Showing posts with label Smoking. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Smoking. Show all posts
Saturday, September 17, 2011
CDC: State-Specific Trends in Lung Cancer Incidence and Smoking --- United States, 1999--2008
September 16, 2011
What is already known on this topic?
Cigarette smoking causes lung cancer in men and women. Wide variations in state tobacco control efforts, smoking prevalence, and lung cancer incidence have been observed in the United States. Lung cancer incidence has been decreasing for the past several decades among men but not among women.
What is added by this report?
Lung cancer incidence is beginning to decrease among women and is continuing to decrease among men in most states. Lung cancer rates are declining more rapidly in the West, which corresponds with smoking behavior; states with low smoking prevalence and high quit ratios are concentrated in this region.
What are the implications for public health practice?
Decreases in lung cancer incidence provide compelling evidence for state tobacco control policies, such as increasing tobacco excise taxes, enacting smoke-free laws, and funding policies to assist smokers in quitting. To continue these decreases in lung cancer incidence, current tobacco control funding for states needs to be increased to implement and sustain successful programs to reduce cigarette smoking and secondhand smoke exposure.
Read more.
Monday, June 6, 2011
Orlando Health launches lung cancer screening program
Orlando Business Journal
Date: Wednesday, June 1, 2011, 3:10pm EDT
Orlando Health launched a lung cancer screening pilot program June 1 targeted at smokers and ex-smokers.
The pilot program at M.D. Anderson Cancer Center-Orlando’s Rod Taylor Thoracic Care Center will focus on current and former smokers age 55 to 74, and will use low-dose radiation and CT scans to look for nodules
that don’t typically show up on X-rays. The hospital expects 20 percent of the people screened to need further testing and 2 percent to need treatment for lung cancer.
More than 18,000 people in Florida are expected to be diagnosed with lung cancer in 2011.
The cost of the test will be discounted from $1,500 to $375.
Read more: Orlando Health launches lung cancer screening program | Orlando Business Journal
Date: Wednesday, June 1, 2011, 3:10pm EDT
Orlando Health launched a lung cancer screening pilot program June 1 targeted at smokers and ex-smokers.
The pilot program at M.D. Anderson Cancer Center-Orlando’s Rod Taylor Thoracic Care Center will focus on current and former smokers age 55 to 74, and will use low-dose radiation and CT scans to look for nodules
that don’t typically show up on X-rays. The hospital expects 20 percent of the people screened to need further testing and 2 percent to need treatment for lung cancer.
More than 18,000 people in Florida are expected to be diagnosed with lung cancer in 2011.
The cost of the test will be discounted from $1,500 to $375.
Read more: Orlando Health launches lung cancer screening program | Orlando Business Journal
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
WYFF4 reports: Upstate University To Impose Fines On Smokers
Lander University Imposes Fines On Student, Faculty Smokers
GREENWOOD, S.C. -- Lander University is preparing to give added emphasis to its status as the first state college or university in South Carolina to ban the use of tobacco products on its campus, a prohibition that was introduced with the start of the fall semester in 2007.
Lander president Daniel Ball accepted the recommendations of a committee that he appointed to come up with a strategy for introducing the tobacco-free policy to newcomers, and reminding returning students, faculty and staff that the use of tobacco is not allowed anywhere on Lander property. The ban includes campus parking lots and the university’s off-campus student housing facilities. The smoking ban also applies to visitors.
Read more.
GREENWOOD, S.C. -- Lander University is preparing to give added emphasis to its status as the first state college or university in South Carolina to ban the use of tobacco products on its campus, a prohibition that was introduced with the start of the fall semester in 2007.
Lander president Daniel Ball accepted the recommendations of a committee that he appointed to come up with a strategy for introducing the tobacco-free policy to newcomers, and reminding returning students, faculty and staff that the use of tobacco is not allowed anywhere on Lander property. The ban includes campus parking lots and the university’s off-campus student housing facilities. The smoking ban also applies to visitors.
Read more.
Saturday, June 13, 2009
ABC News reports: Senate Votes for FDA to Regulate Tobacco
Years in the Making, Senate Votes to Give FDA Power to Regulate Tobacco
Times have changed now that even tobacco states have smoking bans. Today, after two weeks of wrangling and a decade of considering the change, the U.S. Senate endorsed increased regulation of tobacco.
