Smoking ban in Ukraine

On Dec. 16, smoking in Ukrainian cafes, nightclubs and restaurants will be forbidden.

On results of some researches 86 percent of Ukrainians are waiting for appearance of restaurants and bars with smoking forbidden; 54 percent smokers consider that a waiter’s right to work in a smoke-free premise is more important than their own right to smoke inside.

One of the Ukrainian nongovernmental organizations popularizing smoke-free restaurants and bars in the country is “For a Ukraine Free From Tobacco Smoke’ public organization coalition.

Biggest graduate intake at Imperial

Imperial Tobacco says that it has taken on 30 graduates – its biggest such intake to date –as part of a strategy to invest in its ‘talent pipeline’.

‘The newcomers on our 2012 Graduate Programme will gain experience of different areas of the business across the globe in the next two years,’ the company said in a note posted on its website.

‘Imperial’s Graduate Programme has grown from the first intake of just six graduates back in 2010, informs Tobacco Reporter.

‘The current intake attended an intensive induction course to learn about the history, structure, strategy and business of Imperial.

‘This included an evening event inBristolhosted by Alison Cooper [chief executive] and members of the Operating Executive.’

“Our success in the future will depend on the quality of the people we attract now,” said Koos Mennen, director of organisation and people development.

“We are committed to further investment in these programs and providing all our graduates with opportunities to grow and develop.”

Companies count cost of smoking

Smokers are costing the UK economy £1.4 billion by taking an average of two or three days more sick leave per year than their non-smoking colleagues, a new study by the University of Nottingham has revealed.

The study said the £1.4bn lost in the UK due to smoking-related absenteeism was only one of the numerous costs of smoking in the workplace.

Research by Dr Jo Leonardi-Bee and Stephen Weng based at the university's UK Centre for Tobacco Control Studies also found others costs included productivity lost to smoking breaks and the cost of cigarette-related fire damage.

Dr Leonardi-Bee said: "Quitting smoking appears to reduce absenteeism and result in substantial cost savings for employers."

The report, published in the journal Addiction, analysed 29 studies from around the world which were conducted between 1960 and 2011 and covered more than 71,000 workers, This Is Nottingham reported.

Pro-smoking smartphone apps spark a fiery debate

Australian researchers identified more than 100 smartphone applications that appear to promote smoking. The study highlights the challenges governments face in keeping tobacco advertising laws in step with technology, reported France 24.

Applications designed for smartphones that tacitly or overtly encourage smoking are shaping up to be the latest front in the battle against cigarette advertising.

A study released this week in the British Medical Journal’s public health magazine, Tobacco Control, put the spotlight on the so-far overlooked phenomenon of using smartphone apps to promote or encourage smoking.

A team of Australian public health researchers at the University of Sydney identified 107 apps promoting a pro-smoking message on the Apple App Store and Android Market (now Google Play).

Just as the range of tobacco products is diverse, so too the types of apps, from simple wallpaper downloads of popular brands to programmes that simulate stubbing out of cigarettes, and animated games that recreate social smoking situations. The apps are either free or downloadable for a small fee, and while some include measures to verify that users are above a certain age, others do not.

One app, called 'Ashtray', transforms the smartphone screen into a garbage can. A short tap on the screen deposits cigarette ash into the bin, while a prolonged tap discards the entire cigarette.

 Users can choose between three backgrounds for the garbage can, or use their phone camera to place it in a photo of their favourite spot for a smoke.

In another app, 'Puff Puff Pass', users select a caricature then choose a pipe, cigar or cigarette, and venue (lounge room, outdoor setting, office, or limousine). The rules of the game include a time limit to smoke two drags before passing it on to the next caricature, whereupon a player can win points or is reprimanded.

Lagos Assembly Considers Anti-Smoking Bill

A bill towards prohibiting smoking in designated places for connected purposes yesterday scaled through the first reading at the Lagos State House of Assembly. The bill, which is a private member bill sponsored by member representing Eti-Osa Constituency 2, Mr. Gbolahan Yishawu, was read on the floor by the Acting Clerk of the House, Segun Abiru.

The bill if passed into law, will prohibit people from smoking tobacco, or anything, which contains tobacco, or any other substance in any place designated as 'No Smoking Area'. From the commencement of the law, it shall be an offence to smoke in the presence of a child under the age of 15 years in any vehicle or location listed or not listed.

Smaller tobacco tax increase would work better

Get here: cigarettesonline.getfreehosting.co.uk cheap cigarettes in packs from Europe.

