Dec 02, 2008 - 08:59:03 CST
I was happy to see the Nov. 21 Tribune editorial "Smoking a Nasty Cycle." I am writing to add some comments about Measure No. 3, and to clarify one expectation of the new program.North Dakotans voted to approve Measure No. 3 to fund tobacco control programs to CDC-recommended levels. The initiative includes establishing a committee dedicated to developing a plan to implement comprehensive, evidence-based tobacco control programming that meets the recommendations from the CDC Best Practice Guidelines.
The article correctly provided an overview of the problem in North Dakota: Each year, 700 youth initiate tobacco use, and 900 die in North Dakota from tobacco-related causes. In addition, health care costs associated with tobacco use impact the state to the tune of $247 million per year.
My only concern is that the article created the expectation that, within less than a year of launching the program in North Dakota, "the numbers of high school-aged smokers will have declined significantly." Yes, we can and will look for a decrease in high-school-age smokers, but it won't happen that quickly.
It is important to realize that it will take more than a few months of concentrated effort to "undo" the complicated network of tobacco-accepting social norms that the tobacco companies have spent 90 years or more to create. Also, since this is a brand-new initiative, it is possible the advisory committee's implementation of programs may just be getting started by the end of 2009.
What can you look for in the state of North Dakota? First, look for increased availability of free cessation medications and cessation programs. Look for increasing awareness that smoking is not the cool, sexy thing the tobacco companies make it out to be. Then, look for increased quit rates among all North Dakotans and fewer young people taking up the habit.
You can positively count on better health in North Dakota as a result of comprehensive tobacco control programming. States that have implemented programs based on CDC's best practices have seen just that.
The article ended with this statement, "It's another hard road ahead, but one worth taking." I couldn't agree more, because the new program will deliver tremendous benefits to the state. It will reduce tobacco use. That means it will reduce the deaths, heart diseases, cancers, and other lung diseases caused by tobacco use.
We will need to give it time.

Honest Omar wrote on Dec 9, 2008 11:26 AM:
My morning starts with 10-15 miles on my stationary bicycle, or outdoor bicycle (in season, of course). Then a day filled with NORMAL retiree activities; shopping, lunch at Walrus, etc.
What is the only OTHER difference between us? He had a 50 year love affair with the Marlboro Man; I did not. I have had a 50 year hate affair with the stinky things, which leads me to my next point.
When the recent smoking bans for restaurant/bars were being considered, the papers were filled with howls from proprietors who were certain that such a ban would put them out of business. One of the most outspoken and fearful opponents is the owner of one of our favorite watering holes in downtown Bis. Go there almost any weeknight, and for sure on weekends, and good luck finding a place to sit. And best of all, you don't have to go home and hang your clothes in the garage because you smell like you have been in a forest fire. So much for economic ruin!!!
Smoking is good for us, as long as you do it in YOUR childless home or car.
See you at 5th and Main. "
Barb wrote on Dec 8, 2008 5:48 PM:
Economic Conservative wrote on Dec 5, 2008 2:59 PM:
ljfrommin wrote on Dec 5, 2008 2:13 PM:
jim wrote on Dec 5, 2008 12:30 AM:
lxooks like a few folks apprecite it. what i wrote is reality and the truth, i really don't care what you call it. by the way, what are you going to say to the famalies of the 900 that will die next year? don't tell me about addiction, been there done that. a few years back the heartview foundation offered addiction treatment for tobacco. they don't offer it now, do they. i wonder why? "
Cynical Independent wrote on Dec 3, 2008 9:39 PM:
Law wrote on Dec 3, 2008 4:25 PM:
http://www.nd.gov/tax/genpubs/2006-redbook.pdf "
ljfrommin wrote on Dec 3, 2008 12:26 PM:
http://www.gasdetection.com/news2/health_news_digest6.html "
yodal wrote on Dec 3, 2008 11:50 AM:
concerned wrote on Dec 3, 2008 11:08 AM:
Matt wrote on Dec 2, 2008 9:45 PM:
harleyrider wrote on Dec 2, 2008 5:45 PM:
After OSHA came out with this policy ASH one of the biggest anti-smoking lobby's filed suit against OSHA. They will not tell you this but they dropped the suit because the courts will not touch a case unless the risk ratios are higher then 2 which the vast majority of the studies don't even come close. Here are their words not mine;
"Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) has agreed to dismiss its law suit against the Occupational Safety and Health Administration [OSHA] to avoid serious harm to the nonsmokers' rights movement from an adverse action OSHA had threatened to take if forced by the law suit to do so." "
harleyrider1978 wrote on Dec 2, 2008 5:45 PM:
Big pharma is behind the bans with robert wood johnson foundation who hired out the american cancer society and the american lung association to do the honors of shaking down the legislators.
What does big pharma and smokefree kids get from the state besides your rights........the states set up a 200-300 million dollar program for cessation drugs which profit big pharma.....smokefree kids gets a percentage of the cig tax to fund their propaganda dept....the state health dept gets its own police force and police powers..........all for a lie..yes a lie.
