England to introduce plain packaging for cigarettes
Standardised plain packaging for cigarettes is to be introduced in England, following a comprehensive review of the evidence which found unbranded packs could cut the number of children starting to smoke.
Public health minister Jane Ellison told the House of Commons that she would introduce draft regulations swiftly “so it is crystal clear what is intended” although there will be a short consultation.
Sir Cyril Chantler, who was asked to look at the potential benefits, particularly to children, of plain packaging after the government postponed a decision last summer, made “a compelling case that if standardised packaging were introduced, it would be very likely to have a positive impact on public health,” Ellison said.
The government’s decision to delay last year provoked a political storm, because of revelations that a lobbying company owned by David Cameron’s election adviser, Lynton Crosby, had helped the tobacco industry fight the introduction of plain packaging in Australia.
The Chantler review found that standardised packaging which in Australia involves the entire packet being taken up by graphic health warnings is likely to contribute to a modest but important reduction in smoking, including a drop in the number of children who start.
“There is very strong evidence that exposure to tobacco advertising and promotion increases the likelihood of children taking up smoking,” says the report.
“Industry documents show that tobacco packaging has for decades been designed, in the light of market research, with regard to what appeals to target groups. Branded cigarettes are ‘badge’ products, frequently on display, which therefore act as a ‘silent salesman’.
“Tobacco packages appear to be especially important as a means of communicating brand imagery in countries like Australia and the UK which have comprehensive bans on advertising and promotion. It is notable that Japan Tobacco International responded to the decision to introduce tobacco plain packaging in Australia by attempting to sue the Australian government for taking possession of its mobile ‘billboard’.”
Chantler, who was once himself a smoker and found it hard to quit, said that “given the suffering that smoking causes, and the fact that most people start when they are children, even a small effect is very important”.
More than 600 children aged 11 to 15 start to smoke every day more than 200,000 a year. If that number could be cut even by 2%, said the review, 4,000 fewer would take up the habit.
“It is now for government to make its decision on whether or not to go ahead,” said Chantler. “I recognise that there is a democratic process to go through, but for my own view I hope they do introduce it, and I hope they do it quickly.”
The chief medical officer, Dame Sally Davies, supported plans to introduce plain packs within England’s devolved health administration. “This review only reinforces my beliefs of the public health gains to be achieved from standardised packaging,” she said.
Public health campaigners were delighted by the findings . “The Chantler review has backed a significant step towards a healthier future for the UK’s children,” said Harpal Kumar, Cancer Research UK’s chief executive. “We’re very pleased the government will now move forward and lay out draft regulations on standardised packs. This should happen as quickly as possible.
“Every day hundreds of children are lured into smoking an addiction that kills and causes at least 14 different types of cancer. Children find the brightly coloured and slick designs of today’s packs appealing.”
Professor John Wass, academic vice president of the Royal College of Physicians, said it was delighted by the news, although he added “It is disappointing that we will have to wait for the results of yet another consultation, but we hope this will be swift and not impede the introduction of regulations in this parliament. We are one step further towards a tobacco free UK.”
The tobacco industry contested the Chantler report’s findings. Daniel Torras, managing director of Japan Tobacco International UK, said “Nothing has changed since last summer when the prime minister said ‘There isn’t yet sufficient evidence for it and there is considerable legal uncertainty about it.’ The Chantler report explicitly references the ‘limitations’ of the evidence presented by a small group of tobacco control lobbyists.”
“light” cigarettes and cancer risk – national cancer institute
-
What is a so called light cigarette?
Tobacco manufacturers have been redesigning cigarettes since the 1950s. Certain redesigned cigarettes with the following features were marketed as light cigarettes
- Cellulose acetate filters (to trap tar).
- Highly porous cigarette paper (to allow toxic chemicals to escape).
- Ventilation holes in the filter tip (to dilute smoke with air).
- Different blends of tobacco.
When analyzed by a smoking machine, the smoke from a so called light cigarette has a lower yield of tar than the smoke from a regular cigarette. However, a machine cannot predict how much tar a smoker inhales. Also, studies have shown that changes in cigarette design have not lowered the risk of disease caused by cigarettes (1).