Senators voted 79-17 to regulate tobacco in the same way the government regulates everything else you put in your body -- from Froot Loops to aspirin.
At Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, organization president Matthew L. Myers called the vote "a truly historic victory" and "the strongest action Congress has ever taken to reduce tobacco use."
"Forty-five years after the first U.S. Surgeon General's report linking cigarette smoking to lung cancer, the most deadly product sold in America will no longer be the least-regulated product sold in America," Myers said in a statement.
The bill would give the federal government the power to regulate cigarette ingredients, to ban the marketing of "light cigarettes" and to require graphic warning labels.
Read more.
Times have changed now that even tobacco states have smoking bans. Today, after two weeks of wrangling and a decade of considering the change, the U.S. Senate endorsed increased regulation of tobacco.
Senators voted 79-17 to regulate tobacco in the same way the government regulates everything else you put in your body -- from Froot Loops to aspirin.
At Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, organization president Matthew L. Myers called the vote "a truly historic victory" and "the strongest action Congress has ever taken to reduce tobacco use."
"Forty-five years after the first U.S. Surgeon General's report linking cigarette smoking to lung cancer, the most deadly product sold in America will no longer be the least-regulated product sold in America," Myers said in a statement.
The bill would give the federal government the power to regulate cigarette ingredients, to ban the marketing of "light cigarettes" and to require graphic warning labels.
Thursday, June 4, 2009
Newsday.com reports: Bill to regulate tobacco products a sharp departure for industry-friendly Congress
In the half-century since the surgeon general issued his culture-changing report linking smoking to lung cancer, the tobacco industry has had little trouble defeating efforts to regulate cigarettes and other products. That could change this year.
The Senate is debating legislation that would give the Food and Drug Administration authority to control ingredients going into tobacco products, restrict marketing and ads aimed at young people, and ban words such as "light" or "low tar" that may mislead people about the health risks of smoking.
The legislation, said Matthew Myers, president of Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, is "by far the strongest bill to reduce tobacco use that this nation has ever seriously considered."
Myers and other supporters, such as the American Heart Association and the American Lung Association, say the stars may finally be aligned for decisive action on the tobacco issue. The House passed a similar bill by a wide margin and President Barack Obama supports it. It also commands a majority in the Senate, although tobacco-state senators say they won't give up without a filibuster fight.
The Senate is debating legislation that would give the Food and Drug Administration authority to control ingredients going into tobacco products, restrict marketing and ads aimed at young people, and ban words such as "light" or "low tar" that may mislead people about the health risks of smoking.
The legislation, said Matthew Myers, president of Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, is "by far the strongest bill to reduce tobacco use that this nation has ever seriously considered."
Myers and other supporters, such as the American Heart Association and the American Lung Association, say the stars may finally be aligned for decisive action on the tobacco issue. The House passed a similar bill by a wide margin and President Barack Obama supports it. It also commands a majority in the Senate, although tobacco-state senators say they won't give up without a filibuster fight.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
An opinion from LA Times: Tobacco regulations are no regulations at all
A proposal to put cigarettes under FDA supervision is so limited that it's really a smoke screen for Big Tobacco.
This week, the U.S. Senate is considering legislation that would, for the first time, give the Food and Drug Administration regulatory authority over tobacco products. Numerous anti-smoking and health groups support the legislation. So does this mean Congress is finally on the verge of stepping up to take on Big Tobacco?
Hardly. The bill in question was crafted, in part, by the nation's leading cigarette company, Philip Morris, as part of a deal worked out between the tobacco giant and an anti-smoking group -- the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. The health groups supporting the legislation have been seduced by the few concessions that Philip Morris dangled before them and have lost sight of the long-term damage that this bill will do to the public's health.
The legislation would do a few good things, including requiring stronger warning labels on cigarette packages and limiting cigarette advertising directed at youths. But the bill's fine print contains numerous loopholes inserted to appease Philip Morris. In the end, it ensures that federal regulation of tobacco products will remain more about politics than about science.
Read more.
