Hollywood Limits Cigarette-Smoking Screen Time

Hollywood movies have undergone a lot of changes over the years, and there is one in particular that some people may not have thought of comparing or looking into: screen-time devoted to smoking.

A feature on Time.com shared the contents of a report released on Thursday by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which showed that there has been a significant reduction in the number of scenes that involved cigarettes and smoking over the past five years.

The downward trend has been attributed in part to three major motion picture companies, which have enforced polices to limit the use of tobacco products onscreen in movies that are aimed at young audiences.

The study, published in the CDC regular bulletin Morbidity and Mortality Weekly report, revealed that the top-grossing movies of 2010 contained less than half as many scenes involving tobacco, when compared against those of 2005. The difference is even more pronounced among movies classified as youth-rated – encompassing movies that receive G, PG, or PG-13 ratings – which saw a 71.6 percent decline in “tobacco incidents,” from 2,093 in 2005 to 595 in 2010.

The term “tobacco incident” was defined as any onscreen “use or implied use of a tobacco product by an actor,” while a new “incident” begins any time the camera cuts to, or back to, an actor who is using a tobacco product, or any time a tobacco product is lit onscreen.

These incidents are counted by “Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!”, a California group. The group counts these incidents in any movie that is ranked as among the top-grossing movies in the U.S. in a single calendar week.

Philip Morris sues over Australian plans to ban logos from cigarette packets

The tobacco giant Philip Morris has launched legal action against the Australian government over the country's plans to strip company logos from cigarette packages and replace them with grisly images of cancerous mouths, sickly children and bulging, blinded eyes.

The government believes the rules will make the packages less attractive to smokers and turn Australia into the world's toughest country on tobacco advertising. Several cigarette makers have threatened lawsuits, arguing the move illegally diminishes the value of their trademarks. Philip Morris , producer of Virginia cigarettes and Marlboro Gold brand is the first to file a claim for compensation.

"We would anticipate that the compensation would amount to billions," said a Philip Morris spokeswoman, Anne Edwards.

The legislation, which will be introduced to parliament in July, would ban cigarette makers from printing their logos, promotional text or colourful images on packs. Brand names would instead be printed in small type and feature large health warnings and gruesome, full-colour images of the consequences of smoking. The law would be phased in over six months, starting in January 2012.

Hong Kong-based Philip Morris Asia Limited, which owns the Australian affiliate Philip Morris Limited, filed a notice of claim on Monday arguing the legislation violates a bilateral investment treaty between Australia and Hong Kong.

The tobacco company says the treaty protects companies' property, including intellectual property such as trademarks. The plain packaging would severely diminish the value of the company's trademark, Edwards said.

"Our brands are really one of the absolute key valuable assets that we have as a company. It's what helps us compete, it's what enables us to distinguish our products," she said. "This move ... would essentially amount to confiscation of our brand in Australia."

The government denied the proposal breaks any laws and said it would not back down.

"Our government is determined to take every step we can to reduce the harm by tobacco," the health minister, Nicola Roxon, said. "We won't be deterred by tobacco companies making threats or taking legal action."

The Australian prime minister, Julia Gillard, also brushed off Philip Morris's threats. "We are not going to be intimidated by big tobacco's tactics," she told the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.

The legal notice filed on Monday opens a three-month period of negotiation between the two sides. Philip Morris said if a "satisfactory outcome" was not achieved by the end of the three months, it would seek arbitration.

Couple escape blaze at home after being alerted to cigarette fire

TWO 88-year-olds owe their lives to a smoke alarm after fire tore through their bungalow.

Martin and Rosaline Brazier, of Delamere Road, Congleton, were woken up by the device at 11.30pm on Tuesday after the blaze started in the living room of their bungalow.

Mrs Brazier, also known as Greta, admitted that she initially thought it was the burglar alarm that woke them, but it was not until she discovered the front room ablaze that she realised what was happening.

She said: "I came out of the bedroom and saw a glimmer of light. I thought I had left the light on but as I got a little bit closer I realised it was flames.

"I tried to stay calm and hurried around to my neighbour to use the phone and call the fire brigade."

The couple has been told that the blaze was started by a cigarette.

Mrs Brazier said: "It was me. I thought I had put my cigarette out before I went to bed, but obviously I hadn't.

"I don't know how long it took for the fire to start but it must not have been that long because I wasn't properly asleep."

Two fire engines, two police cars and an ambulance arrived at the scene and the pair were taken to Macclesfield Hospital where they were treated for smoke inhalation.

Mr Brazier said: "The house has been damaged by smoke. We have spoken to the insurance company."

