| Blowing
Smoke About Tobacco
By
Philip Alcabes, Tuesday, May 30, 2006; Page A17
"Tobacco: deadly
in any form or disguise" is the slogan of the World Health
Organization's World No Tobacco Day tomorrow. The claim is false:
Tobacco is not deadly; the harm is in the smoke. A policy that confuses
innocuous tobacco with harmful smoke is responsible for millions
of avoidable deaths each year worldwide.
Cigarette smoke is
a deadly delivery device for a benign but habit-forming product:
nicotine. Nicotine isn't especially dangerous -- about like caffeine.
Good policy toward tobacco use would reduce the grave harm of smoking
by replacing cigarettes with non-smoked forms of nicotine for the
addicts. They might use nicotine safely forever, if harmless delivery
systems were widely available.
Instead, nicotine
abstinence is the policymakers' only approach to tobacco. Like other
abstinence campaigns (alcohol prohibition, sexual abstinence before
marriage, just saying "no" to drugs), this one is both
moralistic and ineffective.
The human cost of
the nicotine-abstinence policy is doleful. More than 430,000 U.S.
deaths each year -- one out of every five -- can be attributed to
smoking. This is 10 times our death rate from car crashes, 30 times
the rate from AIDS -- an unprecedented toll that is a testament
to the inadequacy of 40 years of quit-smoking policy.
The surgeon general
reported smoking to be a health hazard back in 1964, but the net
effect of smoking-cessation messages since then is that between
4 and 5 percent of smokers quit each year. Of the approximately
14 million Americans who try to quit smoking every year, only 2
million succeed. That failure leaves 45 million to 60 million American
smokers, more than one-fifth of American adults. Most of them smoke
regularly. Another million or so start smoking each year. In fact,
of all the Americans alive today who ever smoked regularly, half
are smoking now.
Obviously, nicotine
use is a popular and tenacious habit. Equally obviously, tobacco
policy is a failure. Surveys show that a majority of current smokers
would like good alternatives to smoking as ways of getting nicotine.
But we will not tell nicotine users that there are safe ways to
continue to use the legal drug they crave. Apparently, our policymakers
would rather see those people get sick and die.
Alternative nicotine
delivery could be easy. Nicotine replacement therapy could work
long-term. Gum and the patch are already available, but not to everyone.
Also, they are still approved only for short-term use and can deliver
only small doses -- inadequate for heavy users.
Smokeless tobacco
would work. It comes in several forms. One is chewing tobacco, made
famous by cowboys and ballplayers. But other forms are handier,
less messy and far less dangerous than smoking. Yet health officials
label smokeless tobacco as "not a safe alternative to smoking,"
despite much evidence that it is quite safe. Indeed, current policy
is so wedded to nicotine abstinence that officials will lie to discourage
widespread use of smokeless tobacco as a way of delivering the drug.
As Carl V. Phillips,
an epidemiologist at the University of Alberta, has shown, evidence
points to a low risk of health hazards stemming from smokeless-tobacco
use. That includes virtually no evidence of risk of oral cancer.
Phillips's calculations show that total mortality from "smokeless"
is about a hundredth of that from smoking.
And then there's
what many smokers nowadays really do: Mix periods of abstinence
(encouraged by smoke-free workplaces and restaurants) with periods
of light smoking. Mixing light or occasional smoking with other
nicotine-delivery products might be even safer -- but it can't be
studied as a possible alternative because current funding goes only
to research on how to quit smoking, not on finding a safe level
of smoking.
How shameful that
the United States is willing to allow almost a half-million Americans
to die each year, and that the World Health Organization is prepared
to allow up to 5 million annual deaths worldwide -- all because
of a delivery device -- cigarette smoke -- whose hazards are well
known and largely avoidable.
Where's the usually
progressive public-health establishment on this? We are generally
not given to telling people, "Stop doing what you are doing."
We prefer health promotion in the form of seat belts, motorcycle
helmets, condoms, syringe exchange, ingredient labels, and warning
labels, rather than forcing people to quit their habits. But with
tobacco we have jettisoned our tolerance and thrown all our support
to nicotine abstinence.
We cannot ignore
tobacco in its one deadly "disguise": cigarette smoke.
Neither should we ignore a deadly nicotine-abstinence crusade disguised
as tobacco control.
The writer, an epidemiologist,
is on the faculty of the School of Health Sciences of Hunter College
at the City University of New York. © 2006 The Washington Post
Company
http://www.washingtonpost.com/
-----------------------------------------------
Please
use your browser's back button to return to the previous page, or
go directly to the SmokeFreeSociety.org Home
Page |