This week, the U.S. Senate is considering legislation that would, for the first time, give the Food and Drug Administration regulatory authority over tobacco products. Numerous anti-smoking and health groups support the legislation. So does this mean Congress is finally on the verge of stepping up to take on Big Tobacco?
Hardly. The bill in question was crafted, in part, by the nation's leading cigarette company, Philip Morris, as part of a deal worked out between the tobacco giant and an anti-smoking group -- the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. The health groups supporting the legislation have been seduced by the few concessions that Philip Morris dangled before them and have lost sight of the long-term damage that this bill will do to the public's health.
The legislation would do a few good things, including requiring stronger warning labels on cigarette packages and limiting cigarette advertising directed at youths. But the bill's fine print contains numerous loopholes inserted to appease Philip Morris. In the end, it ensures that federal regulation of tobacco products will remain more about politics than about science.
Read more.
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Top NC advocate of smoking ban has lung surgery
The powerful state House Democratic leader who drove the Legislature to pass a statewide indoor smoking ban had surgery Tuesday to remove part of his lung, his legislative aide said.
House Majority Leader Hugh Holliman, D-Davidson, had surgery at Forsyth Medical Center in Winston-Salem and was recovering in the hospital's intensive care unit, his legislative assistant, Carol Bowers, said after speaking with the legislator's wife, Ellen.
Holliman had a lower lobe of his right lung removed, Bowers said. Test results will determine later whether the removed section was cancerous, Bowers said. He was in stable condition Tuesday, hospital spokeswoman Freda Springs said.
Holliman's surgery came a week after he was collecting plaudits from Gov. Beverly Perdue as the driving force behind legislation that will ban smoking inside restaurants and bars when it takes effect in January. Perdue called the law a turning point for the state that remains the country's largest tobacco grower.
Read more.
House Majority Leader Hugh Holliman, D-Davidson, had surgery at Forsyth Medical Center in Winston-Salem and was recovering in the hospital's intensive care unit, his legislative assistant, Carol Bowers, said after speaking with the legislator's wife, Ellen.
Holliman had a lower lobe of his right lung removed, Bowers said. Test results will determine later whether the removed section was cancerous, Bowers said. He was in stable condition Tuesday, hospital spokeswoman Freda Springs said.
Holliman's surgery came a week after he was collecting plaudits from Gov. Beverly Perdue as the driving force behind legislation that will ban smoking inside restaurants and bars when it takes effect in January. Perdue called the law a turning point for the state that remains the country's largest tobacco grower.
Read more.
Thursday, May 21, 2009
The State reports: Study links cigarette changes to rising lung risk
It may be riskier on the lungs to smoke cigarettes today than it was a few decades ago - at least in the U.S., says new research that blames changes in cigarette design for fueling a certain type of lung cancer.
Up to half of the nation's lung cancer cases may be due to those changes, Dr. David Burns of the University of California, San Diego, told a recent meeting of tobacco researchers.
It's not the first time that scientists have concluded the 1960s movement for lower-tar cigarettes brought some unexpected consequences. But this study, while preliminary, is among the most in-depth looks. And intriguingly it found the increase in a kind of lung tumor called adenocarcinoma was higher in the U.S. than in Australia even though both countries switched to so-called milder cigarettes at the same time.
"The most likely explanation for it is a change in the cigarette," Burns said in an interview - and he cited a difference: Cigarettes sold in Australia contain lower levels of nitrosamines, a known carcinogen, than those sold in the U.S.
That's circumstantial evidence that requires more research, he acknowledged.
Up to half of the nation's lung cancer cases may be due to those changes, Dr. David Burns of the University of California, San Diego, told a recent meeting of tobacco researchers.
It's not the first time that scientists have concluded the 1960s movement for lower-tar cigarettes brought some unexpected consequences. But this study, while preliminary, is among the most in-depth looks. And intriguingly it found the increase in a kind of lung tumor called adenocarcinoma was higher in the U.S. than in Australia even though both countries switched to so-called milder cigarettes at the same time.
"The most likely explanation for it is a change in the cigarette," Burns said in an interview - and he cited a difference: Cigarettes sold in Australia contain lower levels of nitrosamines, a known carcinogen, than those sold in the U.S.
That's circumstantial evidence that requires more research, he acknowledged.
