

The Centers for Disease and Prevention Control says more than 3,000 teens smoke their first cigarette every day in the United States, and 70 percent of all teenagers admit they have tried smoking at least once.

John Seffrin, chief executive officer of the American Cancer Society’s Cancer Action Network, says the new legislation “will finally put an end to Big Tobacco’s despicable marketing practices that are designed to addict children to its deadly products.”

I wish this law would have been approved 30 years ago. I don’t remember being influenced as a teen by tobacco marketing, but I see the power a McDonald’s commercial has over my own children, and don’t doubt my friends and I were impacted by clever ads featuring kid-friendly characters such as Joe Camel.

If this new law prevents teens from starting to smoke, it will go a long way toward making our next generation healthier. And a lot less stinky.

Children feel freer on the beaches and playgrounds, because there they can explore the world around them. But unfortunately in these places can be found a lot of cigarette butts, and this is a big cause why kids start to smoke in an early year.
Cigarette butts are consistently the most common litter item found in Australia, making up over 50% of all litter items counted. Cigarette butts contain over 4000 chemicals which leach into the environment when they are flicked or tossed.

Butts are a pervasive problem for local governments as butts are found almost everywhere. Planter pots and garden beds, transport hubs and easements, shopping malls and café strips, outside businesses and licensed premises, flicked onto roadsides, pathways and parks are all targets for butt litter.
On the beaches, people smoke cigarettes even in the water. Such beaches can be met in Maine’s state parks too.
An inhabitant said: “Our state park beaches were really the last place where hundreds of people could be and were impacted by secondhand smoke.”
The new law bans smoking within 20 feet of a state park beach, playground or snack bar. But another bill awaiting the governor’s signature will bans smoking in any outdoor restaurant dining area.
The rivals of the new legislation say they understand concerns about the effects of secondhand smoke inside public buildings but they say banning smoking in the great outdoors is taking things too far.
One of the snack bar owners, Steve Casey said that he created this outdoor patio at The Depot for to accommodate his smoking clientage.
Steve said: “Now smokers may not even leave houses what’s next they can’t smoke in their yards?”
The president of the Maine Restaurant Association, representing 3700 restaurants, said that in this economy it’s just one more restriction struggling businesses don’t need.

THOSE disgusting images on the packets of cigarettes mean little to smokers. The pictures shown warrant viewers’ discretion. They are shocking and gory, with little respect for taste and style. It is supposed to deter people from smoking. Very few, I am sure, kick their smoking habit by merely looking at them. At least, I have not known anyone who did that.

We have yet to ascertain how effective the expensive anti-smoking campaigns launched so far are. I have a feeling that the prohibition sentiment fires up more smokers. Forbidden fruit tastes better, they say.

Some years ago the regional office for the Western Pacific of the World Health Organisation (WHO) reported that half of all Malaysian men smoke. The study also showed that every day about 50 teenagers below 18 begin to smoke and about 30 per cent of boys aged between 12 and 18 smoke.

WHO acknowledges the fact that the Western Pacific Region, which includes East Asia and the Pacific, has the highest smoking rate in the world. To put it in perspective, about one in three cigarettes are consumed here. More than 30 per cent of the world’s smokers come from China. India contributes 11.2 per cent of smokers while Indonesia and Russia make up 4.8 per cent and 4.6 per cent respectively. Developing nations make up 70 per cent of smokers. China has 320 million smokers or 12 times our population. India has 120 million smokers.

In the industrialised West, the number of smokers is declining. In 1955, 56 per cent of American men smoked but by 2001 it was down to 25.5 per cent. Similarly in Britain, in 1974, 51 per cent of the men smoked. It was down to 28 per cent in 2001. But there is an addendum to that: more women are smoking in developed countries.

While fewer Chinese women smoke, the numbers for the US and Britain are much higher. In the US, women made up 21 per cent of smokers whereas in Britain it is almost 25 per cent. Hardly 3.7 per cent of smokers in China are women; in India the figure is slightly less.