Mr and Mrs Brazier, who have lived in the house for more than 20 years, admitted that it was the fire alarm that saved their lives.

Mr Brazier added: "I was in a really deep sleep so if the alarm didn't go off then I may not have woken up. It really did save our lives, a lot of our things have been damaged but it could have been much worse."

The fire alarm was installed at the house following a home safety assessment from Cheshire's Fire and Rescue. Mr Brazier said: "It's the best thing we ever did having that alarm put in."

The couple's son, Colin Brazier, of Swettenham Lane, Congleton, added: "Without doubt, the fire alarm saved my parents' lives. If it had not gone off then they wouldn't be here today."

Alex Waller, performance manager for Cheshire Fire and Rescue Service, said: "This incident clearly highlights once again the importanceof having working smoke alarms.

"I cannot stress enough how important it is to make sure that your home is safe and that everyone knows what to do if a fire should break out.

"This smoke alarm was fitted for free by Congleton firefighters in May 2009 as part of a home safety assessment visit.

"The crew also gave the couple advice on what to do in the event of a fire, which included shutting doors.

"The smoke alarm alerted this couple to the danger and gave them enough time to escape uninjured from this fire."

Reagan’s tobacco bill: A case of persistence and compromise

One bill signed into law this session is a textbook example of persistence, compromise, and how legislation sometimes ends up not too far from what it intended in the first place.

Early in the session, Sen. Michele Reagan, R-Scottsdale, introduced a bill that aimed to increase the penalty for minors who use a fake ID to purchase tobacco products and prohibit the manufacture of “blunt wraps,” which are intended to be used by consumers to roll their own tobacco cigars, but also can be filled with marijuana instead.

Gov. Jan Brewer signed the bill into law on April 29 - but not before it was watered down, initially killed in the Senate, revived, and then amended again the House. The final version no longer contained provisions dealing with blunt wraps.

And instead of instead of a Class 3 felony, minors who present a fake ID in purchasing tobacco products face a petty offense - the same penalty that’s currently in statute for minors who buy cigarettes.

The bill increased the fine to $500 from $300 for individuals under 18 who use false documents to get a cigarette.

The measure’s evolution affirms the nature of the Arizona Legislature - deliberative and wary of big and sweeping changes, preferring instead incremental movements.

But the bill survived because Reagan didn’t give up, even when the odds were stacked against her.

Actually, she thought the bill would easily sail through.

“It was funny, because I thought the blunt wrap issue was going to be fine,” Reagan said.

It turned out to be anything but.

The provision dealing with blunt wraps landed her in the middle of an ugly feud between a national group of cigar manufacturers and one of its members.

The group said the wraps were besmirching its industry because they were used for smoking marijuana. But one maker of the wraps argued that the move was protectionist and anti-competitive. One Arizona-based manufacturer also vigorously opposed the provision.

When she couldn’t get the two sides to compromise, Reagan dropped the blunt-wrap component.

But things didn’t get any easier.

Reagan’s colleagues still balked at the amended bill, and they crossed party lines to sink the proposal in February. They argued the proposed penalty for minors was too excessive, as a Class 3 misdemeanor carries up to 30 days of jail time. It is already illegal to sell tobacco products to a minor, and a minor who buys tobacco is guilty of a petty offense.

Reagan worked to revive the measure, and managed, in the end, to convince nearly the entire Senate to support the proposal. The Senate approved the measure in March.
But then Reagan found out from the Governor’s Office that the state gets some federal funding for tobacco prevention.

“Changing the bill the way it was written would have jeopardized that funding,” Reagan said. “(So), we took it as far as we can without jeopardizing that funding.”

So, legislators lessened the penalty back to a petty offense in the House but increased the existing fine.

The Legislature then sent the bill to Brewer’s desk - on the last day of session.

“I didn’t get everything on this one, but that’s alright. Par for the course, right?” Reagan said.

A Senator's Unilateral Recommendation To Ban Menthol is Inconsistent with the Recommendations of the FDA Tobacco Advisory Committee

Senator Blumenthal states that his recommendation to ban menthol cigarettes is based on the report of the FDA Tobacco Product Scientific Advisory Committee. Unfortunately he must have not read the report in its entirety. The TPSAC made it clear that no action can be taken on a ban until the issue of contraband has been addressed.

A good example of menthol cigarettes is Kiss Superslims Menthol cigarettes.

