smoking rates and harm reduction

[andygee]

I saw something in the New York Times recently (might have been today, my memory is shot!) that showed changes in smoking rates around the world. Although the article did not mention e-cigs, I noticed that that the rates in harm-reduction countries (Engand, New Zeland) are 25%, almost twice the rate of prohibition countries like the U.S.

 

[SimpleSins]

I saw something in the New York Times recently (might have been today, my memory is shot!) that showed changes in smoking rates around the world. Although the article did not mention e-cigs, I noticed that that the rates in harm-reduction countries (Engand, New Zeland) are 25%, almost twice the rate of prohibition countries like the U.S.

Yes, it was the NY Times. US smoking rates were down 13%, British down 22%, and New Zealand down 25%. And if I'm following the little arrows correctly, it looks like Norway's smoking rate has gone up considerable despite a complete ban on cigarette advertising.

The only reason I could think of for the greater decrease in some of the other countries is that they are just recently joining the anti-smoking bandwagon. I think for a long time in a lot of Europe smoking was very much a cultural thing and I don't think there was quite as much interference in personal liberties as is allowed here. I also believe the no-smoking in pubs is a new thing, too, which probably further contributed to it.

Here was the map which showed the various rate decreases.

Business Day > Image >

 

[andygee]

Thanks for posting the link -- actually reading the map (as opposed to glancing at it under bagle crumbs and juice splatters) shows that it is meaningless -- these are not real numbers but projections from 2002.
Note to Self: find real smoking cessation statistics by country and run it against the list of national bans and restrictions.

 

[KissMint]

Hmm so what did the article say? Seems like there's no correlation between full ban, some ban to +- in smoking.

 

[FreakyStylie]

Hmm so what did the article say? Seems like there's no correlation between full ban, some ban to +- in smoking.

Like andygee said, the numbers are only projections. About as good as imagining you have toilet paper in your hand when it's needed.

 

[SimpleSins]

The article was about an upcoming global conference of 171 countries to create a worldwide antismoking initiative and tobacco's less than thrilled response.

It basically seems that everybody has the small and/or developing countries by the short hairs playing tug-o-war. tobacco is suing them for lost profits and WHO et al is threatening to take away funding. So little places are stuck between a rock and a hard place. If everyone would just worry about running their own countries instead of micromanaging everyone else's, there would probably be a lot less resentment of the bigger ones.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/14/business/global/14smoke.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=a2

 

[rolygate]

Last I heard, smokers accounted for around 18 to 20% of the population in the US and UK, but maybe there are more recent figures.