Thai Public Health Ministry Plans Strict Measures Against Smoking

[webfact]

Public Health Ministry plans strict measures against smoking

The Nation

BANGKOK: -- The Public Health Ministry reported yesterday that as many as 6 million people across the world die from smokingrelated diseases every year, and that 600,000 of these deaths are caused by secondhand smoke.

In Thailand, at least 48,000 people die from smokingrelated illnesses annually and that there are 13 million teenage smokers in the country. Since up to 69 per cent of the population inhales secondhand smoke at public places, 56 per cent at home and 31 per cent at the office, the ministry has decided to improve the 1992 NonSmoker's Health Protection Act by including punishment such as the revocation of business licences and heavier fines as well as introducing measures to control young people's access to cigarettes.

This report was presented to HRH Princess Somsavali who presided over the World No Tobacco Day 2012 opening ceremony at Pathum Thani's Future Park Rangsit.

The Princess conferred the Regional Director's Appreciation Award for World No Tobacco Day 2012 to eight people for running outstanding antitobacco campaigns in Southeast Asia, including two Thais: Khatha Bunditanukul, president of the pharmacist professional network for the tobacco control; and Karun Trakulpadetkrai, president of the Laryngectomy Association in Thailand. The Princess also presented shields of honour to 32 persons/organisations for their antitobacco campaigns.

Meanwhile, local authorities in Satun joined forces to destroy 584,000 illegal cigarettes worth Bt1.168 million that had been seized by customs officials since last October.

In addition, Disease Control Department chief Dr Pornthep Siriwanarangsan said his office would work with police to conduct random checks in public places, especially at markets and schools, where smoking is banned. Those caught smoking in these areas would face fines of up to Bt2,000 and the landlords would face up to a month in jail and/or Bt20,000 in fines.

-- The Nation 2012-06-01

[somtumlion]

"Measures" without enforcement = nothing

[LuckyLew]

Will I still be able to smoke cigarettes while I am buying my

fake rolex and XXX cd's while on my way for a rub and tug at

the local massage parlor?

[canardo]

Will I still be able to smoke cigarettes while I am buying my

fake rolex and XXX cd's while on my way for a rub and tug at

the local massage parlor?

May I add:

...bribing the policeman at the corner with 100THB because you drove without helmet / on the right lan of the road or has no driving licens with you...

[Yunla]

If we are going to show grotesque pictures of people dying from self-infliced vices & unnecessary pollution, we should go either all the way or not at all. This applies to Thailand but also Europe where these double-standards are also rife.

The shameful double-standards applied to tobacco smoking, it is somehow viewed as acceptable for gory photos of random dead naked people on cig-boxes and on big posters (see OP). How about some photos on the side of junk-food containers, of a clinically obese person being airlifted in a jumbo-harness from the demolished wall of his home, because he can't get off the sofa or through the doorway by himself. Or big billboards showing a 30 year old alcoholic vomiting up his stomach lining into a huge pool of blood on the pavement after a heavy night on distilled spirits. (my friend Tommy RIP)

They should start showing big billboard pictures along the roads of people trapped in car-wrecks and of bloodied limbs scattered allover the road, to show people what happens when they drive dangerously.

Also should be full colour photos lining the roads of 'industrial breathing disorder', industrial asthma & emphysema , show us pedestrians what happens to people who breathe car-fumes all day long. What a hypocrisy.

Nobody is saying that that smoking doesn't harm your lungs, but you get lung cancer just as fast from breathing toxic industrial smog. How many of these placards in the OP are of people who smoked while living on a mountaintop breathing fresh air every day. How do you know those gory photos of tumors are not from diesel fumes & factory emissions. Fact - lung cancer is much rarer in rural areas than in towns, despite similar levels of tobacco smokers.

Edited June 1, 2012 by Yunla

[warfie]

If we are going to show grotesque pictures of people dying from self-infliced vices & unnecessary pollution, we should go either all the way or not at all. This applies to Thailand but also Europe where these double-standards are also rife.

