Despite the country being in a state of recession, funding is still allocated both federally and locally for healthy lifestyle promotions. The largest amount of money goes to anti-smoking advertising and has for some time now. With tough economic times upon us, we’ve seen the amount of money given to anti-smoking campaigns dwindle but never go away entirely because, despite there being less money to spend on making people aware of the dangers of smoking, data has proven that this money is well spent.

Between 1998 and 2005 the national smoking rate has dropped by 13% and the youth smoking rate dropped by 40%. In recent years, we’ve seen those numbers level out a bit (the national rate is sitting around 20% and the youth rate has slowed it’s rate of decline to 21%) and many are suggesting that the slowing can be directly attributed to decreased funding; given that funding began taking cuts around the same time the rates declined by smaller percentages.

Both the CDC and FDA will continue to roll out new awareness campaigns detailing and educating about the dangers associated with smoking. Money may be tight but you can’t ignore the data. Anti-smoking campaigns actually work. According to the CDC, anti-smoking advertising’s message is educational but the real power of persuasion comes in its ability to demoralize smoking. That is to say, people are less compelled to quit because of the health facts and more by advertising’s ability to make smoking a socially unacceptable practice. Dirty looks and overly-theatrical coughs will make any smoker feel like a jerk; just try to light up at a crowded bus stop plastered with anti-smoking posters and see how other people react.

As if the data showing a positive return on advertising investment wasn’t enough for agencies to continue funding these campaigns, newer data is emerging showing that every dollar spent on anti-smoking advertising shows up as savings somewhere else: health care costs. Many states have noted that with an increase in spending on preventative tobacco campaigns, they have seen a direct correlation to a decrease in health care costs as they relate to smoking-related illnesses.

Anti-smoking campaigns work and the more we put into them, the more we get out.

It’s estimated that some 4.5 trillion cigarette butts are thrown on the ground or in bodies of water each year. For the record, there are 12 zeros in a trillion, that’s a whole lot of litter.

We know that butts can be harmful to many animals if they happen to ingest them but a new study out of San Diego State University suggests that not all animals have to consume the butts to be harmed by them. Fish could very well be the most helpless animal when it comes to cigarette butts.

According to the SDSU study, one cigarette butt with traces of tobacco left on it can turn a single liter of water yellowish brown and kill 50% of any fish living in it. If the butts are free of any lingering tobacco, 4 butts will have the same effect on a liter of water. When immersed in water, butts become deadly because they emit poisonous toxins such as nicotine, carcinogens, metals and benzene.

Unlike land animals that have to eat the butts to be harmed, fish just have to breath the poison in through their gills. The poisonous effects of butts harm both freshwater and saltwater fish equally. Food for thought: in beach cleanups, cigarette butts are the number one item people find in the sand. Bad day to be a fish.

Apple-flavored tobacco will no longer be available in the Big Apple. A federal district court judge upheld a city ban that prohibits the sale of all flavored tobacco products (except cigarettes), with the exception of menthol and mint-flavored products.

According to a recent article, the ban pertains to “any fruit, chocolate, vanilla, honey, candy, cocoa, dessert, alcoholic beverage, herb or spice” flavorings used in anything but cigarettes. The idea is to keep tobacco tasting like tobacco, a move that could directly damage the potential to attract new tobacco users. Among those potential new users that can be turned off by the lack of flavoring are minors – a group of customer that can’t legally buy tobacco products but (although big tobacco will never openly admit it) would be necessary to keep big tobacco earnings high in the future. Because let’s be honest here, who is candy-flavored tobacco really aiming to attract?

The move by NYC to enforce the flavoring ban also sets the stage for more cities to join in. While the FDA hasn’t enforced a ban on the production of flavored tobacco products, NYC’s move to create a citywide ban sets a precedent that allows other cities to do the same thing.

With smoking down, things are looking up in New York. According to a recent study smoking rates have dropped by a whopping 35% in New York and the state has reached an all-time low 14% smoking rate.

Mayor Bloomberg attributed the decrease preventative legislation that made smoking not only harder to do in public but considerably more expensive due to tax hikes. He also went on to give credit to an innumerable amount of New Yorkers who actively made the decision to quit for their own health – a clear sign that awareness campaigns do work.

While on overall 35% drop is outstanding, there are some particular stats that are more impressive. In certain neighborhoods (Central Harlem, Southern Staten Island, Flatbush and Canarsie in Brooklyn) the rate has dropped by over 50%.

