Daily Archives: May 8, 2009

Number of Cigarettes Smoked per Day

Multiple studies presented in Tables 3-2 and 3-3 observed reductions in number of cigarettes smoked per day that persisted for 12-18 months following implementation of a change in smoking policy. One study found a decline after 6 months, with a return to prior levels of consumption after 18 months. Emont demonstrated a nonsignificant, but suggestive, relationship between level of smoking restriction from state clean-indoor-air laws and number of cigarettes smoked per day using data from the 1989 CPS.


Brownson recently reviewed much of the existing evidence on policies to reduce ETS exposure, and this chapter will update that evidence and add analyses conducted using data from the Current Population Surveys (CPS) and the California Tobacco Surveys (CTS).
Changes in workplace smoking rules are often highly visible and are sometimes among the most contested shifts in workplace norms. Employers commonly make substantial efforts to inform and involve their workers as part of the introduction of these changes, and cessation assistance is frequently made available to smoking workers at the time that the changes in workplace rules are implemented. When the smoking behaviors of workers are followed before and after the implementation of workplace restrictions, many, but not all, studies have demonstrated a fall in smoking prevalence and increased cessation rates. Many of the workplaces examined have been in health care settings, but similar observations are evident in other settings as well. These experiences would suggest that the implementation of smoking restrictions in the workplace can trigger smoking cessation attempts among the smokers who work there, particularly if cessation assistance is a prominent part of the implementation process.
A similar picture emerges for changes in the number of cigarettes smoked per day following the implementation of restrictions on smoking in the workplace. Modest declines in the number of cigarettes smoked per day are evident following implementation of workplace smoking restrictions in most of the locations where it has been examined.

Restrictions on Smoking in the Workplace

One of the most dramatic social changes over the past 30 years has been the change in attitudes about public smoking and the resultant governmental restrictions on where smoking is allowed. Beginning in 1970, with then Surgeon General Jesse Steinfeld’s warning that environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) exposure was likely to cause problems for nonsmokers, concern about ETS exposure led to 25 years of scientific inquiry. This inquiry culminated in a series of comprehensive reviews concluding that ETS exposure is a cause of cancer, heart disease, respiratory illness, and a host of other problems.
Early reaction to this evidence included efforts to provide separate sections for smokers and nonsmokers in restaurants and workplaces (NCI, 1993). But with accumulating evidence that ETS exposure was a cause of cancer and other serious diseases, complete bans on smoking in workplaces and public places became more common. In 1986, only 3 percent of workers nationally reported working in a smoke-free workplace.
By the 1992/93 Current Population Survey (CPS), the fraction of indoor workers reporting a smoke-free workplace had risen to 46.7 percent. Table 3-1 presents data from the 1995/96 CPS and demonstrates that the fraction of workers covered by a 100 percent smoking ban in the workplace has risen to 64.3 percent, including more than half (54.1 percent) of all current smokers.
Males and those who were between ages 18 and 24 were less likely to work in a smoke-free workplace, as were Hispanic and Native American indoor workers. The likelihood of working in a smoke-free environment increases dramatically with increasing level of education and family income. The fraction of workers who work in a smoke-free workplace varies across states, from a high of 84 percent in Utah and Maryland to a low of 40 percent in Nevada, but only three states (Nevada, Arkansas, and Kentucky) have less than 50 percent of their employees working in smokefree areas.
The increasing proportion of indoor workers who are employed in smoke-free workplaces has a direct health benefit for nonsmokers due to
the decreased exposure to ETS. However, restrictions on where smokers can smoke may also influence the behavior of smokers outside of the workplace.

Altria Group: Value Play or Value Trap?

In these market conditions, consistent, reliable high-yields are fantastic. It’s also great when that company has monopolistic characteristics and is valued cheaply. A stock that fits these traits is none other than Altria Group (MO).

More apartments are snuffing out smoking

Robbie Zanko hasn’t smelled any of her own cigarettes since she opened her closet 28 years ago and was overpowered by the smell on her clothes.

Smoking ban bill being blocked from Senate vote

Lance Armstrong is half a world away racing in Italy in his comeback to professional cycling.

Red Sox announcer Remy takes leave of absence

Red Sox announcer Jerry Remy is taking an indefinite leave of absence after having setbacks following cancer surgery.

Tobacco pictorial warnings on tobacco product packages

The Supreme Court on Wednesday cleared the display of pictorial warnings on all tobacco product packages, to be implemented with effect from May 31, 2009.