The shameful double-standards applied to tobacco smoking, it is somehow viewed as acceptable for gory photos of random dead naked people on cig-boxes and on big posters (see OP). How about some photos on the side of junk-food containers, of a clinically obese person being airlifted in a jumbo-harness from the demolished wall of his home, because he can't get off the sofa or through the doorway by himself. Or big billboards showing a 30 year old alcoholic vomiting up his stomach lining into a huge pool of blood on the pavement after a heavy night on distilled spirits. (my friend Tommy RIP)

They should start showing big billboard pictures along the roads of people trapped in car-wrecks and of bloodied limbs scattered allover the road, to show people what happens when they drive dangerously.

Also should be full colour photos lining the roads of 'industrial breathing disorder', industrial asthma & emphysema , show us pedestrians what happens to people who breathe car-fumes all day long. What a hypocrisy.

Nobody is saying that that smoking doesn't harm your lungs, but you get lung cancer just as fast from breathing toxic industrial smog. How many of these placards in the OP are of people who smoked while living on a mountaintop breathing fresh air every day. How do you know those gory photos of tumors are not from diesel fumes & factory emissions. Fact - lung cancer is much rarer in rural areas than in towns, despite similar levels of tobacco smokers.

Good point. Gory pictures of dead and dying smokers on cigarette packs... why not have gory pictures of traffic casualties on all motor vehicles?

[Yunla]

Good point. Gory pictures of dead and dying smokers on cigarette packs... why not have gory pictures of traffic casualties on all motor vehicles?

I think the main reason is that the 'quitting-smoking industry' is incredibly lucrative and chewing-gum, tablets, electronic-cigarettes and all the other quit-smoking pharmaceuticals are a hugely profitable industry with their entire income dependant on making people want to quit, using any means including these horrible corpse photos that give children (and adults) nightmares.

By contrast quitting dangerous-driving and quitting alcohol don't have the same pharmaceutical industry suppling devices to make you drive safer or stay off the booze, so there is not the same corporate lobby pressuring you to change those things in your life.

The quitting-obesity industry is of course very lucrative with slimming-products and stomach surgery etc. but generally people decide to lose weight based on doctors advice or personal unhappiness / health problems relating to their obesity, rather than by seeing lurid photos of naked obese people on ventilators etc.

Only smoking gets the full rotting-corpse photos treatment, on display without any kind of Age Rating. If a computer game had photo images like these anti-smoking pictures in it, it would be classified 18 to protect young people.

Edited June 1, 2012 by Yunla

[Sam Drucker]

Good points Yunla. Are you a smoker?

I'm not a smoker. My biggest objection is simply the lack of smoking enforcement by owners and police in bars and restaurants, and inadequate separation for smokers and non-smokers. I like (and in some cases need) to visit these places. But there is no separation from the smokers in many places, mostly the "open air" ones. Apparently there is an exception for that in the law, and it leaves non-smokers breathng second-hand smoke. And the most annoying thing is even when I find a place where there aren't any customers smoking, in the course of the time I will be there someone inevitably will park at a table nearby and be oblivious to his surroundings (that people aren't smoking) and light up.

[jvs]

Hopefully they will start enforcing the non smoking law as is so i can enjoy a meal somewhere without people blowing smoke in my face!

I quit going to some nice restaurants because of this.

[Yunla]

Good points Yunla. Are you a smoker?

I'm not a smoker. My biggest objection is simply the lack of smoking enforcement by owners and police in bars and restaurants, and inadequate separation for smokers and non-smokers. I like (and in some cases need) to visit these places. But there is no separation from the smokers in many places, mostly the "open air" ones. Apparently there is an exception for that in the law, and it leaves non-smokers breathng second-hand smoke. And the most annoying thing is even when I find a place where there aren't any customers smoking, in the course of the time I will be there someone inevitably will park at a table nearby and be oblivious to his surroundings (that people aren't smoking) and light up.

No, I'm a non-smoker & non-drinker, I'm not even allowed coffee because I have progressive MS. I think it is good if people quit smoking for their health, but it should also be their decision and the Govt. should not guilt trip people with photos of rotting cadavers. I also think smokers should respect non-smokers rights and not smoke where people are eating etc.

