[Vision2020] Tobacco: Targeting the Nation’s Leading Killer: Centers for Disease Control

[lfalen]

Your statement  concerning workers is the best argument I have seen if favor of the ban.
Roger
-----Original message-----
From: Ted Moffett starbliss at gmail.com
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 01:55:38 -0700
To: Moscow Vision 2020 vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: [Vision2020] Tobacco: Targeting the Nation’s  Leading Killer: Centers for Disease Control

> Tobacco (nicotine) is a physically addictive drug.  Once addicted, "choice"
> becomes a problematic concept.  And many people become addicted while
> underage, encouraged to continue their addiction in bars, where cigarettes
> are often shared between customers.
> 
> The fact tobacco is physically addictive is absent from the comments of many
> opposing the smoking ordinance, as are the facts regarding the magnitude of
> the damage.  Comparisons to other harmful behaviors are drawn (fatty food,
> etc.), suggesting that a slippery slope of regulation will lead to
> government control over too many aspects of life, but many of these
> behaviors do not involve a drug addiction.  Of course alcohol has dramatic
> negative impacts.  But workers in bars are not forced to drink the drinks
> the customers order, as they breathe the smoke of the customers.
> 
> I find it incredible that the health of workers exposed to an addictive drug
> when they breathe in the workplace is approached so callously.  They can
> work elsewhere, it's announced with smug authority, as if in this economy
> workers have the luxury of choosing whatever job suits their fancy, rather
> than an urgency to take whatever work they can find.  If it was cocaine or
> heroin or methamphetamine that workers were exposed to, the attitude might
> be different.
> 
> Profits from exposing workers to addictive drugs in the workplace should be
> protected based on free market, free choice, adult responsibility?  If this
> is the logic, where are the protests against laws imposed on those selling
> cocaine, heroin or methamphetamine, et. al., to consenting adults, which can
> result in long prison sentences?  Let the free market decide!  Why stand in
> the way of profits and the free choice of adults?
> 
> If those opposing the smoking ordinance were consistent in their outrage
> against limits on the free market, their ideology might have more
> intellectual credibility.  Instead, the libertarianism proposed is
> inconsistent and conformist.  Or perhaps those opposed to the smoking
> ordinance will now protest that bars do not allow legal cocaine, heroin or
> methamphetamine use?  Think of the profits to be made!  And remember,
> tobacco prematurely kills more people than those three drugs combined...
> 
> If attempts were made to criminalize tobacco like cannabis is, resulting in
> prison sentences, home invasions, for sale or use, I would oppose this
> vehemently.  But an ordinance regulating smoking in bars does not stop any
> adult from legally using tobacco products in settings where they do not
> expose workers.
> 
> If worker freedom of choice was a valid argument to justify the exposure of
> workers to tobacco smoke in bars, than OSHA could be mostly eliminated.
> After all, if workers exposed to hazards monitored or banned by OSHA don't
> want to work with those risks, they can work elsewhere, as long as signs
> posted in the workplace inform them of the risks.  A "Big Brother"
> government bureaucracy gone.
> --------------------------
> http://www.cdc.gov/NCCDPHP/publications/aag/osh.htm
>  The Burden of Tobacco Use
> 
> Tobacco use is the single most preventable cause of disease, disability, and
> death in the United States. Each year, an estimated 443,000 people die
> prematurely from smoking or exposure to secondhand smoke, and another 8.6
> million have a serious illness caused by smoking. For every person who dies
> from smoking, 20 more people suffer from at least one serious
> tobacco-related illness. Despite these risks, approximately 43.4 million
> U.S. adults smoke cigarettes. Smokeless tobacco, cigars, and pipes also have
> deadly consequences, including lung, larynx, esophageal, and oral cancers.
> 
> The harmful effects of smoking do not end with the smoker. More than 126
> million nonsmoking Americans, including children and adults, are regularly
> exposed to secondhand smoke. Even brief exposure can be dangerous because
> nonsmokers inhale many of the same carcinogens and toxins in cigarette smoke
> as smokers. Secondhand smoke exposure causes serious disease and death,
> including heart disease and lung cancer in nonsmoking adults and sudden
> infant death syndrome, acute respiratory infections, ear problems, and more
> frequent and severe asthma attacks in children. Each year, primarily because
> of exposure to secondhand smoke, an estimated 3,000 nonsmoking Americans die
> of lung cancer, more than 46,000 (range: 22,700–69,600) die of heart
> disease, and about 150,000–300,000 children younger than 18 months have
> lower respiratory tract infections.
> 
> Coupled with this enormous health toll is the significant economic burden of
> tobacco use—more than $96 billion per year in medical expenditures and
> another $97 billion per year resulting from lost productivity.
> 
> [image: Chart showing about 443,000 U.S. deaths attributable each year to
> cigarette smoking. Text description below.]
> 
> [A text description of this
> graph<http://www.cdc.gov/NCCDPHP/publications/aag/osh_text.htm#1>is
> also available.]
> The Tobacco Use Epidemic Can Be Stopped
> 
> A 2007 Institute of Medicine (IOM) report presented a blueprint for action
> to “reduce smoking so substantially that it is no longer a public health
> problem for our nation.” The two-pronged strategy for achieving this goal
> includes not only strengthening and fully implementing currently proven
> tobacco control measures, but also changing the regulatory landscape to
> permit policy innovations. Foremost among the IOM recommendations is that
> each state should fund a comprehensive tobacco control program at the level
> recommended by CDC in *Best Practices for Comprehensive Tobacco Control
> Programs–2007*.
> 
> Evidence-based, statewide tobacco control programs that are comprehensive,
> sustained, and accountable have been shown to reduce smoking rates,
> tobacco-related deaths, and diseases caused by smoking. A comprehensive
> program is a coordinated effort to establish smoke-free policies and social
> norms, to promote and assist tobacco users to quit, and to prevent
> initiation of tobacco use. This approach combines educational, clinical,
> regulatory, economic, and social strategies.
> 
> Research has documented the effectiveness of laws and policies to protect
> the public from secondhand smoke exposure, promote cessation, and prevent
> initiation when they are applied in a comprehensive way. For example, states
> can increase the unit price of tobacco products; implement smoking bans
> through policies, regulations, and laws; provide insurance coverage of
> tobacco use treatment; and limit minors’ access to tobacco products.
> 
> If the nation is to achieve the objectives outlined in *Healthy People 2010*,
> comprehensive, evidence-based approaches for preventing smoking initiation
> and increasing cessation need to be fully implemented.
> CDC's Response
> 
> CDC is the lead federal agency for tobacco control. CDC’s Office on Smoking
> and Health (OSH) provides national leadership for a comprehensive,
> broad-based approach to reducing tobacco use. A variety of government
> agencies, professional and voluntary organizations, and academic
> institutions have joined together to advance this approach, which involves
> the following activities:
> 
>    - Preventing young people from starting to smoke.
> 
>    - Eliminating exposure to secondhand smoke.
> 
>    - Promoting quitting among young people and adults.
> 
>    - Identifying and eliminating tobacco-related health disparities.
> 
> Essential elements of this approach include state-based, community-based,
> and health system-based interventions; cessation services; counter
> marketing; policy development and implementation; surveillance; and
> evaluation. These activities target groups who are at highest risk for
> tobacco-related health problems.
> 
> -------------------------------------------
> 
> Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett
> 
>