Center for Regulatory Effectiveness (CRE) has informed TPSAC that China exports 400 billion cigarettes per year. CRE continues to issue reports based on information obtained from Chinese government publications which demonstrate that the contraband industry in China is flourishing and will be even more prosperous with a menthol ban. CRE presentations to TPSAC clearly demonstrated that a menthol ban will not only result in an increase in adult and underage smoking of tobacco products but in doing so both groups will be exposed to heavy metals at a level which is an order of magnitude greater than legal cigarettes.
Consequently, if the Congress is going to get involved in the FDA review of the TPSAC report they should do so only after they have read the entire record.

FDA says tobacco law doesn't apply to two smokeless lozenges

It's not often a tobacco company gets released from government regulation without asking.

But that's apparently what happened to Star Scientific Inc. after it asked the Food and Drug Administration to treat two versions of its smokeless, dissolvable tobacco lozenges as "modified risk" because they contain lower levels of carcinogens than other tobacco products.

The most demamded tobacco products are cigarettes as Marlboro Gold cigarettes or Winston cigarettes.

The FDA responded that the products aren't considered smokeless tobacco at all and don't come under the 2009 tobacco law, according to a Star Scientific announcement on Wednesday.

"We were very surprised. We obviously believed that these were smokeless tobacco products under the act," said Sara Troy Machir, Star Scientific's vice president for communications and investor relations.

Why FDA judged Ariva-BDL and Stonewall-BDL exempt from the tobacco law is a mystery.

Both the FDA and Star Scientific declined to release copies of the agency's decision because they said it contained confidential commercial information.

Machir said the FDA cited "details of the manufacturing process" -- which are secret – in exempting the products from oversight.

In a statement, the FDA said it recognizes that "there are uncertainties regarding the regulatory status of a variety of nicotine-containing products" including whether they should be regulated as drugs or tobacco.

The agency said it's "considering its legal and regulatory options regarding these products."

Star Scientific's announcement caused consternation among anti-tobacco activists who said it opens a loophole other smokeless tobacco makers will attempt to exploit.

The decision is puzzling and disappointing because the tobacco law "does not distinguish among smokeless tobacco products based on manufacturing process," said Matt Myers of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids.

"The FDA's handling of this creates unnecessary uncertainty and the potential for widespread abuse," Myers said.

Lynn Kozlowski, dean of the School of Public Health at the University of Buffalo, said the decision highlights the difficulties in precisely defining everything a new law is supposed to cover.

"On one hand, you have common sense and on the other hand definitions and sometimes they don't mesh," Kozlowski said. "I can only speculate that there's something about [Star Scientific's] process that isn't covered by the definition FDA is using."

Psychiatric Patients Risking Lives For A Cigarette

Australia's involuntary mental health patients are so desperate to defy smoking bans they are poking electricity sockets with paper clips to get a spark and light up, The (Perth) Sunday Times reported.

The revelation based on a new report is being used by Western Australia's mental health watchdog, the Council of Official Visitors, to bolster its call for designated smoking areas for involuntary patients.

In its latest annual report, the watchdog warned one patient was soaking nicotine patches in tea "to get more of a nicotine fix" and it was "cruel" to force mental health patients to give up their addiction on admission.

It also highlighted "reports of patients using straightened paper clips in electricity outlets to obtain a spark to light a cigarette."

"It is not the right time to be asking people to go through the terrible nicotine withdrawal symptoms," the council wrote in the report tabled in parliament.

"The ban is also a further erosion of consumers' rights and not in accordance with section five of the Act which requires that people with a mental illness must receive care and treatment with the least restriction of their freedom and least interference with their rights."

But Australian Council on Smoking and Health president Mike Daube said the council's call was "misguided, retrograde and exaggerated."

He said the smoking ban, introduced on all public hospital sites in 2008, was "being very well implemented and there will always be one or two exceptions."

"There doesn't seem to be any concern about the physical health of mental health patients and we shouldn't just be worried about their health from the neck up," he said.

Cigarettes and Sinners

I'd rather be a Catholic than a cigarette company. Confessions are done in private, and priests (and God) are more forgiving of past transgressions than the Justice Department (and judges.) As Catholic On-Line explains it, "The basic requirement for a good Confession is to have the intention of returning to God like the "prodigal son" and to acknowledge our sins with true sorrow before the priest." Once a Catholic has confessed to a specific sin in the privacy of the Confessional, the appropriate punishment is imposed by the priest and the penitent can go on about his/her business confident that the transgression has been forgiven. The Pope's confessional is a kind of one stop shopping for forgiveness whereas the legal confessional, at least as interpreted by Judge Gladys Kessler of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, more closely resembles Hawthorne's Scarlet Letter.