I'm mainly concerned about balance and transparency of the scientific facts. Smoking is bad for you but so are many things in city-air allover the world (and rural air in many places). Where I live in Bangkok, there is no enforced regulation at all on the spraying of neurotoxic & carcinogenic insecticides outdoors where children and adults are walking past.

Diesel fumes are also breathed in on a daily basis by most people in cities and are extremely toxic to humans.

For example to use the UK reports:

"in 1957 the anti-smoking campaign was launched in UK, As a result of the scare campaign there has been a decrease in tobacco consumption since 1962. Since 1962 there has also been an increased and increasing output of diesel smoke on all major roads, while in 1970 and since there has been an increase in lung cancer deaths in areas affected by this increase. Thus, in the Abingdon and Faringdon district lung cancer deaths rose by 65% in 1970 as compared with previous years.Yet another source of evidence has been the statistics provided by the Registrar of Births and Deaths.

The occupation with the highest incidence of lung cancer was that of garage attendant, while long distance lorry drivers also showed a high incidence. All other categories showed far lower incidences. When attention was drawn to this fact the only reaction was to introduce self-service at garages."

http://www.second-op...ung_cancer.html

I think Thailand has a lot of major problems to address regarding its whole infrastructure, law enforcement, equality, and political accountability. The "no smoking" issue is so far down the list of social problems in Thailand, that the campaign can only be, ironically, a smokescreen, or a way of putting on the blinkers and ignoring the genuinely urgent issues that Thailand must face.

Edited June 1, 2012 by Yunla

[WhizBang]

Hopefully they will start enforcing the non smoking law as is so i can enjoy a meal somewhere without people blowing smoke in my face!

I quit going to some nice restaurants because of this.

Absolutely agreed. I stopped going to the Huntsmans Pub inside the Landmark Hotel because they refused to enforce the smoking ban in air conditioned spaces.

Complaints to the Landmark went unanswered too.

[Reasonableman]

Oh dear, we can't tackle the smoking issue because other issues are a higher priority. Ho-hum(bug). Perhaps we might try to address many, even all, of the priority issues, instead of adopting an all-or-nothing mindset. Can't do that, because another issue is more pressing. Isn't it a coincidence that those who seek inaction on smoking are the same ones who point the finger at almost any other issue as the one REALLY needing attention, instead. So where's the smoke-screen really blowing from?

[Yunla]

Oh dear, we can't tackle the smoking issue because other issues are a higher priority. Ho-hum(bug). Perhaps we might try to address many, even all, of the priority issues, instead of adopting an all-or-nothing mindset. Can't do that, because another issue is more pressing. Isn't it a coincidence that those who seek inaction on smoking are the same ones who point the finger at almost any other issue as the one REALLY needing attention, instead. So where's the smoke-screen really blowing from?

I never said I was seeking inaction on smoking, I just said for most people in the industrialised world, there are more toxic substances inhaled other than burned plant-matter. I also feel that Thailand has really got bigger issues than tobacco-smoking to deal with.

Edited June 1, 2012 by Yunla

[Reasonableman]

Oh dear, we can't tackle the smoking issue because other issues are a higher priority. Ho-hum(bug). Perhaps we might try to address many, even all, of the priority issues, instead of adopting an all-or-nothing mindset. Can't do that, because another issue is more pressing. Isn't it a coincidence that those who seek inaction on smoking are the same ones who point the finger at almost any other issue as the one REALLY needing attention, instead. So where's the smoke-screen really blowing from?

I never said I was seeking inaction on smoking, I just said for most people in the industrialised world, there are more toxic substances inhaled other than burned plant-matter. I also feel that Thailand has really got bigger issues than tobacco-smoking to deal with.

OK, so let's tackle those you quite rightly mention--AND smoking. In that case we are agreed.

[Thai at Heart]

In Thailand, at least 48,000 people die from smokingrelated illnesses annually and that there are 13 million teenage smokers in the country. Since up to 69 per cent of the population inhales secondhand smoke at public places, 56 per cent at home and 31 per cent at the office, the ministry has decided to improve the 1992 NonSmoker's Health Protection Act by including punishment such as the revocation of business licences and heavier fines as well as introducing measures to control young people's access to cigarettes.

Does anyone believe any of these stats?

