Breaking the smoking habit

Press, 31 December 1980, Page 12

Breaking the smoking habit

From the “Economist,” London

“Smoking is probably the largest single preventable cause of ill-health in the world,” says the World Health Organisation. But until now diseases related to smoking — lung cancer, coronary thrombosis, bronchitis and emphysema — have been largely confined to. the rich industrial countries. That may not be true for much longer. The West has exported so much of its way of life, from wheat-based bread to pop music, that there is every reason to expect the smoking of manufactured cigarettes to spread to the Third World as well — unless action is taken to stop it. The quantity of tobacco smoked in rich countries has been falling slowly since around 1975. In the Third World it is going up. People there were, on average, thought to be smoking 40 per cent as much as those in industrial countries. Can governments break the trend? Any anti-smoking offensive will not be costless. Third-World governments pushed for cash are loath to give up their revenue from taxes on tobacco and the companies selling it, particularly when they are told the increased cost of health care

from smoking will not rise for another 20 years. In the Philippines, tobacco companies claim that in a recent year cigarette taxes raised 47 per cent of the Government’s total revenue. Growing the stuff also provides a livelihood for many poor people (just as growing poppies for the opium/heroin trade does tor peasants in the Near and Far East). Tobacco can provide a reasonable income from a small land area. The plant can tolerate relatively infertile soils and the caprices of the weather. Cultivating, harvesting and curing it are labour-in-tensive. And poorer . countries are given a chance, simply, to add value to a commodity they produce by making the cigarettes themselves. Contrary to anti-tobacco propaganda, there is little evidence that leaf production squeezes out the growing of food. Instead the farming skills learnt, often through technical advice from the leading cigarette companies, may promote production of other crops. The strength of the farmers’ lobby is, of course, much increased by the five leading tobacco companies, which between them control up to 75 per cent of the

Western World's smoking market. Only one, British-Ameri-can Tobacco Industries, had a reallv big foothold outside the West before 1970, but with stagnation in their traditional markets the other four have recently invaded. with some success, the expanding markets of Latin America and Asia. Yet if the economic and social costs of prevention are a Matterhorn, the eventual health costs of allowing the smoking habit to catch hold are an Everest. A start could be made by curbs on cigarette advertising. The tobacco companies are probably correct when they claim that cigarette advertising in developed countries 1 as little impact on the size of the total market, that it mainly changes brand loyalties. In poor countries that argument does not wash. In Malaysia tobacco companies bought about half the total advertising in 1977. In Brazil last year the launch of a new brand. Advance, was blasted off by four-page newspaper advertisements and lengthy television commercials. Higher excise duties could keep the growth of cigarette smoking in check, especially in countries where incomes are lowest. All the signs are that when the cost of ciga-

rettes rises more slowly than the average rate of inflation, consumption increases dramaticallv. In Brazil, when general Consumer prices rose by 40 per cent in 197$ but cigarette prices were frozen, cigarette sales increased by 9 per cent. There is one potential escape route which would piease everybody except prohibitionist puritans; but no country should count on it opening up. It is the hope of the tobacco companies that they will succeed in making cigarettes much less dangerous. Though the three main substances delivered by a cigarette — carbon monoxide, nicotine and tar — are all said to be harmful, the one thought to be most carcinogenic is tar. So research is being concentrated on reducing the tar yield. In the United States, cigarettes of 15 milligrams of tar and below comprise nearly half of the whole market, against only 2 per cent six years ago. Other developed countries have moved some way in the same direction (in Britain the average smoker inhales less than 17 milligrams of tar per cigarette versus 30 milligrams-plus in the early 19605) and the low-tar part o? the market is now the most hotly contested of all.

If — and it is still a giant if — a reasonably safe cigarette can be produced, advertising in developing countries should actually be encouraged. The majority of their smokers are accus-

tomed to cheap, strong, roll-your-own tobacco, with average tar levels often many times higher than branded cigarettes in the West. Persuading them to switch could then save lives.