Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Adult tobacco use levels after intensive tobacco control measures: new york city, 2002-2003.
Pubmed ^ | June 2005 | Thomas R. Frieden, Farzad Mostashari, Bonnie D. Kerker, Nancy Miller, and Anjum Hajat

Posted on 06/02/2005 4:08:59 PM PDT by qam1

New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, 125 Worth St, Room 331, CN #28, New York, NY 10013. tfrieden@health.nyc.gov.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine the impact of comprehensive tobacco control measures in New York City.

METHODS: In 2002, New York City implemented a tobacco control strategy of (1) increased cigarette excise taxes; (2) legal action that made virtually all work-places, including bars and restaurants, smoke free; (3) increased cessation services, including a large-scale free nicotine-patch program; (4) education; and (5) evaluation. The health department also began annual surveys on a broad array of health measures, including smoking.

RESULTS: From 2002 to 2003, smoking prevalence among New York City adults decreased by 11% (from 21.6% to 19.2%, approximately 140000 fewer smokers). Smoking declined among all age groups, race/ethnicities, and education levels; in both genders; among both US-born and foreign-born persons; and in all 5 boroughs. Increased taxation appeared to account for the largest proportion of the decrease; however, between 2002 and 2003 the proportion of cigarettes purchased outside New York City doubled, reducing the effective price increase by a third.

CONCLUSIONS: Concerted local action can sharply reduce smoking prevalence. However, further progress will require national action, particularly to increase cigarette taxes, reduce cigarette tax evasion, expand education and cessation services, and limit tobacco marketing.

PMID: 15914827 [PubMed - in process]


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; US: New York
KEYWORDS: addiction; antismokinggnatzies; chimneypeople; filthyhabit; nannystate; newyorkcity; pufflist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-36 next last

1 posted on 06/02/2005 4:09:06 PM PDT by qam1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SheLion; Gabz; neverdem

FYI


2 posted on 06/02/2005 4:11:40 PM PDT by qam1 (There's been a huge party. All plates and the bottles are empty, all that's left is the bill to pay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: qam1
From 2002 to 2003, smoking prevalence among New York City adults decreased by 11% (approximately 140000 fewer smokers)...

... however, between 2002 and 2003 the proportion of cigarettes purchased outside New York City doubled...

... further progress will require national action, particularly to increase cigarette taxes, reduce cigarette tax evasion, expand education and cessation services, and limit tobacco marketing.

Bring it on, toots.

3 posted on 06/02/2005 4:24:21 PM PDT by DumpsterDiver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: qam1; Just another Joe; Madame Dufarge; MeeknMing; steve50; KS Flyover; Cantiloper; metesky; ...
RESULTS: From 2002 to 2003, smoking prevalence among New York City adults decreased by 11% (from 21.6% to 19.2%, approximately 140000 fewer smokers).

This is a crock!

I KNEW that when states raised the cigarette taxes so high, we would go elsewhere for them, therefore, the coffers aren't being filled in the city's and states like before.

Smokers haven't quit!!!!!  We just learned how to get cheaper smokes.

Fork all of the lawmakers idiots and their damn statistics!

4 posted on 06/02/2005 4:29:12 PM PDT by SheLion (God Bless Our Vets and Our Military. We thank them for their service!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SheLion
Thanks for the ping, She.

...further progress will require national action, particularly to increase cigarette taxes, reduce cigarette tax evasion, expand education and cessation services, and limit tobacco marketing.

Reading stuff like that gives me the creeps!

5 posted on 06/02/2005 4:32:31 PM PDT by exnavychick (There's too much youth; how about a fountain of smart?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: exnavychick
Reading stuff like that gives me the creeps!

Well, they WISH!

They sure are a vile bunch, aren't they?

6 posted on 06/02/2005 4:36:21 PM PDT by SheLion (God Bless Our Vets and Our Military. We thank them for their service!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: qam1; cyborg; Clemenza; Cacique; NYCVirago; The Mayor; Darksheare; hellinahandcart; Chode; ...
From 2002 to 2003, smoking prevalence among New York City adults decreased by 11% (from 21.6% to 19.2%, approximately 140000 fewer smokers).

Anti-smoking Nazis lie. Either those folks, who are supposed to have quit, moved or lied. FReepmail me if you want on or off my New York ping list.

7 posted on 06/02/2005 4:36:59 PM PDT by neverdem (May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SheLion

Vile, and not a little scary, too.

Just the tone of the whole thing was so smug and self-righteous!


8 posted on 06/02/2005 4:37:46 PM PDT by exnavychick (There's too much youth; how about a fountain of smart?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SheLion
Smokers haven't quit!!!!! We just learned how to get cheaper smokes. Fork all of the lawmakers idiots and their damn statistics!

I would be interested just how they come up with these bogus stats. Did a 140,000 ex-smokers write or flood to their offices to report that they were "good little soldiers" and are now free of the vile, disgusting habit of smoking cigarettes? What a crock.

9 posted on 06/02/2005 4:47:30 PM PDT by Just A Nobody (I - L O V E - my attitude problem!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: neverdem; Clemenza; rmlew; PARodrig; firebrand; nutmeg; hellinahandcart
I happen to be one of those persons who quit smoking in 2002. Basically for two reasons, none having to do with the smoking ban by the city. The first was a health scare when I got a lung infection. The second reason was my 50th birthday was coming up and I figured I'd give myself a present by actually quiting. If other people want to continue smoking it matters not a whit to me.