Thursday, May 14, 2009
The State reports: Higher cigarette tax will make S.C. more physically and fiscally fit
Most people know that smoking carries a major health impact. A recent study by the Harvard School of Public Health confirms that smoking is the leading cause of preventable death in the United States. It is a primary cause of lung cancer, heart and vascular disease and emphysema, is associated with many digestive cancers, bladder cancer, breast cancer, reproductive disturbances, is a contributor to age-related mental decline and so on.
Most, however, do not consider that smoking also exacts a significant fiscal toll on our state.
The U.S. Center for Disease Control estimates that every pack of cigarettes sold generates $7 in smoking-related health-care costs and lost worker productivity. That cost is paid by every taxpayer, every private health insurance customer (individual and business) and by employers — regardless of whether any of them smoke or not. As such, smoking creates both physical loss in the form of damage to life and health, and fiscal loss in the form of medical treatment for smoking-related illness and lost worker productivity.
Some would consider this a hidden tax that every citizen pays to treat the deadly habit of a few.
One of the most effective ways to drive down this human and financial toll is to reduce the number of smokers by helping people choose not to smoke in the first place.
The sooner South Carolina enacts an increase in the cigarette tax, the sooner our state starts to save lives and reduce the toll. We make an investment in our physical and financial health today and tomorrow. Fewer people begin to smoke, and more smokers quit. We, our children and grandchildren enjoy healthier, longer, more productive lives. We spend less emotion and money treating illness and disease.
The S.C. Tobacco Collaborative and our partners strongly urge our legislators to consider South Carolina’s physical and fiscal health, and pass the cigarette tax increase this session. We cannot afford to wait.
Mr. Bowie is executive director of the S.C. Tobacco Collaborative, a partnership of individuals, organizations and agencies committed to reducing the toll of tobacco use in South Carolina. He is a S.C. native and resident of Chapin.
Most, however, do not consider that smoking also exacts a significant fiscal toll on our state.
The U.S. Center for Disease Control estimates that every pack of cigarettes sold generates $7 in smoking-related health-care costs and lost worker productivity. That cost is paid by every taxpayer, every private health insurance customer (individual and business) and by employers — regardless of whether any of them smoke or not. As such, smoking creates both physical loss in the form of damage to life and health, and fiscal loss in the form of medical treatment for smoking-related illness and lost worker productivity.
Some would consider this a hidden tax that every citizen pays to treat the deadly habit of a few.
One of the most effective ways to drive down this human and financial toll is to reduce the number of smokers by helping people choose not to smoke in the first place.
The sooner South Carolina enacts an increase in the cigarette tax, the sooner our state starts to save lives and reduce the toll. We make an investment in our physical and financial health today and tomorrow. Fewer people begin to smoke, and more smokers quit. We, our children and grandchildren enjoy healthier, longer, more productive lives. We spend less emotion and money treating illness and disease.
The S.C. Tobacco Collaborative and our partners strongly urge our legislators to consider South Carolina’s physical and fiscal health, and pass the cigarette tax increase this session. We cannot afford to wait.
Mr. Bowie is executive director of the S.C. Tobacco Collaborative, a partnership of individuals, organizations and agencies committed to reducing the toll of tobacco use in South Carolina. He is a S.C. native and resident of Chapin.
WTVD-TV Raleigh-Durham, NC reports:
The North Carolina Legislature voted to pass a broad smoking ban Wednesday.
The measure would ban lighting up in all enclosed restaurants and bars.
The final 62-56 vote came in the House where Majority Leader Hugh Holliman urged fellow House members to support the Senate version of the bill.
The Senate version bans smoking in nearly all restaurants and bars. It leaves out workplaces where children visit, which the House agreed to last month.
According to the state Division of Public Health, secondhand smoke is responsible for $289 million in state health care costs resulting from lung cancer and other diseases.
While the bill is meant to protect the public's health from second hand smoke, it provides some exceptions to private clubs, cigar bars and non-profit establishments and some feel like that is discrimination.
Opponents of the smoking ban also argue it violates the right of business owners to choose whether to allow smoking, and of their patrons.
"The bill that we have before us that we are being asked to vote on is as I've said before a terrible intrusion - a terrible governmental intrusion of personal freedom," Harnett County Rep. David Lewis said.
