Some industry players are, however, concerned that a vigorous fight-back by the sector will be counter-productive, attracting international attention to the issue.

Last week, Kenya’s capital Nairobi became the latest urban area to outlaw public smoking, following in the footsteps of the smaller municipalities of Nakuru, Kangundo and Mombasa. Nakuru, Kenya’s fourth largest city, pioneered the bans three months ago.

Other Kenyan cities expected to pass smoking curbs in the next two weeks include Eldoret and Kisumu. Uganda’s tobacco control lobby welcomed the Kenyan bans, pointing out that they were in line with those in such cities as New York, London and Dublin.

“The Environmental Action Network (TEAN) highly commends the city and municipal councils of Nairobi, Mombasa, Kangundo and Nakuru for their recent by-laws to ban smoking in public places,” said the organisation’s spokesperson Phillip Karugaba last week. “The new bans are in line with the fact that Kenya was the first country in the region to ratify the World Health Organisation’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC).”

Kenya ratified the FCTC in June 2004, while Tanzania and Uganda ratified this year, in April and June respectively.

According to the city of Nairobi ban, those found smoking in public areas, including the streets, will face a fine of Ksh2,000 ($30) or a six-month jail term for a first offender and Ksh3,000 ($45) or a nine-month jail term for a repeat offender. Within 24 hours of announcing the ban on Tuesday, 10 offenders were arrested and fined a total of Ksh20,000 ($300), sparking protests from the tobacco industry.

“This all-encompassing ban on smoking is unconstitutional and is without due regard to the right of smokers,” said Mastermind Tobacco Ltd spokesman John Kirimania. “By approving these by-laws, the Local Government Minister and the respective town clerks have misdirected themselves.”

Those sentiments were supported by BAT Kenya, the country’s largest tobacco company with a turnover of Ksh12.1 billion ($178 million) and a pre-tax profit of Ksh1.8 billion ($26.5 million) in the last financial year.

Between themselves, Kenya’s tobacco companies sell an estimated 7 billion cigarettes to a market that Ministry of Health officials say includes an estimated one million minors. The ministry says that it spends more than the estimated Ksh7 billion ($103 million) the tobacco industry pays in compounded taxes to “mop up” the health effects of smoking.

The bans by the Kenyan town and city councils are the second prong of a strategy devised by the country’s tobacco control activists, who have long complained that the enactment of national control legislation has been blocked by vested interests for more than six years.

As a result, Kenya’s Tobacco control Bill has been published every year since 2001, but has always lapsed and never been passed into law. Last week, however, the Bill went through its second reading and indications are that it will be passed before parliament goes on recess in August.

Source: Nation Media

The Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC) is due to announce today that it has approved Champix after clinical trials showed that nearly half of smokers given the drug were able to give up their habit.

The decision has been welcomed by charities and medical experts who yesterday described Champix as a significant step forward in the therapies made available for British smokers. It puts Scotland ahead of England, where guidance on the use of the drug is due to be published later this year.
continued…

Unlike nicotine replacement therapies (NRTs) such as patches, which release nicotine into the blood, Champix, whose technical name is varenicline tartrate, provides relief from withdrawal symptoms by sending a neurological signal to nicotine receptors in the brain.

By stimulating these receptors, smokers are provided with relief from their cravings. However, the drug also partially blocks the same receptors, ensuring that if a patient relapses they will not receive the same level of pleasure from smoking a cigarette.

Steve Crone, chief executive of Quit, a charity which helps people give up smoking, welcomed the SMC’s decision.

He said: “Varenicline will give Scottish smokers more choice from a good range of clinically proven treatments. Using varenicline and getting the right support could significantly increase a smoker’s odds of successfully quitting.”

Champix is the second non-nicotine drug to be licensed as a therapy for smokers in the UK. Its predecessor, Zyban, which was licensed in June 2000, was designed as an anti-depressant.

It is thought to work by regulating the brain chemicals dopamine and noradrenaline, which are believed to be linked to cigarette addiction and has been claimed to be twice as effective as NRT therapies in helping people to give up.

However, Champix has proved more effective and less likely to produce adverse side effects than its predecessor.

As part of its assessment of Champix, the SMC used data from two studies which involved more than 2000 smokers. It studied three groups who were given Champix, Zyban and a placebo.