In 2006 Judge Kessler issued a final judgment in a civil RICO (Racketeering) case that the Department of Justice brought against the tobacco industry as a whole. She said tobacco companies violated civil racketeering laws and defrauded the American people by lying for decades about the health risks of smoking and their marketing to children. In her 1682 page opinion she said that:

"the Court will order Defendants to make corrective statements about addiction (that both nicotine and cigarette smoking are addictive); the adverse health effects of smoking (all the diseases which smoking has been proven to cause); the adverse health effects of exposure to ETS [environmental tobacco smoke](all the diseases which exposure to ETS has been proven to cause); their manipulation of physical and chemical design of cigarettes (that Defendants do manipulate design of cigarettes in order to enhance the delivery of nicotine); and light and low tar cigarettes (that they are no less hazardous than full-flavor cigarettes). Within sixty days of the issuance of this opinion and order, both parties will submit a proposal for the exact wording of these statements. After the Court approves particular statements, Defendants must publish such corrective statements in newspapers and disseminate them through television, Within sixty days of the issuance of this opinion and order, both parties will submit a proposal for the exact wording of these statements."
All the appeals have now been exhausted, Judge Kessler's opinion is final and the Justice Department has come up with proposed language that has been made public over the tobacco companies' objections.

Some of the Justice Department proposals as to what the cigarette companies must say in their ads and on cigarette packages are in the nature of a confession that might be heard by a priest in a confessional. One suggested confession says: "We falsely marketed low tar and light cigarettes as less harmful than regular cigarettes to keep people smoking and sustain our profits. We knew that many smokers switch to low tar and light cigarettes rather than quitting because they believe low tar and lights are less harmful. They are NOT." Another says: "We told Congress under oath that we believed nicotine is not addictive. We told you that smoking is not an addiction and all it takes to quit is will power. Here's the truth: Smoking is very addictive. And it's not easy to quit."

Not all the suggestions are in the nature of confessions. Some simply describe the hazards posed by the cigarette. One, for example, says: "A federal court is requiring tobacco companies to tell the truth about cigarette smoking. Here's the truth: . . . Smoking kills 1,200 Americans. Every day." Another says: "Just because lights and low tar cigarettes feel smoother, that doesn't mean they are any better for you. Light cigarettes can deliver the same amounts of tar and nicotine as regular cigarettes." Another says: For decades, we denied that we controlled the level of nicotine delivered in cigarettes. Here's the truth: Cigarettes are a finely-tuned nicotine delivery device designed to addict people; We control nicotine delivery to create and sustain smokers' addiction, because that's how we keep customers coming back; We also add chemicals, such as ammonia, to enhance the impact of nicotine and make cigarettes taste less harsh; When you smoke, the nicotine actually changes the brain-that's why quitting is so hard." This last statement is so detailed that it is probably similar to what a murderer might come up with when confessing sins in a Confessional.

March 3 will have been an exciting day. That is the deadline for the tobacco companies to respond to the language proposed by the Justice Department. It is not often the sinner has a chance to weigh in on the kind of punishment that is appropriate. Priests do not ask confessors how many Hail Marys they think are appropriate for the sins to which they've confessed. My guess is Judge Kessler, like a priest, will not give the sinners' suggestions much weight.

Evidence does not support menthol restrictions, Altria says

The scientific evidence does not justify a ban or restrictions on menthol flavoring in cigarettes, a representative for cigarette maker Philip Morris USA told a government advisory panel Wednesday.

"The weight of the scientific evidence indicates that menthol does not change the inherent health risk of smoking," said Jane Lewis, senior vice president for tobacco regulatory and health sciences at Altria Client Services Inc., which provides support functions for Henrico County-based Altria Group Inc. and its subsidiaries, including top U.S. cigarette maker Philip Morris USA,producer of Marlboro cigarettes which sells several menthol cigarette brands.

Lewis spoke at a meeting of the Tobacco Products Scientific Advisory Committee, a 12-member panel appointed to study tobacco-related issues and advise the Food and Drug Administration on regulating the industry.

The advisory committee is scheduled to submit a report about the public-health impacts of menthol cigarettes to the FDA by March 23. The group could recommend banning menthol, but the FDA is not required to adopt the findings.

A draft copy of the panel's report released this week said the evidence is insufficient to conclude that smokers face higher health risks from menthol cigarettes compared with unflavored cigarettes.

However, the report said menthol flavoring may make it easier for young people to start smoking and may increase the likelihood of addiction.

Lewis told the panel that the impact of menthol on smoking initiation is a "complex issue" that needs more study. The weight of evidence, she said, indicates that menthol flavoring does not increase smoking dependence.

A ban on menthol could instead have the unintended consequence of creating an illegal trade in menthol cigarettes, Lewis said.

