Playing school sports affects youths' smoking

Young people's choices about using drugs and alcohol are influenced by peers—not only close friends, but also sports teammates. A new study of middle schoolers and their social networks has found that teammates' smoking plays a big role in youths' decisions about smoking, but adolescents who take part in a lot of sports smoke less.

The study was conducted at the University of Southern California (USC) and appears in the journal Child Development.

Researchers looked at 1,260 ethnically diverse, urban, middle-class sixth through eighth graders. They asked the students about their own smoking behavior, and they asked them to name friends at school as well as the organized sports they took part in at school. Then, using a social network method they developed, they examined how participation in sports with teammates who smoked affected adolescents' smoking behavior.

They found that youths were more likely to smoke as they were increasingly exposed to teammates who smoked, and that this tendency may be stronger among girls than boys. But they also found that youths who took part in a greater number of sports were less likely to smoke than those who participated in fewer.

"This result suggests that peers on athletic teams influence the smoking behavior of others even though there might be a protective effect overall of increased participation in athletics on smoking," according to Kayo Fujimoto, assistant professor of health promotion and behavioral sciences at the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, who led the study when she was at USC.

The study has implications for programs aimed at preventing teens from smoking. "Current guidelines recommend the use of peer leaders selected within the class to implement such programs," Fujimoto points out. "The findings of this study suggest that peer-led interactive programs should be expanded to include sports teams as well."

Japan Tobacco profits likely to rise next FY

President Hiroshi Kimura also told Reuters in an interview the company may issue a limited amount of debt to help fund a buyback of government-owned shares.

JT on Monday lifted its operating profit forecast for the year to March to 365 billion yen ($4.75 billion), a 9.5 percent year-on-year rise, partly as sales picked up following domestic cigarette shipment suspensions on a shortage of materials such as filters and paper after the March 11 earthquake and tsunami.

Profits next year "won't be lower than this year," said Kimura, 58.

"As long the excessively strong yen does not advance further, upside factors such as the rebound from the disasters and momentum overseas will support the outlook," Kimura said, declining to give a figure for the expected increase.

Eleven analysts polled by Thomson Reuters I/B/E/S projected an average annual operating profit of 406 billion yen for the fiscal year that starts in April.

Kimura, himself a two pack-a-day smoker, said JT is aiming to achieve a domestic tobacco market share of more than 60 percent in its next business year, but it would be hard to return to the 64 percent share it had before the disasters struck.

JT, which ranks behind Philip Morris International (PM.N) and British American Tobacco (BATS.L) in sales volume worldwide, had a 59.1 percent share of Japan's tobacco market in December.

The Japanese government, which owns half the tobacco maker, plans next financial year to sell about 1.7 million shares, or about 17 percent of outstanding stock, to help with reconstruction efforts after the quake and tsunami.

The Mild Seven maker has been lobbying the government to cut its stake for years in hopes a gaining a freer hand in making decisions and is interested in buying back some of the shares held by the Ministry of Finance.

Talks of a share buyback have raised investor hopes that the former state monopoly would take action to boost shareholder returns closer to industry norms, lifting its share price.

Shares have risen nearly 25 percent over the last 12 months, versus about a 15 percent fall in the benchmark Nikkei average .N225.

JT, which is looking to increase its earnings per share, will have to see the schedule and the scheme for the government's stake sale before giving specific EPS growth goals, Kimura said.

An EPS of 18,788 yen is projected for its business year which ends in March, according to a poll of 11 analysts by Thomson Reuters I/B/E/S.

On Wednesday, shares of JT settled 1.9 percent higher, beating a 1.1 percent gain in the Nikkei 225.

Kimura declined to comment on media reports that said JT was a possible bidder for U.S.-based Lorillard (LO.N) and Britain's Imperial Tobacco Group (IMT.L), but said his bigger priority currently was on organic growth.

He added that he was not interested at present in the American market since he believed the risk of litigation for tobacco companies there was still high.

Earlier mega-deals reshaped the global tobacco industry, leaving scant major acquisition opportunities.

JT was part of that realignment by purchasing the international tobacco business of R.J. Reynolds in 1999 and buying Britain's Gallaher for $19 billion, in one of Japan's richest outbound M&A deals on record, in 2007.