The bill now goes to Governor Beverly Perdue for her approval, and she has indicated she will sign it.
Read more.
The measure would ban lighting up in all enclosed restaurants and bars.
The final 62-56 vote came in the House where Majority Leader Hugh Holliman urged fellow House members to support the Senate version of the bill.
The Senate version bans smoking in nearly all restaurants and bars. It leaves out workplaces where children visit, which the House agreed to last month.
According to the state Division of Public Health, secondhand smoke is responsible for $289 million in state health care costs resulting from lung cancer and other diseases.
While the bill is meant to protect the public's health from second hand smoke, it provides some exceptions to private clubs, cigar bars and non-profit establishments and some feel like that is discrimination.
Opponents of the smoking ban also argue it violates the right of business owners to choose whether to allow smoking, and of their patrons.
"The bill that we have before us that we are being asked to vote on is as I've said before a terrible intrusion - a terrible governmental intrusion of personal freedom," Harnett County Rep. David Lewis said.
The bill now goes to Governor Beverly Perdue for her approval, and she has indicated she will sign it.
Read more.
Monday, May 11, 2009
The New York Times: Doctor Sounds Alarm Ahead of Tobacco Vote
For three decades, Dr. David M. Burns has written and edited some of the seminal work on tobacco science and the hazards of modern cigarettes: surgeon general’s reports, National Cancer Institute monographs, World Health Organization studies.
And he is hardly a dispassionate scientist. As a pulmonologist who has cared for hundreds of smokers who died of lung cancer, he is an unabashed campaigner against smoking.
That is why, with the Senate just weeks away from a vote on landmark legislation to regulate tobacco, Dr. Burns, 61, is now willing to sidestep the protocols of peer-reviewed science. He wants to sound one more alarm about the dangers of smoking.
Dr. Burns says he has new information, based on two years of study, indicating that cigarettes — even the supposedly safer ones — pose a much higher risk of lung cancer than before the surgeon general first declared them a health hazard in 1964.
He said the risk of a smoker’s developing lung cancer may be twice as high as it was then, even though tar and nicotine have been reduced.
Read more.
And he is hardly a dispassionate scientist. As a pulmonologist who has cared for hundreds of smokers who died of lung cancer, he is an unabashed campaigner against smoking.
That is why, with the Senate just weeks away from a vote on landmark legislation to regulate tobacco, Dr. Burns, 61, is now willing to sidestep the protocols of peer-reviewed science. He wants to sound one more alarm about the dangers of smoking.
Dr. Burns says he has new information, based on two years of study, indicating that cigarettes — even the supposedly safer ones — pose a much higher risk of lung cancer than before the surgeon general first declared them a health hazard in 1964.
He said the risk of a smoker’s developing lung cancer may be twice as high as it was then, even though tar and nicotine have been reduced.
Read more.
Mail Online from the UK reports: Women smokers get lung cancer earlier than men, says study
Women are more vulnerable to the deadly side effects of smoking than men, a lung cancer study found.
Research into patients with the disease found women tended to be diagnosed at a younger age than men - even though they had smoked fewer cigarettes.
They were also more likely to develop one of the most common forms of the cancer, researchers said.
It adds to the growing pile of evidence suggesting that women are more vulnerable to the cancer-causing chemicals, or carcinogens, in tobacco than men.
The study looked at 683 lung cancer patients treated at a Swiss clinic between 2000 and 2005. It found that female smokers were statistically most likely to develop adenocarcinoma - a common form of lung cancer - and were more likely to be diagnosed with the disease at an earlier age.
Study leader Dr Martin Frueh, from St Gallen Canton Hospital in Switzerland, said: 'Our findings suggest that women may have an increased susceptibility to tobacco carcinogens.'
Read more.
Research into patients with the disease found women tended to be diagnosed at a younger age than men - even though they had smoked fewer cigarettes.
They were also more likely to develop one of the most common forms of the cancer, researchers said.
It adds to the growing pile of evidence suggesting that women are more vulnerable to the cancer-causing chemicals, or carcinogens, in tobacco than men.