Second hand smoke is the moral crusaders sword in this round of prohibition.But guess what...OSHA
SAYS SECOND HAND SMOKE HARMS NO ONE.....YOU GET THAT..THE whole shs scam is made up science to take away your rights in a public place and to take away the property/business owners rights.....
this has been happeneing everywhere bans have been implemented.........the worse is that next year ACS and ALA will be back with smoke free kids to get more taxes and to do away with any excemptions you got this TIME AROUND....They will try and get smoking in cars with kids outlawed and you the parent made to be an unfit parent if you get busted for it..........heres some more of how the anti-smoking lobby operates....... "
GetReal wrote on Dec 2, 2008 2:23 PM:
So what are you buying your children for Christmas? If you have young children you are buying them something they have seen on cartoons.
You could at least require a school class in how Hollywood and Advertisers hire psychologists to use convincing advertisements making their ideas or products desirable. Lessons learned are part of getting a college degree in advertising.
The advertising on Television will also convince the children to drink sugared up soda pops with small amounts of poisons (preservatives) and use make-up with questionable chemicals.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz:80/health/news/article.cfm?c_id=204&objectid=10545854
Have a nice day, enjoy the latest movie or comedy special. Ginger Bread House stories have been around a long time (crazy old lady trying to put kids in an oven). Global Warming is going to cook them anyway. If not nuclear war or bacteriological war will change their way of life back to living in the stone age. But before that happens housewives will buy chinese products at wally-world until there are no jobs left in this country. "
Razors Edge wrote on Dec 2, 2008 1:13 PM:
Also, weren't we number 1 for something to do with alcohol? What was that? Oh ya "North Dakota ranks as the worst state in the nation when it comes to drunken driving." We are attacking smoking in bars, but are forgetting what people do in the bars. They drink then drive home! But let's not look at that. Smoking kills people. Alcohol isn't bad. "
MamaMia wrote on Dec 2, 2008 12:06 PM:
Economic Conservative wrote on Dec 2, 2008 11:56 AM:
Get With The Program wrote on Dec 2, 2008 11:13 AM:
Once a teacher wrote on Dec 2, 2008 10:29 AM:
You write; the loss of tobacco tax revenue will hit the state hard. Thats like saying the loss of marijuana, cocaine, and heroin tax revenue will hit the state hard.
Yipes, how silly can you get!
Then you write about not being able to control behavior, and our young being tired of being controlled.
All parents ever do when they raise children is pour/place tons of concrete under their childrens feet. Parents pour/place it everyday. It is called building a solid foundation. The people of North Dakota overwhelming passed this measure to simply add more concrete to our childrens foundation. "
Snap wrote on Dec 2, 2008 10:23 AM:
Law wrote on Dec 2, 2008 9:57 AM:
The other side of the coin wrote on Dec 2, 2008 9:37 AM:
krten wrote on Dec 2, 2008 9:33 AM:
Sounds to me that the committee is already realizing the impossibility with this one. Maybe, maybe not, but it sounds like another government committee that is going to go years beyond its expected lifetime, and way beyond any imaginable budget. Yep, ever the cynical pessimist with this one.... "
Economic Conservative wrote on Dec 2, 2008 9:20 AM:
warmachine wrote on Dec 2, 2008 9:15 AM:
jh wrote on Dec 2, 2008 8:51 AM:
ND along with other states extort money from the tobacco companies who are selling a legal product.
The condition on this extorted money is that it be spent on tobacco control programs aimed at our youth.
Our leaders must have missed the condition so the people had to vote on a measure stating what they were supposed to do in the first place.
Now we're told don't get your expectations too high.
Who in this day and age doesn't know smoking is bad for you? What a waste of time and money . "
jim wrote on Dec 2, 2008 6:47 AM:
kinda gets your attention, doesn't it? well ms. knox, if tobacco is so deadly that every day 2 people from ND die from using it, why not ban it? let me answer; the state of ND needs the tax revenue. yes, folks, the dirty little secret is that our governor, and legislative houses are allowing its citizens to use a product, knowing full well it will kill 17 people per week. imagine if a rancher/farmer/business/ etc was doing this? or heaven forbid a bald eagle died from eating tobacco. now for something completely different; what's really goofy is that in a recent legislative session, a bill was introduced into the nd house to ban tobacco in nd, guess who testified against it? yep the people that want all this stop tobacco use killed it in committee.
oh yea, here's the rest of the story, for those of you that will loose a loved one in 2009 becuse they used tobaccoo, be patient with THE COMMITTEE.
the lunatics are runnin' the asylum. "
Comments are reviewed for taste, tone and language before posting.
Some comments may be used in the Tribune's print edition.
We value and respect your privacy, but The Bismarck Tribune might
disclose certain information to governmental entities if served with subpoena.