The drop in smoking rates is not to blame for the alarming obesity rates in the U.S., according to a study from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Smoking cigarettes is the number one cause of preventable death and therefore there have been many anti-smoking campaigns aimed at getting people to quit. Smoking is also associated with lower weight or weight loss, whereas quitting smoking is associated with higher weight or weight gain. The anti-smoking campaigns have resulted in a significant decline in smoking rates, but that is not the cause of higher obesity rates, according to the data collected by the CDC.
Harm Reduction
An August 29, 2007 piece by Jack Hunter cites ACSH's Dr. Whelan among critics of Surgeon General Carmona and others who exaggerate the benefits of smoking bans, deadly though smoking is:
Reason magazine editor Jacob Sullum writes, "Carmona is so intent on promoting smoking bans that he absurdly exaggerates the hazards of secondhand smoke. (Carmona's) insistence that there is 'no risk-free level' is an article of faith, not a scientific statement."
As they consider the new bill that would give the FDA the power to regulate cigarettes, Congress needs to take into account new information on nicotine dependence. According to a recent study published in the July edition of The Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, nicotine dependence can occur in young cigarette smokers long before they begin to smoke daily.
The study examined 1,246 sixth-grade students at public schools in Massachusetts over a four-year period. Of those students, 217 reported inhaling cigarette smoke, with an average age of 12.8 years at first inhalation. They became the focus of the study because inhalation is necessary to deliver the nicotine that causes dependence.
A July 19, 2007 piece on ScienceBlogs.com by the blogger Orac criticized attacks on the Helena, MT study that implausibly claimed smoking bans cause immediate heart attack reductions. As it noted, we had a lot to do with the wave of criticism:
Some of these rants linked to an article published on the ACSH website by Michael J. McFadden and David W. Kuneman a week ago...
A July 18, 2007 piece notes a skeptical HealthFactsAndFears.com piece about the benefits of smoking bans and, while downplaying ACSH's constant warnings about the dangers of smoking, also says:
The ACSH has been willing to take a controversial position on the ETS issue in the past, hotly contesting Mayor Bloomberg's claim of New York's ban saving thousands of lives. ACSH president Dr. Elizabeth Whelan has stated, "Our best estimate of the number of deaths prevented is somewhere between zero and a hypothetical ten to fifteen. There is no evidence that any New Yorker -- patron or employee -- has ever died as a result of exposure to smoke in a bar or restaurant."
This piece originally appeared on June 20, 2007 on HuffingtonPost.com:
The Vatican's "Ten Commandments" for drivers is pretty unusual. And while it will no doubt be fodder for late-night TV, it has some good messages about road rage and being careful. The commandments, predictably enough, also warn that a car can be an "occasion of sin," and I don't think they are referring to rolling through stop signs. But for the most part, the directive is meant to encourage safer driving. For instance, drinking and driving is a no-no. And road rage is sinful. This is good. Perhaps even progressive.
A Lancet article by Carol E. Gartner et al published online on May 10, 2007 cited the ACSH study "Tobacco Harm Reduction," which in turn appeared in Harm Reduction Journal (2006;3:37) and was the basis of ACSH's booklet on smokeless tobacco as harm reduction. The Lancet article concludes:
Many smokers are unable to quit smoking through complete nicotine and tobacco abstinence, and conventional quit-smoking programs generally present smokers with two unpleasant alternatives: quit or die.
New York, NY -- May 1, 2007. The public health establishment has misled smokers about the benefits and risks of using smokeless tobacco as a method of quitting cigarettes. That's one conclusion of a new pamphlet, What's the Story? Smokeless Tobacco as Harm Reduction for Smokers, created by physicians and scientists associated with the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH).
A March 13, 2007 piece, explaining why tobacco stocks appear to be benefiting from impending FDA regulation of cigarettes, quotes ACSH's Dr. Gilbert Ross on the status quo-enhancing tendencies of regulation, especially the sort that limits new advertising:
Let's explain what's going on here. First, the Kennedy bill (co-sponsored by Texas Republican John Cornyn) specifically prohibits the FDA from banning tobacco products, so some in the industry feel this gives the Marlboro Man and the Camel brand a new lease on life.
No scientists are immune from accusations that they are too close to industry these days, not even recently-deceased ACSH Advisor Sir Richard Doll, despite his pioneering work demonstrating the terrible cancer toll of cigarettes. Luckily, other eminent scientists sprang to his defense in letters to the London Times printed December 9, 2006:
From Professor Colin Blakemore et al