The community forum at the Williston Community Library attracted 15 people who had a chance to get educated on the draft plan while gathering feedback and suggestions.
Bismarck's Pat McGeary, a registered nurse and tobacco treatment specialist, shared information about state policy and how it can be improved through the proposed plan.
McGeary said the state already has some programs and plans in place, but now is the time to begin using increased funding for prevention and control programs. It's also time to create the infrastructure on a state level to coordinate programs statewide.
"Establishing smoke-free communities and workplaces is a goal. Increasing the price of tobacco in the form of something such as an excise tax is a goal and a deterrent," said McGeary. McGeary said studies have shown that increasing the price of tobacco 10 percent prompts young people to cut its use by 7 percent. A price hike prompts adults to cut use by an average of 2 percent and provides an overall reduction of 4 percent.
"Any of you in the field of cessation know that the price increases are especially effective," said McGeary.
McGeary said the cigarette tax in North Dakota is 44 cents, while the national average is $1.23. She also said the rate of smoking among young people and pregnant women in the state is higher than the national average.
"We need some help there; we have some work to do," said McGeary.
Javayne Oyloe, health promotion team leader for the Williston's Upper Missouri District Health Unit, said the draft proposal has four primary goals. Those goals are to prevent the initiation of tobacco use among youths, to protect the public from exposure to second-hand smoke, assist current users in quitting and to build infrastructure and leadership in managing the program.
Oyloe said prevention among young people is extremely important because it can save a large portion of the next generation from suffering from problems associated with current smokers.
"We don't want people to even start. It's much easier not to start than it is to quit," said Oyloe.
Among the initiatives outlined for preventing young people from smoking are increasing the cigarette tax to $2 a pack, amend the state smoke-free law to provide 100 percent smoke-free public places and places of employment and increasing the percentage of schools with smoke-free campuses from 24 percent to 50 percent by June 2013.
The second goal is to prevent exposure to second-hand smoke. One objective of this goal is to continue fighting state laws that prevent local levels of government from enacting certain laws or regulations. Oyloe said doing so allows communities to pursue being smoke-free cities.
"Fargo and West Fargo already have 100 percent smoke-free ordinances; we'd like to see communities statewide be able to do so eventually," said Oyloe.
Objectives listed in helping people to quit include newer ideas such as getting nicotine use to be addressed in addiction treatment plans and in mental treatment plans by 2014.
"These are new concepts. We have found that people with various mental issues are dependent on tobacco use at a rate two, three times higher than others," said Oyloe.
The final goal is to get an infrastructure created to coordinate the new programs on a state level. This includes having staff and leaders such as an executive director in charge of state tobacco prevention and treatment programs.
One question asked by audience members is what kind of work is being done to make sure doctors, nurses and clinic workers ask people if they smoke, give them advice on quitting and refer them to the state quit line.
McGeary said having a program in place where they can survey and monitor how often workers are asking patients such questions is definitely something they hope to work on.
"It really is an important task for health care workers; talking to them and informing them on the issue may make patients think about getting help," said McGeary.
Another topic was talking to students at schools. One audience member said talking to young students and setting off a "reverse peer-pressure" to not smoke instead of smoking could be an idea. McGeary said that would be an interesting result of having talks with schoolchildren if done right.
Overall, McGeary said the meeting, the final of seven statewide hearings on the draft this month, was successful. She said people in Williston and elsewhere were quite receptive to the proposed plan.
"We had a good mix of doctors, nurses, local legislators and citizens attend with a wide variety of ideas and intelligent input," said McGeary.
The Tobacco Prevention and Control Advisory Committee was appointed by Gov. John Hoeven in January and the plan is to be submitted to the state by July 8.
For more information about the committee and information about smoking and prevention, visit www.tfnd.org.
Comments
Headward wrote on Jun 9, 2009 8:12 AM:
"Approximately 3,000 lung cancer deaths per year among non-smokers...are estimated to be attributable to ETS(second hand smoke) in the United States."
1998 - Federal Judge Osteen
"EPA's procefural failure of constitutes a violation of the law."
"...EPA 'cherry picked' it's data."
"EPA deviated from acceptable scientific procedure...to ensure a preordained outcome."
WHO - Multicenter Case-Control Study of Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke and Lung Cancer in Europe
"Conclusions: Our results indicate no association between childhood exposure to ETS and lung cancer risk."
The adults study was not statistically significant.
What does the Surgeon General, American Lung Association, American Cancer Society, and American Heart Association use as evidence to state that second hand smoke kills? That same 1993 EPA study was thrown out by federal court. "
Frank wrote on Jun 6, 2009 11:40 AM:
FrstKnt wrote on Jun 5, 2009 2:51 PM:
How about the Surgeon General or the Mayo Clinic? Yep...pretty much every major medical or environmental agency out there will tell you that second-hand smoke kills...but there's no credible evidence... "
Kris wrote on Jun 5, 2009 11:45 AM:
Smoker wrote on Jun 4, 2009 7:10 PM:
Wilres wrote on Jun 4, 2009 12:58 PM:
headward wrote on Jun 4, 2009 12:57 PM:
/beginrant
We're paying tax dollars for these people to try to cut tobacco use down? Are these people dumb? Tobacco and alcohol taxes keeps our government solvent. If anything the government wants more people to smoke. People who smoke live 20 years less than people who do not smoke. So they wouldn't be collecting Social Security benefits.
Not to mention there is not 1 credible study that second hand smoke kills. Having blanket bans on smoking in PRIVATE ESTIBLISHMENTS are un-American.
I just can't figure out that if you don't want to be around something, don't go there. Like I don't like watching topless girls dance so I stay out of strip clubs. I know it might be a hard concept to grasp but the gov't needs to stop controlling things.
Let the free market and the power of the dollar let the businesses choose if they will be smoke free.
/endrant "
What a Joke wrote on Jun 3, 2009 7:50 PM:
Frank wrote on Jun 2, 2009 11:48 PM:
Wilres wrote on May 31, 2009 10:40 AM:
Allan wrote on May 31, 2009 12:53 AM:
The people on the Tobacco Prevention and Control Advisory Committee should be very ashamed of themselves, especially for trying to force an Iowa-style outdoor college campus ban on all colleges in the state. Enough private businesses already prohibit smoking, and as demand for smoke-free businesses further proves the free market works, I hope state lawmakers will continue to allow free choice to all businesses on setting their own smoking or non-smoking policy. "