Among the patients given Champix, which is administered as a tablet, 44% were able to give up smoking, compared with 30% of those given Zyban and 18% of those given a placebo. After 12 weeks, smokers taking the new drug had four times greater odds of stopping smoking than those on a placebo and two times greater odds of stopping than those on Zyban, the studies found. Clinical trials have also found that, among 4000 smokers who were treated with the drug, the number of treatments that had to be discontinued due to adverse effects was similar to those treated with a placebo.

Dr Alex Bobak, a London-based GP and expert on quitting smoking who has been involved in trials of Champix, said he had found the drug effective with patients who wanted to give up smoking.

“It is the first drug that has been designed for the purpose of giving up smoking. I have trialled it with patients and have certainly found it extremely helpful,” he said.

“One of the big differences from Zyban is that it is much better tolerated, there are much fewer side-effects. I’m very excited about using it.”

A spokesman for Ash Scotland, which campaigns against smoking, said: “We would welcome the introduction of any properly tested and licensed treatment that can help Scotland’s smokers to quit.

“There is a huge challenge in Scotland, where around 13,000 people die every year because of tobacco use.”

Source: The Herald

Although similar statewide measures have been adopted in Arkansas and Louisiana, Bangor is the first city to adopt such an ordinance, which goes into effect next week.

Violators of the newly approved law face a $50 fine, which applies to any motor vehicle on any public roads within the city confines.

Supporters of the newly enacted ordinance argue that children need the legislation to help protect themselves from the adverse health effects of second-hand smoke. However, opponents of the measure argue that the law detracts the police department from more important issues and is an unnecessary government intrusion into people’s lives.

The long-time smoker jokes the ban has overturned one of the traditions of the century-old Kowloon Cricket Club he belongs to.

“They really hit us on the head when they let women in here,” he quips, a plastic nicotine inhaler between his lips.

“But this is almost as bad as that,” he adds before cueing a shot in the club’s once smoky snooker den.

Unlike France, which will allow smokers to ease into the new year before implementing a partial smoking ban in February, Hong Kong’s ban came into effect at midnight on New Year’s eve.

The new laws bring Hong Kong, a city of seven million, in line with places like Ireland, New York and California, by banning smoking in offices, restaurants, most parks and beaches.

So far, implementation seems to have been smooth, with the government’s team of enforcement inspectors only prosecuting seven violators since last week.

While some of the city’s restaurants and “cha chan teng”, or hole-in-the-wall eateries, have begrudged the dip in business from the ban, others showed signs of embracing change.

“There’s been no effect on our business,” said Wong Sing-fan, the bespectacled boss of the 56-year-old Mido cafe in Yaumatei, as she stood behind her cash register. “I welcome the ban.”

Across the harbour in the raucous Red Box Karaoke lounge in the teeming Causeway Bay district, managing director Anthony Lock said business had fallen up to 20 percent on the first weekend after the ban, with clients consuming less and leaving earlier.

But for regular karaoke crooners like John Chan, the ban was something to savour whilst belting out the latest Canto-pop hits.

“It’s super, I don’t have to smell like cigarettes all day.”

Violators face fines of up to HK$5,000 (330 pounds) after a court summons, though the government says spot fines could be introduced within 18 months.

The government has proclaimed the smoking ban a success so far, but critics say it has instead forced smokers onto busy streets where smoking is still allowed, and to other spots where enforcement is problematic, such as in stairways and toilets.

“Now, if we need a smoke, we go out. We run in and out of buildings all day,” said Ah Chun, a teenager who was lighting up with five friends on a crowded shopping street.

The ban is also not absolute, with over 800 bars, saunas, nightclubs and mahjong parlours granted exemptions till mid-2009.

Anti-smoking advocates are hopeful the Hong Kong’s ban will set a precedent for tougher smoking laws in China, which has 350 million smokers, more than any other country.

Esther Ng, a social smoker and reveller at the Lan Kwai Fong nightlife hub, complains the ban will not resolve one of Hong Kong’s most pressing problems — the pollution which the University of Hong Kong estimates kills 1,600 people a year and costs $HK21.2 billion.

“Having the ban’s one thing. But what the government really needs to do is sort out the air pollution,” she says. “That’s what’s really killing us.”