David T. Levy, a professor of economics at the University of Baltimore, told the panel that his research indicates a ban on menthol would reduce smoking rates enough to prevent between 323,000 and 633,000 deaths from smoking-related diseases by 2050. He said the research was funded by the American Cancer Society and the American Legacy Foundation, a tobacco-control group.

Menthol brands make up about 30 percent of the U.S. cigarette market, and about 80 percent of black smokers use menthols, research from the Federal Trade Commission shows.

Niger Innis, a national spokesman for the civil-rights group Congress of Racial Equality, also argued before the committee that a ban on menthol would create an illicit trade.

He said his group supports "rigorous and early education about the dangers of smoking in the schools," but not a ban on menthol.

"If the government is not going to ban all cigarettes, then the obvious question is why should it selectively ban those cigarettes that African-Americans tend to prefer?" he said.

The committee's chairman, Dr. Jonathan Samet, a professor of medicine at the University of Southern California, said the report to the FDA would include research on the potential unintended consequences of a ban, such as an illegal, underground market.

Two of the nation's largest cigarette makers last Friday filed a lawsuit seeking to stop the FDA from relying on recommendations made by the scientific advisory committee.

The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Washington by Lorillard Inc. and R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., claims several members of the committee have a financial conflict of interest and bias because they have testified against tobacco companies in smokers' lawsuits or worked for pharmaceutical firms that make smoking-cessation products.

Altria Group is not part of that lawsuit, but the company has raised objections with the FDA about alleged conflicts of interest among members on the advisory committee.

Close flavoured tobacco loophole: NDP

It's time to close loopholes that let tobacco companies keep marketing flavoured products to kids, NDP health critic Megan Leslie said Tuesday.

Leslie introduced a private member's bill, C-631, to tighten the rules around the sale of flavoured little cigars.

Adult smokers are used to smoke regular cigarettes like Red&White cigarettes or Winston cigarettes but for kids it is very dangerous all the tobacco products.

The Conservative government tried to ban the sale of flavoured small cigars, which are thought by some to target teens, but the tobacco industry changed the size of the products slightly and removed the filters to comply with the new law.

Bill C-32 passed in October, 2009, and the law came into force last July.

"Despite the ban, you can still find flavoured cigarillos on store shelves today," Leslie said.

"Health experts agree that flavoured tobacco [products] are consumed by young Canadians as a stepping stone to consuming non-flavoured tobacco products ... these things target young people," she said.

Leslie pointed to the campaign slogan for the "Flavour…GONE" advocacy group: cancer shouldn't come in candy flavours.

"It's marketing to kids," she said.

Luc Martial, a spokesman for Casa Cubana, which distributes flavoured cigars, said most users of flavoured tobacco are legal smoking age, adding that the government's own numbers show fewer teens are using flavoured tobacco.

"C-32 without question is legislation that was based on an outright lie. Everything that was said about the flavoured little cigars, everything that was said about the industry was not based on fact at all."

Banning the flavours doesn't do anything to enforce laws against selling tobacco products to teens, Martial adds.

"The government's own data clearly showed the kids, unfortunately, were getting far greater illegal access in much greater quantities to non-flavoured cigarettes," he said.

"(But) truth doesn't matter in tobacco."

Martial says he fears the government will pick up the private members bill and push its own legislation, which is more likely to become law. He says several lawyers have approached Casa Cubana about going to court over the issue but they have so far passed on the offers.

Bills on Cigarette and Plastic-Bag Taxes, Judicial Retirement Falling to Wayside

As expected, the House Finance Committee on Jan. 24 tabled a proposal by Del. Patrick Hope (D-47th) to increase Virginia’s cigarette tax from 30 cents per pack to $1.45.

Hope wanted the increased revenue to be used, in part, to fund Virginia’s Medicaid obligations. State officials estimated it would bring in nearly $300 million a year in new revenue.

Even before the action, the measure had little chance in the Republican-led House of Delegates, which can be counted on to oppose new or higher taxes. Virginia’s tax on cigarettes is among the lowest in the nation.

* A bill by Del. Adam Ebbin (D-49th) to require a 5-cent tax on single-use plastic bags from supermarkets and retail establishments also appears dead in the House Finance Committee.

* A measure by Hope to extend the mandatory retirement age for state judges from 70 to 73 died a quick death Jan. 16 in the lower house.

A subcommittee split 5-5, with one abstention, on reporting the legislation to the full Committee for Courts of Justice.

A similar measure from Del. Charniele Herring (D-Alexandria) also failed on a 5-5 vote.