The study looked at 683 lung cancer patients treated at a Swiss clinic between 2000 and 2005. It found that female smokers were statistically most likely to develop adenocarcinoma - a common form of lung cancer - and were more likely to be diagnosed with the disease at an earlier age.
Study leader Dr Martin Frueh, from St Gallen Canton Hospital in Switzerland, said: 'Our findings suggest that women may have an increased susceptibility to tobacco carcinogens.'
Read more.
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
The State reports: Backlog may snuff cigarette tax hike
Advocates of raising the state’s lowest-in-the-nation cigarette tax are worried a legislative backlog could prevent the bill from becoming law until the Legislature returns next year.
The Senate Finance Committee today is expected to vote on the plan, which would raise the tax by 50 cents a pack. The $139 million the tax is expected to raise would help employers purchase health insurance for low-income employees, or for those employees to purchase insurance directly.
The bill has widespread support, but lawmakers said the delays over payday lending, stimulus money and other legislation mean the cigarette tax might run out of time this session.
“It’s a very real possibility,” said Sen. Harvey Peeler, R-Cherokee. “It’s not an impossible jump, but there’s a lot of things ahead of it.”
Peeler said he has heard little opposition to the bill so far. Sen. Thomas Alexander, R-Oconee and chairman of the subcommittee studying the bill, expected minor changes to the House plan.
Lawmakers said one change would use tax revenue to fund the Hollings Cancer Center and another amendment might change the way smokeless tobacco products are taxed.
Contact your Senator now!
The Senate Finance Committee today is expected to vote on the plan, which would raise the tax by 50 cents a pack. The $139 million the tax is expected to raise would help employers purchase health insurance for low-income employees, or for those employees to purchase insurance directly.
The bill has widespread support, but lawmakers said the delays over payday lending, stimulus money and other legislation mean the cigarette tax might run out of time this session.
“It’s a very real possibility,” said Sen. Harvey Peeler, R-Cherokee. “It’s not an impossible jump, but there’s a lot of things ahead of it.”
Peeler said he has heard little opposition to the bill so far. Sen. Thomas Alexander, R-Oconee and chairman of the subcommittee studying the bill, expected minor changes to the House plan.
Lawmakers said one change would use tax revenue to fund the Hollings Cancer Center and another amendment might change the way smokeless tobacco products are taxed.
Contact your Senator now!
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Lung Cancer Alliance to Canadian Medical Association Journal Editorial on Lung Cancer Screening
Monday, April 20, 2009: Last week, the Canadian Medical Association Journal published an editorial discussing lung cancer screening. In the piece, they misrepresented LCA's position on lung cancer screening. In addition, they came to the conclusion that the best use of funding for lung cancer would be in tobacco control and cessation programs. LCA President & CEO, Laurie Fenton Ambrose, sent in a Letter to the Editor of the Canadian Medical Association Journal clarifying LCA's position on lung cancer screening and urging those within the community to address the disease in a comprehensive manner with tobacco cessation programs, early detection and treatment research.
Dear Editor,
The editorial in the April 14, 2009 Canadian Medical Association Journal entitled "A Pause for Thought on Lung Cancer Screening", by M.B. Stanbrook and K. Flegel accuses the Lung Cancer Alliance of having "promoted" CT screening for lung cancer. For the record, our position is that those at high risk for lung cancer (those with greater than 20 pack year smoking history, those with a family history of lung cancer, those with exgtensive exposure to asbestos, radon, Agent Orange and other carcinogens) should speak with their doctors about the risks and benefits of a CT scan.
Please note that we emphasize those at high risk, not population based screening. Even before mammograms and psa testing became widely accepted population based screening tests in the US. (The 5-year survival rates for those cancers are now 88% and 99% respectively and whether or not screening played a role in this increase in survival rates you can debate). The 5-year survival rate for lung cancer is still only 15%.
Lung cancer is far more lethal for the individual patient and in its overall public health impact. Nearly one in every three cancer deaths in the United States is due to lung cancer and only 16% of patients are being diagnosed at an early, most curable stage. Advances in CT scanning now present an alternative to late stage diagnosis for those at hight risk and recent papers coming out of ongoing European trials are further refining the process of CT screening.