Source: Scotsman.com

Besides the cost of buying cigarettes themselves, you’re probably spending more money on life insurance than a non-smoker. “On average, you’re paying close to a thousand dollars more per year… if you have a half million dollar policy, which a lot of people have,” says Hennessey. But, the moment you stop smoking, your premium will go down.

Life insurance isn’t the only thing that may cost you more: your health insurance costs will go up too. Smokers pay, on average, close to five hundred dollars more each year than non-smokers. “That’s understandable,” says Hennessey. “Nobody wants to pay down the line – the risks of lung cancer, emphysema, diabetes, all the problems that are associated with smoking.” Because smokers are at a higher risk for these and other diseases, health insurance companies charge them more to cover costs that may crop up later in life.

Smokers can lose money when it comes to their cars as well. Car resale values go down by almost two-thousand dollars if the car was owned by a smoker. “It’s [money] you lose simply because of the smoke in the car, the wear and tear that comes from the cigarette burns,” says Hennessey. “I tell a lot of people to lease a car rather than buy. You cannot lease a car if you’re a smoker because those burns will kill you when you go to bring it back in and you can never get the smell out.”

So when it comes to making your New Year’s resolutions, this year, consider quitting smoking. It may be a good move health-wise, but it doesn’t hurt financially either.

Source: CBS News

Kumar Mangat, the producer of “No Smoking,” told the Mumbai Mirror newspaper that he has hired a cameraman to catch offenders in action.

“Many people try to smoke on the sly, so I have told my cameraman to be very alert at all times,” said Mangat. “Sometimes when caught the offenders protest that 500 rupees (US$11) is too high an amount,” the daily quoted Mangat as saying.

However, he insists they pay up and plans to donate 112,000 rupees (US$2,488; euro1,874.91) collected over the past two months to a cancer hospital.

The movie is about a chain smoker, played by Bollywood heartthrob John Abraham, who undergoes rehab to help him stop smoking and save his marriage.

Abraham has quit smoking and has not been caught cheating, he said.

Among those recently fined was upcoming actor Ranvir Shorey.

“I think this fine is a bit heavy on the pocket, but it’s done in good spirit,” Shorey told the newspaper. “Anyway I’m trying to quit smoking, so I think this should help.”

Source: AP

The singer, who smokes up to 60 cigarettes a day, has already given up drugs and alcohol and now wants to kick another unhealthy habit.

Robbie – who was fined £60 for smoking onstage in Australia last week – is so desperate to quit nicotine he has even planned to visit a hypnotist on New Year’s Eve.

He said: “I want to give them up for good in 2007. Seeing a hypnotist on New Year’s Eve seems a good idea to me.”

The ‘Angels’ singer has made several attempts to give up cigarettes in the past including a fitness drive last summer.

However, Robbie gave into temptation after just a few weeks – because he was worried about piling on the pounds.

He admitted at the time: “I smoke loads and I really don’t want to anymore. But I’m terrified of giving up. I’m a fat bloke inside this body and the minute I stop smoking, I will put on weight.”

The British Heart Foundation (BHF) said every extra day after quitting helped smokers reduce their risk of heart problems in the future.

It came as the charity continued its Under My Skin advertising campaign, with thousands of posters appearing on billboards around the UK to remind smokers of the damage their habit causes to their health.

BHF medical spokeswoman, Dr Charmaine Griffiths, said: “Smokers’ risk of having a heart attack plummets after quitting.

“After just two weeks, your circulation has improved and blood vessels are becoming more efficient at carrying blood and oxygen around your body.

“A healthy heart is the greatest gift you can give yourself and your loved ones.

“The lead up to Christmas is a good time to plan a quit attempt and success can be just a phone call away.”

The latest campaign, which includes TV and radio ads, features the disturbing image of a lump rippling under a smoker’s skin to symbolise the unseen damage caused by smoking.

It also carries the message that every 35 minutes a smoker dies needlessly from a heart attack when a blood clot blocks a coronary artery.

Research shows that support from the NHS Stop Smoking advisors combined with nicotine replacement therapy can increase a smoker’s likelihood of quitting by up to four times.

Dr Griffiths said: “If all smokers were to trade cigarettes for nicotine patches or chewing gum tomorrow, we would see a dramatic fall in the number of deaths from heart disease.