On June 22, 2009, President Barack Obama signed into law the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, which granted the U.S. Food and Drug Administration the authority to regulate tobacco products. One provision of the new law bans tobacco manufacturers from using the terms light, low, and mild in product labeling and advertisements. This provision went into effect on June 22, 2010. However, some tobacco manufacturers are using color coded packaging (such as gold or silver packaging) on previously marketed products and selling them to consumers who may continue to believe that these cigarettes are not as harmful as other cigarettes (2 4).
-
Are light cigarettes less hazardous than regular cigarettes?
No. Many smokers chose so called low tar, mild, light, or ultralight cigarettes because they thought these cigarettes would expose them to less tar and would be less harmful to their health than regular or full flavor cigarettes. However, light cigarettes are no safer than regular cigarettes. Tar exposure from a light cigarette can be just as high as that from a regular cigarette if the smoker takes long, deep, or frequent puffs. The bottom line is that light cigarettes do not reduce the health risks of smoking.
Moreover, there is no such thing as a safe cigarette. The only guaranteed way to reduce the risk to your health, as well as the risk to others, is to stop smoking completely.
Because all tobacco products are harmful and cause cancer, the use of these products is strongly discouraged. There is no safe level of tobacco use. People who use any type of tobacco product should quit. For help with quitting, refer to the National Cancer Institute (NCI) fact sheet Where To Get Help When You Decide To Quit Smoking, which is available at on the Internet.
-
Do light cigarettes cause cancer?
Yes. People who smoke any kind of cigarette are at much greater risk of lung cancer than people who do not smoke (5). Smoking harms nearly every organ of the body and diminishes a person s overall health.
People who switched to light cigarettes from regular cigarettes are likely to have inhaled the same amount of toxic chemicals, and they remain at high risk of developing smoking related cancers and other disease (1). Smoking causes cancers of the lung, esophagus, larynx (voice box), mouth, throat, kidney, bladder, pancreas, stomach, and cervix, as well as acute myeloid leukemia (6).
Regardless of their age, smokers can substantially reduce their risk of disease, including cancer, by quitting.
-
What were the tar yield ratings used by the tobacco industry for light cigarettes?
Although no Federal agency formally defined the range of tar yield for light or ultralight cigarettes, the tobacco industry used the ranges shown in the table below (5, 7).
Industry Terms on PackagesMachine measured Tar Yield (in milligrams)Ultralight or Ultralow tarUsually 7 or lessLight or Low tarUsually 8 14Full flavor or RegularUsually 15 or more
These ratings were not an accurate indicator of how much tar a smoker might have been exposed to, because people do not smoke cigarettes the same way the machines do and no two people smoke the same way.
Ultralight and light cigarettes are no safer than full flavor cigarettes. There is no such thing as a safe cigarette (1).
-
Are machine measured tar yields misleading?
Yes. The ratings cannot be used to predict how much tar a smoker will actually get because the way the machine smokes a cigarette is not the way a person smokes a cigarette. A rating of 7 milligrams does not mean that you will get only 7 milligrams of tar. You can get just as much tar from a light cigarette as from a full flavor cigarette. It all depends on how you smoke. Taking deeper, longer, and more frequent puffs will lead to greater tar exposure. Also, a smoker s lips or fingers may block the air ventilation holes in the filter, leading to greater tar exposure (7).
-
Why would someone smoking a light cigarette take bigger puffs than with a regular cigarette?
Cigarette features that reduce the yield of machine measured tar also reduce the yield of nicotine. Because smokers crave nicotine, they may inhale more deeply take larger, more rapid, or more frequent puffs or smoke extra cigarettes each day to get enough nicotine to satisfy their craving. As a result, smokers end up inhaling more tar, nicotine, and other harmful chemicals than the machine based numbers suggest (1).
Tobacco industry documents show that companies were aware that smokers of light cigarettes compensated by taking bigger puffs. Industry documents also show that the companies were aware of the difference between machine measured yields of tar and nicotine and what the smoker actually inhaled (8).
-
How can I get help to quit smoking?
There are many groups that can help smokers quit
- Go online to ( ), a Web site created by NCI s Tobacco Control Research Branch, and use the Step by Step Quit Guide.
- Call NCI s Smoking Quitline at 1 877 44U QUIT (1 877 448 7848) for individualized counseling, printed information, and referrals to other sources.
- Refer to the NCI fact sheet Where To Get Help When You Decide To Quit Smoking, which is available at on the Internet.