LETTERS: ET INVOLVED IN TOBACCO ISSUES

To the editor:

Most of the dialogue regarding the proposed tobacco ordinance in Cape Girardeau allows that teen-age smoking is both unhealthy and undesirable, and for good reason. Tobacco use among Missourians is significantly higher than the national average. In 1995, 40 percent of Missouri youth reported they smoked, compared to 35 percent nationally. An estimated one-third of these teen smokers will die of tobacco-related illness, with an average lifespan 12 to 20 years less than nonsmokers. Approximately 10,000 Missourians die each year from tobacco-related illness.

The controversy develops over what approach to take regarding this public health menace. Some advocate stronger penalties for businesses that sell tobacco to youth, which may well reduce access and availability to youth. However, we can expect limited success with this approach, as youth manage to access alcohol products despite strict regulations based on licensing.

And what about the situation whereby an adult purchases tobacco products for youths.

The proposed city ordinance originally included a provision to make possession of tobacco products illegal, as did federal legislation co-signed by Congresswoman Jo Ann Emerson. Although not popular, this approach deserves serious consideration, because tobacco is a dangerous drug that causes four times more deaths than the combined total of alcohol and all illegal drugs. Furthermore, it is capable of killing not only the user, but innocent bystanders as well. Over 50,000 deaths per year are attributed to the effects of breathing secondhand smoke, making it the third leading cause of death in the country (behind active smoking and alcohol abuse).Smoking during pregnancy increases the risk of birth defects and spontaneous abortion by about one-third (one in five pregnant women in Missouri are active smokers). Sadly, tobacco smoke is attributed to 11 percent of all perinatal deaths in Missouri.

Increasing the tobacco excise tax is another possibility discussed at the national level, and it certainly holds promise based on actions taken by individual states. For instance, in 1993 Massachusetts increased the tax on cigarettes from 26 cents to 51 cents and used the proceeds on statewide tobacco control and health education. Adult consumption of cigarettes declined by 3 percent per year for the next three years. Meanwhile, in Missouri, adult consumption rose from 24.4 percent in 1995 to 27.7 percent in 1996.

Missouri's cigarette tax is currently 17 cents/pack, which is about half the national average, and none of the funds generated is allocated for statewide tobacco-use prevention.

What can we do? I foresee several options for those that care: Cross your fingers and wait for whatever the federal government produces.

Recommend that our state Legislature double the cigarette tax to fund prevention efforts.

Become involved with local groups that are exploring local solutions, including the proposed city ordinance (many other municipalities have enacted tobacco ordinances, with varying degrees of success). The local office of the American Cancer Society is a good starting point for those willing to become involved.

JIM MAGINEL

Cape Girardeau