10 posted on 06/02/2005 4:53:28 PM PDT by Cacique (quos Deus vult perdere, prius dementat ( Islamia Delenda Est ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: DumpsterDiver
Heh, lock and load...Damn Northern liberals..
11 posted on 06/02/2005 4:56:14 PM PDT by Caipirabob (Democrats.. Socialists..Commies..Traitors...Who can tell the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Cacique
If other people want to continue smoking it matters not a whit to me.

Nor me. But I have a feeling they'd be happier if they could get a whole lot of other people to take up the habit.

12 posted on 06/02/2005 5:06:58 PM PDT by Mr Ramsbotham (Laws against sodomy are honored in the breech.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Mr Ramsbotham

I do not smoke but follow the belief that smoking is far less harmful than loading up on Prozac and Zoloft for anxiety etc. Lighting up to relax may be harmful but never was connected to shooting several co workers and fellow students. Let them smoke honey.


13 posted on 06/02/2005 5:25:27 PM PDT by oldironsides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: oldironsides
Let them smoke honey.

I smoked a whole chicken the other day, but I've never smoked honey. Sounds intriguing!

14 posted on 06/02/2005 5:39:44 PM PDT by Mr Ramsbotham (Laws against sodomy are honored in the breech.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Cacique
I happen to be one of those persons who quit smoking in 2002. Basically for two reasons, none having to do with the smoking ban by the city. The first was a health scare when I got a lung infection. The second reason was my 50th birthday was coming up and I figured I'd give myself a present by actually quiting. If other people want to continue smoking it matters not a whit to me.

Hey, good for you, Cacique. I've never been a smoker, but I know it takes a great deal of discipline to be able to quit.

15 posted on 06/02/2005 7:22:22 PM PDT by nutmeg ("We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." - Hillary Clinton 6/28/04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Caipirabob
The politicians are really stressing out over losing their God-given right to tobacco taxes. They're striking from all angles.

Post Office Sidesteps Fray on Illicit Sales of Cigarettes
May 29, 2005

Last month the National Association of Attorneys General asked the Postal Service to "adopt a firm policy prohibiting transportation of packages that the carrier knows or reasonably should know contains cigarettes sold illegally on the Internet."

"Tobacco is a legal, mailable product," Mary Anne Gibbons, the Postal Service's general counsel, wrote last month in a response to the association of attorneys general.

They [postal officials] note that Priority Mail, which officials say is most frequently used to ship cigarettes, cannot be inspected without a search warrant or the consent of either the sender or the recipient.

Congress has considered legislation that would ban the mailing of cigarettes.

SNIP

McHugh Introducing Legislation To
Stop Mail Delivery Of Tobacco Products

June 2, 2005

Representative John McHugh [R-NY] is introducing legislation in the House next week to prevent tobacco products from being delivered via the U.S. Postal Service.

The legislation will amend Title 39 of the U.S. Postal Code, making cigarettes and other smokeless tobacco products restricted, non-mailable matter.

The bill (H.R. 22) is expected to come before the House for a vote in early summer.

END OF ARTICLE

Michigan Smokes Out Cigarette Tax Dodgers
May 25, 2005

Two Web sites, eSmokes.com and DirtCheapCig.com, gave up the names of 11,579 Michigan residents who bought 581,808 cartons, costing the state $8.5 million in taxes. A third site has started identifying customers, and the state subpoenaed United Parcel Service to get information about shipments from some of the 10 companies that haven't responded.

Major credit card companies began declining transactions from Web-based tobacco vendors earlier this year, and some delivery services, including FedEx, have stopped accepting tobacco shipments to homes.

Several Web sites, including esmokes.com, now refuse orders to Michigan and 16 other states. Other sites, including two that Virginia prosecuted for cheating 46 states out of $2 million in taxes, are no longer operational.

Even some cigarette manufacturers oppose online sales. Philip Morris USA, whose brands include Marlboro, Virginia Slims, Parliament and Basic, has sued several sites and supported legislation to make sure vendors follow all laws. "We haven't found any Internet site out there that pays appropriate taxes and does proper age verification," said Philip Morris spokesman Dana Bolden.

SNIP

16 posted on 06/02/2005 8:00:52 PM PDT by DumpsterDiver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: SheLion
Smokers haven't quit!!!!! We just learned how to get cheaper smokes.

I have not purchased any cigarettes or paid State taxes since 1998. However, I smoke three packs a day and have done, so for over 30 years now.

Personally, the more the government tries to restrict the legal purchase of cigarettes, the more money I make on the black market.

I love this government!

17 posted on 06/02/2005 8:08:00 PM PDT by Hunble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SheLion

Of course it's a crock!

God,what fools they are.


18 posted on 06/02/2005 8:36:56 PM PDT by Mears (Keep the government out of my face!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: exnavychick; SheLion

Sounds like something from The Communist Manifesto,doesn't it?


19 posted on 06/02/2005 8:38:26 PM PDT by Mears (Keep the government out of my face!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Hunble

Good for you. I guess I have a new hero,Hunble!

I was watching a thing about moonshiners last night on the History Channel.

With the repeal of prohibition the government jacked up the taxes on liquor. Needless to say,the moonshiners made some BIG money.




20 posted on 06/02/2005 8:46:27 PM PDT by Mears (Keep the government out of my face!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-36 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson