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.