Cigarette May Have Caused Apartment Fire

Investigators say a flicked cigarette may have started an apartment fire in the 9000 block of Richmond Avenue on Thurday night.

It was first reported at 10:30 p.m in southwest Houston.

Responding firefighters found a small fire on the balcony of a third floor apartment unit at ‘The Aberdeen’ complex. Firefighters were able to put the flames out before they spread.

According to the Houston Fire Department, the residents of the burned apartment were home when the flames broke out. Apparently one of the tenants threw a lit cigarette out onto the balcony.

It hit the corner and rolled into a wooded area of the structure, which caught fire. The damage was limited to mostly the balcony.

The fire department says the situation could have been a lot worse, and emphasized how dangerous even the smallest of fire sources can be.

Call to stub out tobacco testing offer to students

An attempt to recruit Christchurch students to test cigarettes has sparked a Ministry of Health investigation.

Smokefree agencies are outraged by a Student Job Search advertisement looking to recruit 15 students to test a brand of cigarettes and provide feedback.There can be many cigarettes brands from which to choose for test , for example, Kiss cigarettes or Esse cigarettes.

A Ministry of Health spokeswoman said the local smokefree enforcement officer had been asked to investigate the "possible legal issues" raised by the trial.

"We are concerned by any activity that seeks to undermine the efforts, and the gains made so far, to further reduce the prevalence of smoking in New Zealand, particularly amongst young people," she said.

"The Ministry of Health aims to make smoking less appealing to young people, and this product test undermines that objective."

The ad asks for male and female smokers aged between 19 and 29.

Participants would go to an undisclosed central Christchurch location to collect the cigarettes and be paid $50 following a final interview.

The Press understands the brand is Benson and Hedges.

Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) director Ben Youdan said tertiary age students were particularly vulnerable to starting smoking.

"The tobacco industry is flashing the cash to entice them into `research' that will extract the secrets of exploiting this vulnerability. This is yet another example of tobacco companies deliberately targeting young people.

"Tobacco companies, of course, claim they do not do this, but paying university students to market-test their brands shows how important young people are to their business."

He said the law did allow for tobacco products to be given away.

"If there is a loophole in the law that allows for tobacco to be given away to research participants the upcoming Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill needs to address this, along with other ways tobacco companies can market their product, particularly at youth."

Students are being recruited through People for Information for market research company Colmar Brunton.

Colmar Brunton was forced to apologise in October last year over a survey it sent out for British American Tobacco. The survey was sent to 10,000 people and said that depending on their answers, they could be asked to join a study involving smoking cigarettes.

About 20 people complained about the wording of the survey, which they believed encouraged people to smoke.

Colmar Brunton spokesman Chris Vaughan said the company did research for clients in accordance with "strict guidelines" to ensure recruitment for consumer research was limited to existing smokers aged over 18."The research in question is not aimed at Canterbury students or any university students," he said.

Smokefree Canterbury youth representative Sarah McCallum said she had not come across the ad on Student Job Search, but was disgusted by the idea of recruiting youth for a smoking trial."To think that they are trying to get young people to test new products is just disgusting and shouldn't be allowed," the 18-year-old said.

"Some of us need financial assistance and can get roped into things like this."

Fellow youth representative Kris Austin said the posting of the ad on SJS did not send a good message.

"It's like, `hey guys, do you want some money to try out some new poison?"' he said.

SJS chief executive Paul Kennedy said jobs could be posted on the site without staff viewing them.

Wake schools to get $3m windfall from cigarette tax case settlement

RALEIGH -- In these parsimonious times when many government agencies are pondering staffing cuts to deal with budget deficits, the Wake County schools just got an unexpected $3 million windfall.Cigarette taxes should be paid otherwise there can be big problems for those who don't.

As part of a plea arrangement entered this morning in Wake County Superior Court, two South Carolina cigarette distributors agreed to pay $6.5 million in restitution and fines to settle a protracted and complicated tax fraud case that could have resulted in prison time.

Larry Phillips, 62, and John M. June Jr., 38, each entered Alford pleas to two counts of obtaining property by false pretense.

Under the arrangement, Phillips and June did not admit guilt, but acknowledged that prosecutors had sufficient evidence to bring convictions.

Initially the men were charged with criminal conspiracy and attempting to evade state taxes.

June and Phillips, who operated J & E Distributors Inc.and Tobaccoville USA Inc., were accused of trying to avoid a 2005 state cigarette tax increase in a complicated scheme in which sales records and invoices were created to show they sold 958,000 cartons of cigarettes in August 2005 shortly before the tax jumped from 50 cents per carton to $3.00 per carton.