“On average, UK smokers who die in middle age lose 21 years of life – so being smoke-free can actually add years to your life.”

Public health minister Caroline Flint said: “We know that smoking is the biggest cause of heart disease in this country.

“One in five deaths from coronary heart disease are directly attributed to smoking and could be avoided.

“It is important that people are made aware of the damage they are doing to their bodies by continuing to smoke.

“This advert is an effective way of communicating the risks to a wide audience.

“I am confident that it will act as a motivation for people to contact the NHS Stop Smoking Services for their best chance of giving up for good.”

The BHF is urging smokers to call their helpline – 0800 169 1900 – or visit their website www.bhf.org.uk/smoking for advice on quitting.

Source: Daily Mail

Researchers found that a group of heavy smokers who cut down to as few as five cigarettes per day still inhaled many more toxic substances than long-term light smokers.

Why? Because they inhaled more often and more deeply from each cigarette in an unconscious bid to get the same amount of nicotine that their bodies are used to.

This habit is known as ‘compensatory’ smoking, and it may reduce any health benefits of cutting down on cigarettes, according to a study in the journal Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention.

‘The best way to reduce risk for disease is to quit smoking altogether,’ said lead author Dr Dorothy Hatsukami, a professor of psychiatry at the University of Minnesota.

Dr Hatsukami said her findings are consistent with what has been seen in studies of smokers’ disease rates. That research suggests that people who cut their smoking by half lower their risk of lung cancer by no more than a quarter – and their odds of other smoking-related ailments, like heart disease and serious lung conditions like emphysema, by only a few per cent.

‘It’s a good explanatory factor for why you don’t see a reduction in cardiovascular and pulmonary disease,’ she said.

That doesn’t mean there is no reason for cutting back on cigarettes. Smokers who can’t quit cold turkey can still trim down their number of daily cigarettes as a first step, Dr Hatsukami said.

But that should be only the first step in the process of quitting entirely, she said. – Reuters.

The study shows that tobacco industry-sponsored prevention ads aimed at parents often have harmful effects on students, also increasing their likelihood of smoking.“We suspected this the minute we saw the kind of ads the tobacco companies were creating. Their objective is to get customers, not to stop customers from finding them,” said Brian Flay, a professor in the Department of Public Health at Oregon State University.

Flay was one of nine researchers from “Bridging the Gap,” a policy research program based at the University of Illinois at Chicago and the University of Michigan, who worked on this study, which is the first to examine how youths are affected by parent-targeted ads sponsored by the tobacco industry.

More than 100,000 students in their 8th, 10th and 12th grades were surveyed to assess the relationship between exposure to tobacco-company prevention advertising and youth smoking-related beliefs, intentions and behaviours.

Each additional youth-targeted prevention ad viewed by a student resulted in a 3 percent stronger intention among all students to smoke in the future.

There was a 12 percent increase in the likelihood that 10th- and 12th-grade students would become smokers if they watched prevention ads targeted at their parents.

The study appears in the December issue of American Journal of Public Health.

“Smoking ban chaos,” the Bild am Sonntag newspaper declared in a headline on Sunday and said there was discord between the states over smoking limits.

“Bavaria announces tough new rules but other states are banking on voluntary measures.”

Efforts to introduce a nationwide smoking ban collapsed last week as Germany’s justice and home affairs ministries questioned the constitutional basis for a ban in restaurants and schools, which would have brought Germany in line with the EU.

The decision followed six months of debate in the left-right grand coalition and was a blow for Chancellor Angela Merkel.

Instead, the country’s federal states will be responsible for their own rules on smoking, a habit which over a third of German adults continue to indulge despite the health risks.

Merkel will now attempt to get the states to agree to uniform regulations at a meeting on Wednesday, but opinions on a smoking ban in public places vary.

“After what happened in Berlin we will of course act in Bavaria in the interests of health,” Bavarian Premier Edmund Stoiber told the Bild am Sonntag. “That means there will be smoking bans in all public buildings and restaurants.”

Smokers visiting Munich, Bavaria’s capital, for the famous Oktoberfest would be spared, however. “There will be exceptions, such as the beer tent for example,” Stoiber said.

The states of Lower Saxony, Thuringia and Saarland are banking on voluntary solutions to the problem, wary of creating the impression of a “nanny” state. Smoking is a cherished sign of tolerance in Germany after a tobacco clampdown by the Nazis.

