Photo: lana1501 / Lori
Introduced in Russia’s ban on Smoking in public places and frightening pictures on packs, as shown by international experience, are among the most inefficient methods of struggle against Smoking. Work best financial incentives
C March 17 on cigarette packs sold in Russia and other countries of the Eurasian economic Union must be more frightening images than before. The idea is that the image is damaged by Smoking to human bodies need to discourage people from harmful habits. Stories will be the same as the last four years — rotted teeth, blackened lungs, etc. the Difference is that what used to be mostly brown, and the “horror stories” spread on both sides of the pack, and not just on back as far.
For the transition to the new design of the manufacturers were given time until November 2017. A few months they will be able to sell cigarettes in packs that are decorated according to the old rules, that is, on the face of anything terrible will not be, except the simple statement “Smoking kills”.
With such a design, according to the plan of the Ministry of health, cigarettes would rather alienate customers. Meanwhile, the world experience shows that the effectiveness of this measure is not too high.
Frightening image is part of the measures envisaged by the framework Convention on tobacco control by the world health organization (who) adopted in 2003. Russia joined her five years later, becoming one of the 176 countries who have decided that Smoking is a global epidemic that must be combated by all possible means. That is, to reduce the profits of producers, raising taxes, complicate trade, banning advertising, placement of cigarettes on display, and labeling of certain varieties as “light” or “low-tar” as well as prohibiting Smoking in all public places, including where some of the hand she reaches for the cigarette in cafes, restaurants and other involving the communication of institutions.
More than a decade of global experience in the fight against Smoking is to prove only that the design of cigarette packs — the latest factors that affect the addiction to nicotine. According activists against Smoking Ash.org now the world’s 1.1 billion smokers, and a few dozen years there will be nearly one and a half times more than 1.6 billion Increase happens at the expense of people in developing countries, including those which acceded to the Convention who. In the poorest States, according to the organization, people spend on cigarettes up to 30% of their income, but still not leaving. According to psychologists, people find in cigarettes is the most affordable way to get rid of stress caused by poverty. And scary pictures on cigarette packages assure them that life can be better, if you spend the money on more useful things like food or education.
Meanwhile, the answer to the question that most quickly helps people to quit Smoking, is already found in the United States.
Battle for the States
United States — the Motherland of tobacco products is not among the countries that have acceded to the Convention who, although President George W. Bush signed the document, but never submitted for ratification to the Senate.
However, it can be argued that the United States and needed to sign an international Treaty, rather, the rest of the world follows in the footsteps of the Americans, who by the time of the Convention already started to ban Smoking in public places. However, not at the national level and at the regional. The first one was new York, where Michael Bloomberg in 2002 banned tobacco use in all public institutions (the exception was made only for the eatery, which has one employee — the owner-smoker).
Another measure contained in the Convention — a ban on lobbying by tobacco companies. That is, the producers communicate with legislators should be limited. But it’s only a call if any member, he should not, he will not violate the law, and manufacturers cannot be demand, because they promote their interests in Parliament unless the negotiations are accompanied by bribes.
Here, too, America has advanced furthest, after all, to attack tobacco companies then began in 1950, when British doctors published in the British Medical Journal the evidence that the Smoking rate roughly corresponds to the incidence of lung cancer. Americans began to sue manufacturers of cigarettes on the grounds that the latter unscrupulous advertised their goods, and violated safety requirements (in the famous film “the insider” former Vice-President of a tobacco company publicises the facts proving that the company puts into cigarettes substance that facilitates the penetration of nicotine into the brain and causes dependence on him).
Almost half a century, tobacco companies successfully fought — they won more than 800 lawsuits initiated by individuals and local authorities who estimated that Smoking budget expenditures on healthcare are growing. Along the way the tobacco companies went to marketing concessions — on packs there are some warnings that Smoking kills. However, the country is not satisfied. In the 1990s, anti-Smoking attack gained a grandiose scale 40 States filed lawsuits against the largest manufacturers of cigarettes. And business movers and shakers thought it best to negotiate with the legislators. I went back down to four major companies, earning on the tobacco — Philip Morris, R. J. Reynolds, Brown & Williamson and Lollilard the products of which accounted for about 97% of all cigarette sales in the country. They agreed to pay the authorities a total of $246 billion (payments agreed to stretch for 25 years), which should go to antigenically propaganda.