Certainly we can look forward to a simple biomarker to further refine the optimal population subset for a CT scan, and we have adocated strongly for reseach funding in these areas. But in the meantime are you suggesting that those at high risk should do nothing? Your conclusion is: "In the meantime, given how much we know about the prevention of lung cancer, targeting smoking avoidance and cessation, rather than detection and management of lung cancer, would seem a better investment."
Sadly this statement ignores the fact that over 50% of lung cancer is being diagnosed in people who have already quit, many of them decades ago. Another 15 to 20% have never smoked. Without considering these individuals,any investment analysis in lung cancer in 2009 and the future is incomplete and suspect.
Sincerely,
Laurie Fenton Ambrose
President & CEO
Lung Cancer Alliance
Laurie Fenton Ambrose
President & CEO
Lung Cancer Alliance
Monday, April 20, 2009
HealthDay News reports: Urine Test Could Gauge Smokers' Lung Cancer Risk
Those with higher levels of a compound had nearly 9 times the risk, scientists say
By Randy Dotinga HealthDay Reporter
SUNDAY, April 19 (HealthDay News) -- Someday, a simple urine test might spot smokers at highest risk for lung cancer, scientists report.
The research is still in its preliminary stages, and it may be years before such a test becomes publicly available. But if it works, the urine-based screen could give added motivation to smokers who can't find other reasons to quit, said study author Dr. Jian-Min Yuan, an associate professor at the University of Minnesota.
Read more.
By Randy Dotinga HealthDay Reporter
SUNDAY, April 19 (HealthDay News) -- Someday, a simple urine test might spot smokers at highest risk for lung cancer, scientists report.
The research is still in its preliminary stages, and it may be years before such a test becomes publicly available. But if it works, the urine-based screen could give added motivation to smokers who can't find other reasons to quit, said study author Dr. Jian-Min Yuan, an associate professor at the University of Minnesota.
Read more.
Thursday, April 9, 2009
The New York Times: New Yorkers Often Exposed to Cigarette Smoke, Study Finds
More than half of all nonsmokers in New York City have elevated levels of a nicotine byproduct in their blood indicating recent exposure to cigarette smoke, a city health department study has found. The figure is surprisingly high given the city’s stringent public smoking ban, among the toughest in the country.
Some 56.7 percent of nonsmokers living in the city were found to have elevated levels of the nicotine metabolite cotinine, compared with an average 44.9 percent of nonsmokers nationwide. Among the ethnic groups studied, nonsmokers of Asian descent were most often affected, with 68.7 percent of those examined showing elevated blood levels of cotinine.
The long-term health consequences of the finding are not known, but secondhand smoke is estimated to account for at least 35,000 deaths from heart disease and 3,000 deaths from lung cancer in nonsmokers nationwide each year.
Researchers with the health department said they were unsettled by the finding, which they called “puzzling.”
Some 56.7 percent of nonsmokers living in the city were found to have elevated levels of the nicotine metabolite cotinine, compared with an average 44.9 percent of nonsmokers nationwide. Among the ethnic groups studied, nonsmokers of Asian descent were most often affected, with 68.7 percent of those examined showing elevated blood levels of cotinine.
The long-term health consequences of the finding are not known, but secondhand smoke is estimated to account for at least 35,000 deaths from heart disease and 3,000 deaths from lung cancer in nonsmokers nationwide each year.
Researchers with the health department said they were unsettled by the finding, which they called “puzzling.”
Monday, April 6, 2009
Science Daily reports: Young Women Warned Of Lung Cancer Risks
Seventeen people are still dying from lung cancer each week in Northern Ireland despite a small improvement in survival rates for the disease.
The figures are revealed by a report launched April 3 by the Northern Ireland Cancer Registry (NICR) at Queen's University Belfast.
The NICR is holding a joint launch April 3 with Macmillan Cancer Support which has released its own report on the experience of patients living with lung cancer and their carers in Northern Ireland, highlighting that services are not meeting their needs.
The Queen's report, entitled Monitoring care of patients with lung cancer in Northern Ireland diagnosed 2006, details the facts of the disease from the numbers of people diagnosed, to trends, treatment and survival.