Prosecutors said the men overstated their 2005 cigarette sales and understated their 2006 sales to sidestep the tax increase.

In court today, Joseph B. Cheshire V and Thomas Manning, two Raleigh attorneys representing the men, said the distributors had gotten a five-page letter from a different attorney in 2005 who told them what they did was legal.

Judge Donald Stephens, the chief resident Wake County Superior Court judge, said today he took an active role in helping prosecutors and defense lawyers arrange a plea that both sides could accept.

Phillips and June have already paid $2.5 million to the state Department of Revenue and made a $1 million contribution to a state trust fund set up to deal with tobacco-related health claims.

The men also had a $3 million check for the the Wake County courts, which will be forwarded to Wake County schools as court fines routinely are.

"This whole fight has been about money, and I'm going to resolve it with money," Stephens said. "Sometimes, when you make bad business decisions, the best way to resolve it is by paying a heck of a lot of money."

The men, who made no comments after their pleas, will be on unsupervised probation for 18 months.

Stephens said under his calculations the $3 million fine could help save the jobs of 50 to 60 Wake teachers.

"Everybody benefits from this decision," Stephens said from the bench. "Hopefully the board of education finds some rational way to spend the $3 million."

Lawmakers to consider boost in Idaho cigarette tax

BOISE, Idaho (AP) - State lawmakers are expected to consider a bill that would significantly boost taxes on cigarettes in Idaho during the upcoming session.

Rep. Dennis Lake, the Republican who heads the House Revenue and Taxation Committee, said Thursday he has agreed to sponsor a bill supported by health groups to increase the cigarette tax by $1.25 per pack.

Lake detailed the proposal at a legislative preview sponsored by The Associated Press.

A pitch for any tax increases will face a tough fight in the 2011 session with the conservative turn of the Idaho Legislature during the November election.

But Lake says his bill to increase Idaho's 57-cent-per-pack cigarette tax may find favor because of the savings it could bring in health care-related costs associated cigarettes and other tobacco products.

Hiring at ProMedica to exclude smokers

Two years after ProMedica Health System was among those to ban smoking everywhere on their hospital grounds, officials have taken the next step: not hiring anyone who uses tobacco products.

Many persons are smoking brands liek Kiss cigarettes or Winston cigarettes.

ProMedica, along with St. Rita's Medical Center in Lima, Ohio, this month became the latest local employers in the health-care industry to shun those who smoke and use other tobacco. Such policies not only set an example for the community, but they also are expected to eventually help lower insurance costs as the overall work force becomes healthier, officials said.

"We are a health-care organization — we should be promoting health," said registered nurse Laura Ritzler, director of corporate and employee wellness at ProMedica. "We should have people role-modeling healthy behavior."

Medical Mutual of Ohio, which has about 500 employees in Toledo, adopted a similar policy three years ago. The Cleveland insurance company since has been joined by Cleveland Clinic and others in the health-care industry statewide.

Firms in other fields also have refused to hire smokers, including Scott's Miracle-Gro Co. of Marysville, one employer studied by ProMedica as its policy was formulated. ProMedica and Medical Mutual, meanwhile, are among those providing free smoking-cessation assistance for existing employees, which has helped reduce the ranks of tobacco users.

A matter of concern
At ProMedica, job applicants are asked about their tobacco use, and if their screening is positive after denying use, they will not be hired. Those who declare tobacco use or do not pass the screening can reapply for a position after 90 days.

It can take varying amounts of time for nicotine to leave the body based on frequency and length of use.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio dislikes policies monitoring what employees do off the clock, said spokesman Mike Brickner. Because Ohio is an "at-will" state, meaning employees can be fired for any reason without proving just cause, that dislike has no effect when it comes to not hiring smokers, he said.

"It's definitely something we have seen an increase in around the state and nationally," Mr. Brickner said. "There's not a lot legally [here] that can be done."

Michigan also is an "at will" employment state. It also has employers that have adopted policies against hiring tobacco users, and improving wellness and financial issues certainly have played a part.

The cost of tobacco use
Tobacco use nationwide costs an estimated $193 billion annually, including $97 billion from loss of productivity because of premature death and $96 billion in smoking-related health-care costs, according to the latest statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Within nine months of quitting, people experience less coughing, sinus congestion, and other problems. And five to 15 years after quitting, the stroke risk for former smokers is equal to nonsmokers; at 15 years, their risk of coronary heart disease also is the same, according to information from the American Cancer Society.

The possibility of being able to lower health-care costs and increase productivity is among benefits that have drawn interest in Medical Mutual's policy from employers in various fields, said Sarah Susalla, Medical Mutual's manager of health promotion and wellness.