So About That Tobacco-Free Policy

Last week, you may have read Regina Iannizzotto preach about how “great” the tobacco and smoke- free campus is. This is not one of those editorials.
For the college to make a decision to limit what its students can do that is in compliance with state and federal law is completely absurd. I understand why the school is doing it; to make the school a healthier place to live, but that does not justify limiting the consenting adult who knows all the health risks involved.
With smoking, I understand that some people do not want to smell the second-hand smoke which is fine and I understand that. But there is a solution to that without the complete ban of smoking on campus, and that would be creating designated smoking areas on the campus that people actually know about. Apparently the gazebos were for that, but that is something that I did not find out until the tobacco embargo was placed on the Saint Rose campus. The college assumed that students would know that. If the smokers know where to go other than the sidewalk to smoke their cigarettes, then hypothetically there should not be a problem.
Making students smoking on the sidewalks also raises another problem: the pollution from throwing their butts on the ground. Someone has to clean that up and if the City of Albany does, that is a complete waste of tax payer money, in my opinion. At a designated smoking area, there would be a place to dispose of butts appropriately.
Making people walk to the sidewalks could also be dangerous at night. I know for a fact that a girl was abducted on Morris, and if you know your campus geography, that is where one of our dorms is. There is no reason to have to walk to a sidewalk; policy should not outweigh an individual’s immediate safety.
Now you may think that this is a rule that is strictly for the smokers, but this also effects those that chose to chew or dip.
Coming from someone that does it, it is pretty nasty. But I do not understand why this is something that we cannot do. Using chew or dip only affects the person that is doing it and no one else. There is nothing second hand that comes with. You may feel a little grossed out when you see someone spit, but that really is the only side effect for other people.
Did the school make the right move? I personally do not think so. We are adults now; we should be able to make our own decisions for ourselves without being limited. With this new rule, it feels like I never really left high school.

Tobacco free campus 2012

Perhaps one of the biggest questions circulating campus right now is: What’s going on with the smoking policy?

Perhaps one of the biggest questions circulating campus right now is: What’s going on with the smoking policy?

Pat Sisneros, vice president of College Services, said the administration is moving forward for a smoke-free campus.

Sisneros said there is a draft of the policy that has to be voted on by the board of trustees, something that is planned to happen sometime in the spring. As far as a set date on when the policy would be implemented if it is approved, Sisneros said “July 1st is still the plan.”

If the policy is approved, EvCC will be the fourth community technical college in the state to become tobacco-free. Clark, Lower Columbia, and the most recent, South Puget Sound, are the three campuses to precede EvCC.



Sisneros said that when it comes to “weighing public health issues against the rights of an individual,” public health triumphs. The main issue is the second hand smoke, especially when it comes to the designated area in front of Shuksan hall, Sisneros said.

If the board of trustees votes against the proposed policy, Sisneros said the administration would take another look at the designated areas, and where the best places to have them would be; namely, moving the area in front of Shuksan hall.

Sisneros said that they have been working with the ASB on what the penalty process would be if the policy is approved. He also said that he’s been “talking to colleagues on other campuses to see what they do.”

According to Emily Harrington, ASB president, this idea was initially proposed around 15 years ago.

“The executive council doesn’t take an official stance. It’s our duty to represent all students.” Because students are divided on the issue, “it wouldn’t be true to pick one side or the other,” Harrington said. She said that her job is to make student voices heard, something she said the administration has been very interested in hearing in regards to the policy proposal. “The administration really sought out student voice, and what the impact would be.”



Harrington said it was very important that students understand that as of right now, “until the board votes on it, it remains a proposal.” Right now, she said, they’re just waiting for the board of trustees to vote.



“Any student that would like their voice heard is encouraged to talk to student government,” Harrington said. She said that based on all the conversation she’s had with students, the opposing sides to the issue seem about even, and a large group are indifferent.

Sisneros said: “Eventually, the state might mandate no smoking on any state property. We’re moving in the right direction.”