We have done almost everything to deter smoking. We have banned cigarette advertisement that had brought billions in advertisement money. We launched anti-smoking campaigns overzealously. We have made it a point to raise the price of cigarettes in almost every Budget. We love to call them “sin taxes”. Today, the price of the most popular cigarette brand is RM9 or 7.5 times the price of this newspaper.

On April 1, the American government spiked the federal tax rate on cigarettes from 39 cents to US$1.01 per pack, a record increase. Supporters say the move will stop at least a million teenagers from starting the habit and cause another million to stop smoking. It will save an estimated 900,000 lives. The tax was signed by President Barack Obama, who is trying hard to quit smoking himself.

We should think out of the box. The answer does not lie only in campaigns to deter people from smoking. We should now harp on people changing their lifestyles. Modern life dictates certain conventions. A hectic lifestyle is unavoidable. Eating habits, too, have a major bearing on our people’s health. Lifestyles have changed but our eating habits have not. We spend many hours in the office, hardly allowing ourselves to exercise. We eat like our forefathers, yet they toiled and sweated in the sun. We live and work in the comfort of our air-conditioned homes and offices.

Encourage our people to exercise. Engage them in sports. Get them to work out in gyms. Let them jog or brisk-walk. Make sports compulsory in schools. Start our children to love sports early. At the same time, we cannot blame our young for wasting their hours when we fail to provide sporting avenues for them. Even in the villages where space is plentiful, football fields are nowhere to be seen these days. Football has a massive following. If we can get the young to play, onlookers will assemble. In a faraway village, a football field is everyone’s idea of a meeting place free from political encumbrances.

In the cities, spaces for sports are fast diminishing. Even schools are compromising what’s left of open fields for buildings. In the name of progress we turn empty spaces into concrete structures. How are we to ensure our young are healthy? What kind of recreational and sports activities are we offering them? Yet we blame the young for becoming Mat Rempit.

Learn from Adnan Osman, the 67-year-old sportsman extraordinaire. He quit smoking only when he was 50. The decision changed his life. He has since run 12 marathons, climbed all 12 mountains above 2,100 metres in this country, reached the peak of Gunung Tahan 15 times and Mount Kinabalu thrice. He attempted to cycle all the way to Beijing for the last Olympics, only to be turned away at the border. He has just completed the most gruelling foot race in the world, the Marathon of the Sands in Morocco.

Adnan did not quit because of the frightening images on the packets of cigarettes. He did it because he wanted to change his lifestyle for the better. There are lessons to be learnt here. It takes more than warnings, campaigns and sin taxes to make people quit smoking. The determination to turn a new leaf and to be healthy made Adnan quit his 33-year old habit.

He should appear on the packets of cigarettes, not those hideous images.

There is much speculation coming out of Lansing that Michigan might finally join the ranks of 30 other states and ban smoking inside restaurants and bars. While the focus of this debate is centered on eateries and watering holes, the proposed bills are actually for the elimination of smoking inside of any public place as well as public and private worksites.

In 1984, Garrison Keillor wrote a fictional tale for The New Yorker titled “End of the Trail” a humorous account of “the last cigarette smokers in America.” His parody is based on a fictitious 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution that banned smoking. The story chronicles five people — who apparently are among the last cigarette smokers in America — hiding out and “located in a box canyon south of Donner Pass in the High Sierra by two federal tobacco agents in a helicopter who spotted little smoke puffs…” Federal agents were sent in to apprehend the five who were later sentenced to write 20,000-word essays.
While Keillor’s humorous take from 25 years ago on the possibilities of a total ban on smoking in America seemed unrealistic then, one must wonder today if such a concept will become a reality. Especially in light of smoking bans in public places mandated by law and now in effect throughout the country. Even the anti-smoking movement believes that it is unrealistic to believe that smoking will ever become illegal and their efforts are better spent eliminating smoking from public buildings and workplaces.