Government must put children’s health before tobacco’s profits

Girl looking at plain pack

Children are lured by tobacco packaging

Next Wednesday, in a ceremony full of tradition and colour, the Queen marks the formal start of the parliamentary year.

This will include a speech that sets out the government’s agenda for the coming session, outlining proposed policies and legislation.

We’ve been urging the government to seize this opportunity to replace the slickly designed tobacco packaging with packs of uniform size, shape and colour.

But we’re very concerned by today’s newspaper reports that the government is backing away from including legislation in the speech.

We believe it’s a grave mistake to allow the current situation to continue.

The public consultation on the future of tobacco packaging closed in August 2012 and we’ve been impatiently waiting since then to hear what this government will do about this issue.

Impatiently waiting because every day the government delays taking action sees more than 500 under 16s being lured into smoking, an addiction that will kill half of all long term smokers.

Tens of thousands of our supporters have added their voice to our campaign to protect children from tobacco industry marketing, so we know the public backs this measure. 

The evidence shows plain, standardised packs reduce the appeal of smoking, and experts from across the fields of health and law enforcement are fully behind the move.

You might wonder who could possibly oppose this measure. The answer is simple – the group with the most to lose, the tobacco industry and the groups they fund.

Because fewer smokers mean lower profits and less money in the bank for the industry.

If this government doesn’t act, the tobacco industry will get the green light to continue targeting our children with sophisticated and slick designs.

You may have also seen this Japan Tobacco International (JTI) ad popping up in national newspapers recently, part of the £2million advertising campaign that JTI are waging against the introduction of plain packaging.

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

We’ve written before about misleading and unsubstantiated ads from JTI, which have been banned by the Advertising Standards Agency.

When the tobacco industry is desperate enough to spend so much money on misleading the public, we know we must be on the right path. Private Eye magazine published its own spoof version of the above JTI ad, which we thought was too good not to share:

Reproduced by kind permission of PRIVATE EYE magazine www.private-eye.co.uk

Reproduced by kind permission of PRIVATE EYE magazine www.private-eye.co.uk

Indeed… we couldn’t have said it better ourselves.

Alan

Misleading ads and public distrust – wising up to the tobacco industry

JTI advert that appeared in several national newspapers this month

JTI advert that appeared in several national newspapers this month

As we revealed last week, almost two thirds (65 per cent) of the public don’t trust the tobacco industry to make believable and independent arguments about how to reduce smoking rates.

This is particularly relevant at the moment. The public health community – over 190 health and welfare organisations, including Cancer Research UK – is calling for the government to introduce plain, standardised tobacco packaging to protect children from tobacco marketing.

But the tobacco industry – and its funded groups – continue to oppose the measure, despite clear evidence that standard packs make cigarettes less attractive to children.

As the campaign intensifies, with the appearance of a new series of national press ads, it’s worth looking at how the tobacco industry’s opposition has panned out so far, and how it’s built such a dire reputation.

Continue reading

Gene variations and cancer risk – more results, more answers and more questions

Reseacher looking at DNA fingerprint

Scientists have found around eighty new gene variations linked to breast, prostate and ovarian cancers

A thousand scientists from one hundred international research groups working over four years. Thirteen papers spread across five journals. DNA analysis of two hundred thousand people. And eighty new genetic variations, or SNPs (pronounced “snips”) linked to three different types of cancer, doubling the current total known about so far.

These are impressive, big figures from an equally impressive, big piece of science, which Cancer Research UK helped to fund (here’s the press release). But what does it all mean?

To find out, we spoke to Professor Doug Easton from the University of Cambridge, one of the leaders of the project.

Cancer Research UK: What exactly are SNPs?

Prof Easton: SNP stands for “single nucleotide polymorphism”, and it’s a single ‘letter’ difference in the DNA between individuals. Your DNA is made up of around 3 billion of these ‘letters’ – there are four possible letters you can have: A, C, T and G – so a SNP is just a single place in your genome where you might have one particular letter, and someone else has a different one.

To explain a bit more about SNPs and what they do, have a look at this short animation:

Continue reading

Alcohol and cancer – the size of the problem in the UK

A pint of beer

Alcohol causes thousands of cases of cancer every year, but cutting back can reduce the risk.

You might be surprised to learn that alcohol-related cancer caused more hospital admissions than alcohol-related violence and road accidents combined (figures for England, 2010-11).

This is just one of the findings of a new report published by the Alcohol Health Alliance (AHA), highlighting the need for the UK to cut back on boozing in order to reduce cases of cancer and deaths from the disease. As well as gaining coverage in the media, the report will help politicians recognise the need for new measures to reduce alcohol harm.  

The AHA believes that the UK’s problems with alcohol aren’t just social. It’s important that politicians also realise the true extent of the damage drinking does to the nation’s health. And Cancer Research UK agrees – that’s why we sponsored the report.

Let’s look at the risks in more detail.

Continue reading

Budget 2013 – impact on Cancer Research UK

George Osborne MP

The Chancellor has delivered his fourth Budget

The Chancellor, George Osborne, presented his fourth Budget today, against a backdrop of poor growth and declining poll ratings for his Party since last year’s Budget.

Many of us are feeling the pinch in these harsh economic times – including many affected by cancer.

Here’s our reaction to the budget as it affects us at Cancer Research UK.

Continue reading

‘Reduce stress’ and ‘look sexy’ – marketing tobacco to the world

Allan Hackshaw lecture

Professor Allan Hackshaw gave a public lecture at UCL

The success of global tobacco marketing is undeniable.

Over decades, tobacco companies have somehow managed to maintain common myths about smoking: it makes you look cool, relieves stress, and manages to make both men and women look sexy.

As a result, and in defiance of the long-established health risks associated with smoking (including increased risk of cancer, heart disease and respiratory diseases) – which result in half of long-term smokers dying as a result of their habit – the tobacco industry continues to make eye-watering profits.

And rates of smoking are increasing in countries with the highest levels of population growth.

Indeed, as the tobacco industry itself likes to boast – “If you can market a product that kills people, you can sell anything”. Smoking causes 6 million deaths each year around the world, yet 1 billion people worldwide still smoke.

So, asked Professor Allan Hackshaw, in the last in a series of ‘Lunchtime Lectures’ at University College London: Are cigarettes the most ‘successful’ product ever?

Continue reading

Absolute versus relative risk – making sense of media stories

A climber

Some activities are riskier than others

What do these headlines have in common?

They’re all statements of the relative risk of developing cancer. They tell us how much more, or less, likely the disease is in one group, compared to another.

But crucially, they don’t tell us anything about the overall likelihood of any of these things happening at all – what’s known as the absolute risk.

In this post we’ll explore the notion of risk, and some of the common pitfalls of taking headlines involving risk at face value.

Continue reading