“The state should not get involved in every aspect of life and should not create bans where people should be taking responsibility for what they do in their free time,” said Christian Wulff, conservative premier of Lower Saxony.

Anti-smoking campaigners said the government had buckled under tobacco industry pressure by ditching a nationwide ban.

“The route chosen by the government is not suited to the uniform protection of non-smokers,” Social Democrat politician Carola Reimann told the Berliner Zeitung. Italy, France, Ireland and Britain have introduced or agreed to introduce restrictions.

Close to 140,000 Germans die each year from tobacco-related illnesses, but the government has little financial incentive to crack down as it collects billions of euros in tobacco taxes.

Source: Stuff.co.nz

Eric Herzik, a political science professor at the University of Nevada, Reno., also offered a simple explanation for this week’s surprising victory for strict regulations on smoking.

“People just don’t like it anymore,” he said

“When you’re this frontier state of 200,000 people, that live-and-let-live-attitude – no problem,” Herzik said.

But Nevada is no longer the Wild West.

“It’s a far more urban and thus regulated environment, and smoking is part of that,” Herzik said.

In a state where the flow of booze is perpetual, gambling fuels the economic engine and undertones of sex are flaunted, the outcome of Tuesday’s election caught many by surprise. Organizers didn’t target smokers in casinos, but they did impose government regulations in a state that prides itself on independence.

“Nevada has had a libertarian reputation, and has tried to uphold it, but that has been slipping away for quite a while,” said Michael Green, a history professor at the Community College of Southern Nevada.

“While we encourage people to come here and do things that are bad for them, we also have a growing baby boomer population,” Green said. “And that population is probably a bit more health conscious and might not want to be exposed to secondhand smoke.”

The state, now with a population of about 2.5 million, has the nation’s highest rate of smoking-related deaths and one of the lowest rates of smoke-free work places, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

But Nevada also has a unique, almost-anything-goes economic relationship with tourists, and smoking has been regarded as what you do with your other hand while gambling.

Geno Hill, who owns five Rum Runner bars offering food and slots in Las Vegas and who is the president of the Nevada Tavern Owners Association, said he thought the independent leanings of Nevada’s rural counties would snuff Question 5.

“We were pretty comfortable the rural counties wouldn’t let California come in here any more than they are,” Hill said. “By golly, they did.”

Hill’s organization backed Question 4, a competing, less restrictive anti-smoking measure, which voters rejected, 52 percent to 48 percent.

Instead voters in Nevada’s most populated counties – Clark, Washoe, Douglas, and Carson City – as well as rural Churchill and Lincoln counties, approved Question 5. The remaining 11 rural counties turned it down.

Herzik was among many who projected Nevada voters would favor the less-restrictive measure, but he said he realizes his oversight.

“First and foremost, this was just straight anti-smoking,” Herzik said. “The majority of people do not smoke, the majority of people do not like smoking.”

Green said voters may have been confused between the competing measures, and he offered another theory.

“Nevadans are contrary cusses,” he said.

“There were a lot of advertisements saying vote yes on 4, vote no on 5,” he said, speculating many people voted just the opposite – just because.

Source: AP

About 19 percent of U.S. women smoke compared to 23 percent of men.

But women who choose to smoke must also face the health risks. Many smoking women have died and, unfortunately, many will continue to do so.

Since 1950, lung cancer death rates in U.S. women have increased 600 percent. And as of 1987, lung cancer has become the leading cause of cancer deaths in U.S. women.

The cancer now kills more than 72,000 women annually – more than the combined deaths from the two next-most-common cancer killers, tumors of the breast and colon.

Occasionally, nonsmoking women die from lung cancer. Such was the case of the recently deceased celebrity Dana Reeve, widow of actor Christopher Reeve. Factors that may contribute to cancer in these situations include family history, secondhand smoke exposure, environmental toxins and air pollution. But nearly nine out of 10 times, lung cancer occurs because at some point a woman smoked.

Currently, we’re at a crossroads. In terms of tobacco use and effects, women have nearly achieved gender equality with men. And at this juncture, I think it’s essential for all women to take a hard look at the costs.

Many health hazards

Besides lung cancer, a multitude of health problems threaten women who smoke. Research shows that females are more susceptible than males to a number of smoking-related illnesses.