Let's consider the size of the proposed tobacco tax increase in Proposition B. It's over five times the current tax. It would go from $1.70 to $9 per carton. Missouri does have a low tobacco tax, but a more than five times increase is obviously pure greed. Everyone would be outraged if the sales tax went up five times, say from 6 percent to 30 percent. And what would you be paying if your property tax was five times higher?

Wouldn't it be fairer to all parties involved if the tax wasn't so high? If the rate was doubled, it would still be a large increase but it would be considerably more tolerable to everyone. Schools would still get a subsidy, jobs would not be lost, tobacco users would not be hit so hard in the pocketbook and Missouri's total revenue would be larger instead of a decrease in revenue that a economics professor has calculated.

Joseph Haslag, a professor from the University of Missouri, has findings that show Missouri would actually lose at least $34 million a year in tax money if Proposition B would pass. This revenue would have to be made up somewhere, and all of us would pay. Let's be reasonable and vote this increase down and let the legislators come up with a more fair compromise.

Kids who smoke menthol more likely to get hooked

Kids who experiment with menthol cigarettes are more likely to become habitual smokers than their peers who start out with the regular variety, new research findings suggest.

In a study of tens of thousands of U.S. students, researchers found that kids who were dabbling with menthol cigarettes were 80 percent more likely to become regular smokers over the next few years, versus those experimenting with regular cigarettes.

Three in custody for illegal cigarettes

The dog unit team of the Makhado police arrested two suspects for being found in possession of illegal cigarettes last Friday (26 October). The suspects, aged 34 and 42, were driving along the N1 road when the police stopped the Isuzu bakkie, which had a load of 21 wooden doors. According to the spokesperson for the Makhado police, Capt Maano Sadiki, the police then realised that something was wrong with the arrangement of doors and opened one door to inspect.

They then discovered at least 1 536 cartons of illegal cigarettes inserted inside the 21 doors. The street value of the confiscated cigarettes was estimated to R198 000. Sadiki added that the police also found at least R29 000 in cash in the suspects' possession. “We suspect that the suspects had intended to use this huge amount of money to bribe the police, should they be stopped,” he said.

In a separate incident, only a moment later, another suspect was arrested after being found in possession of illegal cigarettes. The cartons were found hidden in the rear seat of the Nissan Sentra sedan. All suspects in these two cases will appear in court soon, said Sadiki.

As UCLA goes smoke-free, some ask if USC will do the same

A new smoke-free ban at UCLA, which was announced Tuesday, has re-energized the debate surrounding the implementation of a smoke-free ban on campus at USC. UCLA is the first of the UC schools to put a restriction on smoking on campus. USC currently follows the same rules as California legislation: Smoking is not allowed inside public establishments, and smokers have to be at least 20 feet from a building to light up.

To accommodate students who do not smoke, there are multiple designated smoke-free areas around campus. As of spring 2012, 14.4 percent of USC students smoked daily or one or more days a week, according to a report by the USC American College Health Association-National College Health Assessment. The same study found that undergraduates smoke more frequently than graduate students. Student reactions have been fairly positive to the designated smoking areas and the current rules about smoking.

Many students, however, are opposed to adopting a ban on smoking. Henrique Malvar, a senior majoring in political science, and a smoker, opposes having a smoke-free campus. “I’m a courteous smoker so I’m fine with having a designated smoking area,” Malvar said. “It’s not fair for someone to walk out of a building expecting to get fresh air and instead gets a whiff of nicotine. But if you do a full-on ban that’s just too extreme.” Some non-smoking students also are satisfied with the current smoking rules and do not see a need for a change.

 “There’s already too many rules,” said Emily Frank, a junior majoring in business administration. “We are all college students so we have the right to choose if we want to smoke or not.” Yet other students believe that smoking should be more restricted on campus and match up with the no-smoking ban that UCLA adopted. One such student, Sydney Golombek, a sophomore majoring in American studies and ethnicity, said she is in favor of USC going smoke-free. “I think there should be a ban,” Golombek said. “It’s much safer and healthier and I’m all for that on campus.” Last year, Undergraduate Student Government held a forum and distributed surveys to determine student interest in having a smoking ban on campus.

Because some of the survey data was skewed, this year’s student government is redistributing the surveys. Last year, USG presented a senate resolution that favored keeping the current policy for smoking, yet advocating that the school better inform the students of the smoking rules. USG Campus Director, Wiley Strahan, a senior majoring in health promotion and disease prevention studies, said student government is working to gauge student interest in implementing more stringent smoking regulations on campus. “We’re looking to see what the students feel with the climate on campus,” Strahan said.