The most promising statistic came from high school students. In 2001 New York high school students reported a 17.6% smoking rate but that rate has dropped by over half and now rests at 7.2%. The drop is significant because it shows a decrease in the number of new and potential life-long smokers, a group that big tobacco desperately needs to stay in business.

Slowly but surely, we’re cutting away at it.

For as long as the game dates back, baseball has had a love affair with tobacco. If it weren’t for tobacco, we wouldn’t have baseball cards today – they originally came packaged with chewing tobacco; one of the earliest ways to target kids. Heck, even the term “bullpen” was created in 1860 by the Bull Durham tobacco company as a way to link their product to the game.

Fast -forward over 100 years and we’re finally starting to see that the longstanding relationship isn’t what it once was.

MLB commissioner, Bud Selig, is in talks with the players’ union about the future of tobacco use in the game…or rather, the non-use of it in the future. While pro ball players are grown adults and have the right to decide whether or not to use, there are a couple overlying dilemmas when it comes to chewing tobacco (the most commonly used form of tobacco in the game).

First, the health issue: In a day and age when steroids are all the talk in sports, the health of athletes takes center stage but until recently, nobody raised too much of a stink about tobacco. The long-term effects of which can be deadly and if the MLB wants to ensure the health of it’s employees, tobacco use is glaring contradiction.

Second the role model issue: kids love, adore and idolize the players. If you’re a young kid seeing your hero take a dip during batting practice, what does that do to your impression of tobacco? These kids mimic the players’ swing, throw and body language…so why wouldn’t tobacco usage seem appealing too?

With the season coming to an end soon, this issue wont be resolved by The World Series but next season, with enough support, we could see public bans of tobacco usage on all major league fields.

In a never-ending attempt to make tobacco seem desirable and more importantly, cool, savvy big tobacco marketers are trying out a new idea that makes smoking not only cool but hands-on.

Jamaica has always been a country with prevalent smoking rates but now it will serve as a sort of test market to a new product: roll your own tobacco stores. U-Roll’em is a new type of smoke shop opened in Jamaica in which shoppers go in, choose their own tobacco (flavor, consistency, boldness, etc.) and make their own signature type of cigarette or cigar. The idea is to allow smokers to customize their habit to their tastes and, in the process, makes the act of buying tobacco a much more personal experience than going into a corner store and buying the same exact pack as everyone else. It’s pretty easy to see the appeal this sort of business would have to smokers.

These new, roll-your-own tobacco stores are owned and operated by an American couple living in Florida and although the business is currently exclusive to the Caribbean, this could hit much closer to home soon. The couple currently has plans to open U-Roll’em’s in 29 Caribbean countries and with enough success we could see something similar stateside in the not-too-distant future.

Making smoking more personal could be a dangerous reaction to the countless American laws that have continuously pushed the habit in the opposite direction for years. The roll-your-own stores have been doing well in the islands, how would they go over here?

“There are no safe tobacco products.” – Dr. Matt Carpenter, clinical psychologist & associate professor, Medical University of South Carolina.

Let’s just soak that in for a moment…

Maybe it’s due to increased awareness, the desire for improved health, recent legislation or maybe even just plain old fear but whatever the cause, cigarette sales are down. With smoking becoming an ever-increasing public taboo, big tobacco is struggling to make the same profits they once did when it was lawful and acceptable to light up anywhere. That doesn’t mean that they’re going to just give up though.

It was recently announced that Charlotte, NC will be one of 2 test cities for Camel Orbs, A dissolvable, mint-like, smokeless tobacco product that aims to keep people buying big tobacco goods while allowing folks to get their fix without having to go to designated, outdoor areas far from anyone else to do it. Should they new product test well, you will likely see it in abundance at a convenience store near you.

While dissolvable tobacco products, like orbs, don’t run the risk for lung cancer like cigarettes, they are susceptible to the same risks as chewing tobacco: oral cancers, gum disease and tooth loss. Like all tobacco products, they represent significant risks for pregnant women. Some tobacco users may be enticed by the convenience of the product and not necessarily scared off by the risks but should consider the nicotine content. On average, dissolvable products only contain 25% the nicotine of a cigarette. This means that achieving the same effect of one cigarette requires you to use 4 times as many dissolvable products – vastly increasing the user’s risk of the aforementioned oral cancers, gum disease and tooth loss.