Cancer: Women smokers have an increased risk of developing cancer of the cervix. Scientists have linked smoking to cancers of the mouth, throat, voice box, breast, pancreas, stomach, esophagus, bladder and kidney.

At any given age and smoking amount, women have a higher risk for lung cancer than men, according to a study in the Journal of the American Medical Association. This might result from gender differences in hormones and metabolism, the researchers say.

Cardiovascular disease: Smoking is linked to a higher risk for coronary heart disease, heart attacks, strokes and hardening of the arteries.

Chronic lung disease: Death rates from chronic bronchitis and emphysema have increased among women in the past 30 years. More than 90 percent of these deaths are attributable to smoking.

Pregnancy effects: Smoking reduces fertility and the chances of conception. Stillbirths, newborn deaths, and sudden infant death syndrome occur more often in the children of mothers who smoke. Infants of smokers more often are born small for age, weighing less, and having poorer lung function.

Bone density: Smoking women usually have a lower bone density than nonsmokers. This places the smokers at higher risk for osteoporosis and hip fractures, especially after menopause.

Digestive tract: Smokers have an increased risk of peptic ulcers and Crohn’s disease.

Eye disease: Smoking is associated with a greater risk for cataracts.

Depression: Smokers are significantly more likely to become depressed than nonsmokers.

Since women are more vulnerable to some of smoking’s adverse effects, they’ve got more to gain from quitting. Ask your doctor about the many options available today to help you to stop smoking. After all, it’s your life. It’s your choice.

Source: Heraldnet

A NSW Health survey of more than 5000 school students aged 12 to 17 revealed 75 per cent of them believed seeing celebrities with cigarettes encouraged young people to start smoking.

The findings of the Australian Secondary School Alcohol and Drug survey, due for release in March next year, also show teenage smoking rates are at their lowest level in 20 years.

About 41,000 NSW students had smoked at least one cigarette in the previous week, with those who did saying they smoked an average of 22 cigarettes a week.

Frank Sartor, the minister assisting the Health Minister, said the research showed young people were more likely to start smoking before they turned 16.

“The survey reveals that more than half the students surveyed believed that smoking by celebrities encouraged young people to take up smoking,” Mr Sartor said.

They also indicate that advertising campaigns and graphic warnings on cigarette packets are helping to reduce smoking rates.

Professor Simon Chapman, of Sydney University’s public health faculty, said people in the public eye needed to be aware they were important role models for children.

“Just as we say cigarette advertising influences smoking, so does the image of somebody who is well known for being beautiful, interesting or talented,” he said.

Source: News.com.au

As the Morning Advertiser exclusively revealed last week, the council has asked Government for the power to designate certain streets no-smoking because of the high density of bars. Anyone

lighting up on the pavement would face a £50 fine.

In its response to the smoking ban consultation, West-minster pointed to the fact that noise complaints in Edinburgh rose by 1,000% after the ban was introduced in March.

“There are already problems outside some licensed premises caused by people standing outside drinking and creating considerable noise for neighbours,” said councillor Audrey Lewis. “We are anxious to avoid this being greatly increased by smokers.

“While clubs are responsible for the behaviour of the people inside their premises, we don’t want to find substantial numbers of them congregating outside where there is the likelihood of extra work for the police.”

But trade leaders insisted the proposal had “no chance” of success.

“It is beyond the scope of the draft regulations,” said British Beer & Pub Association manager of communications Neil Williams. “It’s not workable and I don’t see any prospect for its success. It’s not something Westminster can or should be allowed to do.”

Association of Licensed Multiple Retailers chief executive Nick Bish believes Westminster is setting out its stall to reject all applications for licence variations to allow extended use of outside areas.

“Westminster is using the smoking regulations to paddle another canoe,” he said. “Measures are already in place to deal with noise and it should take advantage of those. It is using smoking to drive people off the streets.”

Enterprise lessee Brian Hebblethwaite, of the Old Nell in Covent Garden’s Drury Lane, added: “This is just another example of West-minster’s anti-pub stance.

“I have had a terrible time with licensing. The police have now even objected to my temporary events notices. I accept the smoking ban, but this is unbelievable. It would make things a lot worse.”

Source: Morning Advertiser