Man Sentenced For Cigarette Thefts

A Twin Falls man who pleaded guilty to stealing $1,300 in cigarettes could spend up to six years in prison.
Joshua Aaron Cossey, 30, was sentenced Monday in Twin Falls County 5th District Court to serve three to six years in prison on a charge of grand theft. He could be released sooner, though, by completing the state’s retained jurisdiction program.
Cossey was also ordered to pay court costs, a $1,000 fine, a $500 public defender fee and $1,772.50 in restitution.
Cossey was arrested in November after stealing a box of 30 cartons of cigarettes from the Oasis Stop ’N Go convenience store at 515 Washington St. N. and then trying to sell the cartons. Police say he was found with several drug-related items in his pockets including a scale, butane torch, clear glass pipe with 8.6 grams of methamphetamine, and a plastic bag with .7 grams of meth. He was also found with one 9-inch knife concealed under his shirt and another 9-inch knife in a pocket.

Legislature considers ban of hookah lounges, e-cigarettes

Hookah lounges and e-cigarette users could soon be going up in smoke following a proposed bill to the Utah legislature. The proposed bill has already become an early controversy for legislators on the first day of session.

House bill 245 would amend the Utah Indoor Clear Air Act to include tobacco products used in hookah pipes and electronic cigarettes, banning the use of these products in a public environment.

Since the debate over indoor hookah smoking has heated up, business is down for smoke shops and hookah lounges in the state. Opponents to the bill say hookah tobacco and e- cigarettes do not produce harmful second-hand smoke.

"If I burn a cigarette here, you can smell it from there," said Haydar Altalibi. "If I smoke (from a hookah), you behind me can't smell it."

The bill's sponsor, Rep. Bradley Last, said the science about the tobacco products has not determined whether the products are safe to use or not.

"I think the reality of that is that we don't have good data," said Rep. Last. "We don't have good information to show that e-cigarettes are not harmful — there's not good information to show that it is harmful or that they are harmful."
Although data cannot refute the alleged harmful affects, or lack thereof, the Utah Legislature is poised to determine if hookah tobacco and e-cigarettes should be amended into the state's Clean Air Act. The legislation was delayed last September after supporters of hookah lounges protested the product's inclusion.

However, legislators say, where there is smoke, there is probably fire.

"I think this is one of those things where we have to say, someone is inhaling nicotine and they are blowing it out in the air, even though you can't see it," Rep. Last said. "Is that a health risk we want to consider from a policy perspective?"

The ingredients of hookah tobacco are different from traditional cigarettes, with 0 percent tar and less than half of a percent of nicotine. However, the determining factor will not be what is inside the product, but what is coming out of a users' lungs and into public air.

All tobacco is not equally harmful

Your recent editorial endorsed a tax increase on tobacco products other than cigarettes, but it was based on some sweeping statements that are not scientifically accurate or credible ("The 'other' tobacco tax," Jan 20).

You stated: "Tobacco is linked to an estimated 6,861 deaths in Maryland each year … the American Lung Association reports." The Lung Association actually reported that smoking caused these deaths. The distinction is critical because your case for raising OTP taxes is based on the presumption that all tobacco products are equally risky: "Experts say all forms of tobacco are considered harmful to human health no matter whether they are smoked, puffed, chewed or otherwise ingested. Smokeless tobacco, for instance, is often linked to oral and esophageal cancer."

In fact, smokeless tobacco use is 98 percent safer than smoking. While smokeless may be "linked to oral and esophageal cancer," the specific risks are well established in the scientific literature, and they are minuscule. In 2009, a comprehensive review published calculations showing how smokeless tobacco use might have changed cancer deaths among American men in 2005, when 104,737 in the U.S. died from seven cancers directly attributable to smoking. If all smokers had instead used smokeless tobacco, the number would have been 1,102. The risks from smokeless tobacco are so low that, even if all American men had been users, there would have been 2,298 cancer deaths, only 2.2 percent of the number attributable to smoking.
Smokeless tobacco use is vastly safer than smoking, so it is not "foolish public policy" for smokeless taxes to be lower than those for cigarettes. The emerging awareness of smokeless as a cigarette substitute is not just an industry ploy, it has been endorsed by two prestigious medical organizations, the British Royal College of Physicians and the American Association of Public Health Physicians. The Royal College concluded "...that smokers smoke predominantly for nicotine, that nicotine itself is not especially hazardous, and that if nicotine could be provided in a form that is acceptable and effective as a cigarette substitute, millions of lives could be saved."