According to Mary Gotaas, tobacco analyst for IBISworld.com, American sales of cigarettes drop 3 to 4 percent every year, but smokeless sales increase by 3% each year. With legislation making public smoking harder and harder, Gotaas expect smokeless sales to rise by as much as 7% this year.

Most smokeless tobacco buyers intend to use the products as quitting aids but studies have yet show any strong correlation between smokeless tobacco use and quitting. Doctors still urge smokers to use tested and proven medical methods to quit, such as nicotine replacement pills and patches.

Good luck Charlotte, stay strong.

Fighting tobacco usage is a non-stop battle. With something as pervasively addicting and easily accessible as tobacco (nicotine), achieving a reduction in usage requires us to never let our guards down. After years upon years of fighting, we’re finally starting to see some return on investment.

California recently announced that the state had reduced its smoking rate among adults to below 12% making it the second state to reach the federal goal of reducing smoking rates to 12% by 2020. Utah was the first.

The state of California predicts that the reduction will save 1 million lives and $86 billion in health care costs. The state directly credits the reduction to aggressive anti-smoking campaigning all over the state. Which proves that anti-tobacco campaigns are effective if people have enough exposure to them. Paired with increases in both tax and price, the impact is double effective: campaigns provide a reason why not, while price increases provide financial unease. California has also reaped the benefit of legislative progression, being one of the states with the most public smoking constraints.

Today 1 in 5 Americans still smoke and numbers are higher among men than women. With 48 states still working towards their 12% goal, California shows that there is hope. What’s more, studies in CA have proven that the most dramatic decrease in tobacco users happened among the 25 to 44 age group, suggesting that campaigns aimed toward young adults are most effective.

By 2013, every person who buys a pack of cigarettes will get a very real reminder of exactly what sort of risk they take every time they smoke. This is because the FDA just released images of the new warning labels that will be required on every pack of cigarettes within 2 years.

The FDA whittled down their list of 36 potential warnings to the final 9 and recently published photos of those warnings. Unlike previous, small, text-only warnings these new labels are required to take up at least 50% of the pack’s space, making the warning a completely unavoidable point of focus. The FDA believes this will help increase desire to quit but they also admit that desire and actual quitting can be two very different things. However, being that smoking is still the #1 most preventable cause of death in the world, the hope is that the new warning labels will take a step in the proper direction; elimination of smoking.

Although the new labels will undoubtedly incur some opposition from smoking lobbyists and (dare I say it) smoking fans, keep in mind that this is still a tame approach compared to other countries. In Australia, for example, plans are currently being made to strip cigarette packs of any and all branding entirely. Every brand would come in the same plain packaging with only the brand name printed on it alongside a large warning.

The new warnings are expected to increase the number of quitters but the FDA does admit that the most effective method of getting people to stop buying cigarettes is to raise prices even more – an approach that FDA is currently working on.

Lets ask ourselves a rhetorical question. Why don’t we head out to the garage, pop the hood on our car and siphon out a nice, cool cup of antifreeze to sip on a warm summer day?

There’s no shortage of information available to smokers regarding the harmful and potentially deadly chemicals contained in cigarettes. We can attribute the E-cigarette’s recent climb in popularity to that abundance of health information and wide spread awareness of risks but despite the fewer chemicals used in an E-cig, newer studies are finding that while E-cigs do contain fewer chemicals than a traditional cigarette, scientists aren’t using the word ‘safe’ to describe their use.

In a recent news report on KCTV5 in Kansas City, Dr. Michael Liston (a cardiologist at Saint Mary’s Medical Center) explained that E-cigs contain many chemicals that have yet to be fully studied and tested. As a result, it’s not known what effects these chemicals can have on the human body once consumed. Of the many, yet-to-be-studied chemicals, E-cigs contain ethylene glycol, which is a component of antifreeze. Going back to that rhetorical question at the beginning of this article, we don’t drink antifreeze because it would kill us and would do so pretty efficiently. So, how safe could it possibly be to inhale its components?

Dr. Liston went on to urge those attempting to quit smoking to stick with scientifically and medically tested and approved approaches. These include patches, gums and doctor-prescribed inhalers among others.

The thing potential quitters need to never lose sight of is the fact that smokeless alternatives are, on the whole, produced by the same big tobacco companies that got them hooked on harmful products in the first place. So, if health isn’t a motivation for tobacco companies, then what i$?