It looked at the experiences of more than 2,200 lung cancer patients over a decade and points to a fall in cases for men under 65 but not for women in this age group. Lung cancer now kills more women than breast cancer in Northern Ireland.
While highlighting the need for continued work to prevent the condition in all sections of the population by addressing smoking, it also acknowledges the commitment of staff who treat patients with the disease.
Read more.
The figures are revealed by a report launched April 3 by the Northern Ireland Cancer Registry (NICR) at Queen's University Belfast.
The NICR is holding a joint launch April 3 with Macmillan Cancer Support which has released its own report on the experience of patients living with lung cancer and their carers in Northern Ireland, highlighting that services are not meeting their needs.
The Queen's report, entitled Monitoring care of patients with lung cancer in Northern Ireland diagnosed 2006, details the facts of the disease from the numbers of people diagnosed, to trends, treatment and survival.
It looked at the experiences of more than 2,200 lung cancer patients over a decade and points to a fall in cases for men under 65 but not for women in this age group. Lung cancer now kills more women than breast cancer in Northern Ireland.
While highlighting the need for continued work to prevent the condition in all sections of the population by addressing smoking, it also acknowledges the commitment of staff who treat patients with the disease.
Read more.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
US court dismisses smoking appeal
The US Supreme Court has dismissed an appeal by cigarette maker Philip Morris over a $79.5m award to the widow of a long-time Oregon smoker.
The court upheld a 1999 ruling by the Oregon Supreme Court in favour of Mayola Williams.
Having heard arguments in December, the judges said in a one-sentence order that they were not passing judgement on the legal issues presented.
The judgement has grown to more than $145m with interest.
Jesse Williams died of lung cancer in 1997 having smoked for 40 years.
Mrs. Williams sued the cigarette manufacturer for fraud on behalf of her husband.
Read more.
The court upheld a 1999 ruling by the Oregon Supreme Court in favour of Mayola Williams.
Having heard arguments in December, the judges said in a one-sentence order that they were not passing judgement on the legal issues presented.
The judgement has grown to more than $145m with interest.
Jesse Williams died of lung cancer in 1997 having smoked for 40 years.
Mrs. Williams sued the cigarette manufacturer for fraud on behalf of her husband.
Read more.
N.C. nears House vote banning smoking in public
North Carolina legislators were facing a narrow vote on a proposed law that would ban smoking at indoor restaurants, bars and any other places people are working.
The House was scheduled to vote Wednesday on legislation that advocates say aims to eliminate the dangers of secondhand smoking. Opponents said it takes away a business owner's choice.
Read more.
The House was scheduled to vote Wednesday on legislation that advocates say aims to eliminate the dangers of secondhand smoking. Opponents said it takes away a business owner's choice.
Read more.
Monday, March 30, 2009
Say 'thank you' to smokers
The Daily Gamecock's Emily Weithman, second-year broadcast journalism student, says "thank you" to smokers and weighs in on the cigarette tax debate.
Well, I never thought I'd say this, but hooray for smokers.
Yes, that's right, I am condoning smoking. Make no mistake, I still despise the habit, but since the 50 cent-a-pack tax increase looks like it's finally going to pass this year, I say, full speed ahead Marlboro lovers.
South Carolina has historically had the lowest cigarette taxes in the nation, a statistic that was almost changed last year when the House and Senate approved a 50-cent increase. However, there was disagreement over how the money should be spent and so the House could not override Gov. Mark Sanford's veto.
This year, all that is subject to change with the new plan modeled after Oklahoma's federal match plan, which uses the extra money to help low-income or high-risk residents obtain health insurance.
Well, I never thought I'd say this, but hooray for smokers.
Yes, that's right, I am condoning smoking. Make no mistake, I still despise the habit, but since the 50 cent-a-pack tax increase looks like it's finally going to pass this year, I say, full speed ahead Marlboro lovers.
South Carolina has historically had the lowest cigarette taxes in the nation, a statistic that was almost changed last year when the House and Senate approved a 50-cent increase. However, there was disagreement over how the money should be spent and so the House could not override Gov. Mark Sanford's veto.
This year, all that is subject to change with the new plan modeled after Oklahoma's federal match plan, which uses the extra money to help low-income or high-risk residents obtain health insurance.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Kick Butts Today!