"It's a fairly common question," said Ms. Susalla, a registered nurse. "We can certainly provide some direction."

Area hospitals
St. Rita's is one of Catholic Health Partners' first hospitals to adopt a policy against not hiring tobacco users. The hospital and Lima Memorial Health System, which is part of ProMedica, started enforcing the policy Jan. 1.

Mercy, a fellow Catholic Health Partners entity with several hospitals in northwest Ohio, does not have a similar policy. Neither does the University of Toledo Medical Center, formerly the Medical College of Ohio.

St. Rita's policy was questioned upon its announcement last month, but the furor has died down, said Jennifer Van Tilburgh, the hospital's human resources director.

"It really is legal, and it really is in our rights to do it," she said.

Mixed reaction
ProMedica's policy has drawn mixed reaction.

For Toledo Hospital's Cheryl Gomez, a patient safety specialist, the policy was a wake-up call to stop smoking after about three decades.

"There's no denying the evidence — the medical evidence — that smoking is not a healthy habit," Ms. Gomez said. "All of a sudden it just kind of hit me, ‘It's time.' "

Ms. Gomez stopped smoking Dec. 21, less than a month after ProMedica's policy was announced.

She is using nicotine replacement products, and she started getting smoking-cessation counseling last week from a certified tobacco treatment specialist.

"It's hard to say to your patients ‘You have to stop smoking' when you haven't done it yourself," said Ms. Gomez, adding that her clothes and hair formerly smelled of smoke. "No matter how quiet you are about it, people know when you smoke."

So-called third-hand smoke, toxic residue that remains on clothing and other items, was another concern for ProMedica, said Ms. Ritzler, the wellness director. It can be especially harmful to children, she said.

Among others who have weighed in on the debate is John Kirkbride, a retired Washington Local Schools educator and administrator. He said that instead of not hiring smokers, officials should hire them under the condition that they quit, he said.

"I don't care whether my doctor smokes or not — I would prefer they hire the best doctor," Mr. Kirkbride said. "I want the best doctor, or nurse, or health professional that I can have."

Ms. Ritzler said maintaining such a policy would be complicated, and ProMedica used existing policies as models.

ProMedica's position is clear cut, and Southwestern College in Toledo, which offers training for medical-related careers, has posted the policy and encouraged students to refrain from smoking, she said.

What's next?
The next step will not be refusing to hire people because they are obese, a charge made by some opponents, although weight-loss efforts will continue for willing employees needing help, Ms. Ritzler and others said.

Going tobacco-free on hospital campuses and elsewhere two years ago was harder to accomplish than not hiring smokers, Ms. Ritzler said. Employees were given six months to prepare for the tobacco-free change, and some cut down smoking dramatically even if they haven't totally quit, she said.

"We've always had a mission to improve the health of our own employees and the community as well," Ms. Ritzler said.

The Economics Behind Marijuana and Its Illegality

Marijuana is one of the most commonly used illicit substances in the United States. However, the history of the drug is ripe with controversy ranging from its use to its illegalization. To truly understand the situation regarding marijuana it is only proper to look at the root of the controversy surrounding it. People choose to smoke marijuan or different cigarette brands like Bond cigarettes or Temp cigarettes.

Once the 1930s rolled around, and the prohibition of alcohol had failed tremendously, there was a feeling of failure in most prohibitionists' minds. One of the jaded prohibitionists, Harry J. Anslinger, soon found himself at the forefront of yet another prohibition movement in the United States. During the latter years of alcohol prohibition many Southwestern states were pushing for a law against marijuana as a means to persecute the Mexican immigrants who offered cheap labor during the Depression.

In response to the public's outcry for action, the Federal Bureau of Narcotics (FBN) was founded in 1930 as an agency of the United States Department of Treasury. Secretary of the Treasury, Andrew Mellon, felt his nephew-in-law, Harry J. Anslinger, was the perfect candidate for the job of FBN commissioner. While Anslinger was upset over the failure of the prohibition of alcohol, the cries for action against marijuana enabled Anslinger to focus his attention on a new scapegoat substance.

For the first 4 years of the FBN, Anslinger never felt cannabis to be a real threat, but he eventually changed his mind and began one of the most heinous campaigns of propaganda in the history of the United States. At the time the campaign began, accurate scientific studies of marijuana had not been conducted; in fact, marijuana was not properly studied until the 1950s, long after the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937 was passed. Most of the evidence used to lead the Supreme Court in their decision to pass the Marihuana Tax Act was created and distributed by the FBN.