“It’ll be a few weeks before we can start moving forward, but right now we’re looking at what other large, private universities are doing with their smoking rules.” USG President Mikey Geragos believes USG has to get feedback from the student body before they can take a stance on a smoke-free campus. “We are taking a more comprehensive approach this year,” Geragos said. “We’re not sure if we’re advocating for a ban or not yet.

We’re not trying to make a decision without knowing what the students will want first.” USC has never had a ban on smoking on its University Park campus. Though student input is important, health professionals believe the health benefits outweigh temporal student opinions. The director of the office of wellness and health promotion, Paula Swinford, works with enhancing student wellness and reducing health risks for students on campus. Swinford remains an advocate for a smoke-free campus.

 “There’s nothing good about smoking,” Swinford said. “You’re basically choosing to shorten your quantity and quality of life, but unfortunately it’s such an ingrained part of our culture.” Some students oppose the smoking ban because they also believe that smoking is too ubiquitous to regulate. “Smoking is already banned everywhere in California,” said Aneesa Al-Musawwir, a junior majoring in jazz studies. “I don’t know how much more strict these rules can get.” Though student reaction is mixed, Swinford emphasized the importance of implementing a ban in light of UCLA’s newest policy.

She said this is especially important considering students who make it through college without smoking are unlikely to smoke throughout the rest of their life. “A student who goes to UCLA and lives on their smoke-free campus will graduate healthier than a USC student living in an environment of smoking,” Swinford said. “There is really no reason to not move forward on a smoke-free campus. It’s just a matter of when. I’m just surprised that UCLA had to beat us to it.”

Students modify smoke-free campus initiative

For over a year now there have been a series of ongoing discussions concerning UR’s smoking policy. Within the past semester, however, junior Sheridan Finnie and seniors Sara Rothenberg and Catie Tarentine, who are leading the initiative, have begun to push for one which would outline a plan for a smoke-free campus save for a number of designated areas in which smoking would be allowed.

Under the guidance of Director of the University Health Service Ralph Manchester and Associate Director of Health Promotion Linda Dudman, Finnie, Rothenberg and Tarentine initially aimed to implement a policy that would designate UR as entirely smoke free with no designated smoking areas, but after receiving feedback from students, faculty and staff, decided this new direction would make for a policy that would accommodate a larger majority of the University community.

“We really felt this was an appropriate kind of compromise,” Rothenberg said. She explained that with a policy like this smokers will be able to continue to smoke, but that it would create a cleaner environment for those who do not. Dudman agreed. “I feel that at this point in time this is the best way for us to be proceeding,” she noted. Tarentine emphasized that this policy is in part all about accounting for different perspectives at the University. “I think from the beginning our initiative has been [built] around respect,” Tarentine said. “We wanted respect for nonsmokers, we wanted respect for the environment and we also [wanted] respect for smokers.”

Discussion about UR’s smoking policy began during the 2010-11 academic year when Tarentine and Rothenberg decided to expand upon an independent study they completed after learning of SUNY Buffalo’s decision to become a smoke-free campus. Finnie, who is also currently the president of UR’s chapter of Colleges Against Cancer (URCAC), joined the effort at the end of that year. They discussed a number of different options for a new policy that would replace UR’s current standard, which states that smoking is not allowed within 30 feet of University-owned buildings.

In addition to going entirely smoke free or smoke free with designated smoking areas, the option to go tobacco free (a policy which would also restrict chewing tobacco) was touched upon as well. In the spring semester of the 2011-12 academic year a document containing background information on all possible options was submitted to UR President Joel Seligman. Manchester explained that there is no definite timetable for when a new policy will be announced, but Dudman noted that whenever an announcement is made, there will be a transition period of six to nine months afterwards which will allow time for publicity, construction of designated smoking areas assuming that is the policy that is adopted, time for expansion of smoking cessation support for the University community and a chance to update official information UR sends to prospective students.

Once the University makes a decision about whether a new policy should be implemented and which direction it would take, committees made up of students, faculty and staff, who are both smokers and nonsmokers, will be formed (assuming the policy will go forward) to discuss topics such as how to best educate the University on the new policy, where to put designated smoking areas, what form they will take, and how best to offer smoking cessation resources. “We want this policy that’s going to be affecting everyone to be contributed to by everyone,” Rothenberg said. Other developments to this initiative include the consideration for the use of peer enforcement rather than relying on UR Security to enforce a new policy, an option that Finnie believes is made increasingly possible by having designated smoking areas and an increased effort to build up smoking cessation resources.