But — and this is an important clarification — not anti-Smoking. By itself, the tobacco is a good thing, say its supporters. It all depends on how to use it. The nicotine to which smokers are drawn, it is a natural substance that in certain quantities is necessary. He, in particular, helps concentration, is produced as alcohol, the human body, found in many vegetables consumed by non-smokers, underscore the many studies paid by the tobacco lobby.
Smoking is the easiest way to get your nicotine in the body. But the most harmful. Lung cancer, which began with the fight against nicotine is not a substance, namely, Smoking — high temperature and the resin absorbed with the smoke.
International Corporation, offered alternative ways to consume tobacco. In early March, 2017 Philip Morris International President Andre Kalatzopoulos gathered in the Swiss headquarters of the journalists and asked would they mind if he’s a little smoke in their presence. “There is no impact on the environment will not, he assured the audience. For you no danger.”
Journalists allowed, and the entire press conference, the top Manager was delayed out of the device, which the company called iQOS (it’s an acronym of the expression I quit smoking ordinary, that is, “I quit Smoking as usual”). Kalatzopoulos consume nicotine but don’t exhale any smoke. iQOS-like mouthpiece, worked like this: it was inserted a cartridge with the tobacco, which when the key is pressed only up to a third of the temperature decay. That’s enough to stand out nicotine, which directly went to the lungs, blood and brain of the smoker, but not in the environment. No smoke, no tar, no high temperature.
Such electronic devices are doing now bet international tobacco manufacturers. However, their trick solved — who, as well as many countries, including Russia, are going to equate electronic device to conventional cigarettes. The question is, are you ready to carry these countries in their fight against Smoking more serious charges, which promise greater effect.
Money vs cigarettes
Scientist Kevin Volpe from the University of Pennsylvania has received from the General Electric grant more than $1 million, to explore what incentives motivate employees to quit Smoking. Only American companies GE employs more than 150 thousand people, 20% of which smoke, and it corresponds roughly to the General level in the country. Of these, about 70% want to get rid of this bad habit, but manages only 2-3%. This is also consistent with the national level. 1.9 thousand employees responded to the invitation to participate in the study, of them for the experiment selected 878.
Forming group, the researchers did not offer participants any additional incentives, saying only health benefits and not to spend money on cigarettes. But after the start of the experiment half of the participants were offered a reward (the other half — the control group — was given only the coordinates of the municipal centers for smokers). In particular, at the end of the program relied $100, even $250 is owed to those who quit Smoking during the first six months of the experiment (which had to be confirmed by analyses), held out another six months, received $400.
Despite the relatively modest fee, it was found that the program helped to quit Smoking 5% of participants, and additional financial incentives increased their number in the first six months to 14.7%. In the second six months, the number of those who quit reduced, but the benefits of financial incentives was still obvious and 9.4% among encourage participants compared with 3.6% among unselfish, summed up the Fol with colleagues in 2009.
The entire complex of anti-Smoking measures in the United States over the previous decade — and raising taxes, and a ban on Smoking in public places, and the promotion of healthy lifestyles, and the emergence of less harmful methods of tobacco use (e.g., evaporators) — reduced the number of smokers in the adult population from 25 to 20%. In other words, it was found that financial incentives of wanting to get rid of cigarettes more effective than all other methods of struggle against Smoking.
For General Electric benefits from investment in antigenically program was obvious. After all, according to the Federal Agency for control and prevention of diseases, every smoker costing American companies $3.4 thousand per year more than his non-Smoking colleagues, given the health insurance costs and lower productivity of smokers. As a result, in 2010 the company introduced a number of financial incentives for Smoking cessation, and in 2011 reinforced its ban on Smoking in all of their enterprises.
According to The Washington Post, nearly 90% of large companies in the US now underpaid employees that monitor the health. However, this applies not only to Smoking but also other major health problems, including obesity.
Tobacco companies argue that not every business benefits from the Smoking ban. In particular, the hospitality sector is suffering, having lost customers who used to spend time with a cigarette in hand, the manufacturer, citing the study by the National restaurant Association, which was paid. However, objective studies have shown that, on the contrary, the attendance in many cases has been increasing, as employment in this sector — after all smokers in the world is less than non-smokers, and the last become more willing to spend time where they do not turn into passive smokers. And in new York a year after the cigarette ban in all catering establishments the number of jobs increases in total for 10 thousand