13mn teenage smokers? Does this mean every teenager in the country smokes?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Thailand#Age_structure

Age structure

0-14 years: 21.2% (male 7,104,776/female 6,781,453) 15-64 years: 70.3% (male 22,763,274/female 23,304,793) 65 years and over: 8.5% (male 2,516,721/female 3,022,281) (2008 est.) 0-14 years: 19.9% (male 6,779,723/female 6,466,625) 15-64 years: 70.9% (male 23,410,091/female 23,913,499) 65 years and over: 9.2% (male 2,778,012/female 3,372,203) (2011 est.)

31% inhaling smoke in the office? Anyone lit up a cigarette INSIDE an office building in Thailand recently? Obviously all those people standing in front of offices are wasting their time going outside.

I don't mind them trying to reduce the smoking population of the country, but stats like this are ridiculous

[jaltsc]

I continue to see people smoking under the signs that say smoking is prohibited/2,000 THB fine. However, there is no enforcement of this statute. It's also not too encouraging when one can see police and military personnel alongside monks smoking in bus stations under the same type of sign.

As mentioned above, it would be nice to sit in a restaurant and enjoy a meal without having to inhale someone else's smoke. As for having a smoking section in a restaurant, that's the same as having a peeing section in a swimming pool.

The arguments it is the "quit-smoking industry" that is driving the movement is nothng less than a smoke screen (excuse the unintentional pun) perpetuated by those addicts who are too weak to quit and inconsiderate of other's right to breathe. This is just a strong request from people who do not want to add cigarette smoke to the other air pollutants in our environment. We might not have much power to stop all the other pollutants in our enviroment, but all that needs to be done to elimiate this poison is don't light up near me. We don't care if you smoke 20 packs a day. Just don't do it near us!

Edited June 1, 2012 by jaltsc

[jaltsc]

If we are going to show grotesque pictures of people dying from self-infliced vices & unnecessary pollution, we should go either all the way or not at all. This applies to Thailand but also Europe where these double-standards are also rife.

The shameful double-standards applied to tobacco smoking, it is somehow viewed as acceptable for gory photos of random dead naked people on cig-boxes and on big posters (see OP). How about some photos on the side of junk-food containers, of a clinically obese person being airlifted in a jumbo-harness from the demolished wall of his home, because he can't get off the sofa or through the doorway by himself. Or big billboards showing a 30 year old alcoholic vomiting up his stomach lining into a huge pool of blood on the pavement after a heavy night on distilled spirits. (my friend Tommy RIP)

They should start showing big billboard pictures along the roads of people trapped in car-wrecks and of bloodied limbs scattered allover the road, to show people what happens when they drive dangerously.

Also should be full colour photos lining the roads of 'industrial breathing disorder', industrial asthma & emphysema , show us pedestrians what happens to people who breathe car-fumes all day long. What a hypocrisy.

Nobody is saying that that smoking doesn't harm your lungs, but you get lung cancer just as fast from breathing toxic industrial smog. How many of these placards in the OP are of people who smoked while living on a mountaintop breathing fresh air every day. How do you know those gory photos of tumors are not from diesel fumes & factory emissions. Fact - lung cancer is much rarer in rural areas than in towns, despite similar levels of tobacco smokers.

I would like for you to substantiate your "fact" with the citation of the study from which you quote. I won't hold my breath for your reply.

And, if there is such a study, does "rarer" mean fewer cases due to a lower population or a lower rate when population is taken into consideration? Anyone can skew statistics to suit their need. What can't be faked are the inconsiderate behaviors of smokers who light up regardless of the unhealthy environment they are creating.

[gand]

Smoke all you want, as long as it is outside away from non smokers.

[Reasonableman]

As for having a smoking section in a restaurant, that's the same as having a peeing section in a swimming pool.

I'm old enough to remember when there was a smoking section in some international aircraft, and a non-smoking section in the same open cabin. Rows and rows of seats in the same cabin, and some were "smoking" seats and some were "non-smoking". I still don't know how they managed it, but the nauseating smoke was apparently intended to magically stop drifting when it saw the non-smoking sign... anyway that was the theory. My worst ever flight in half a century (and more) was Olympic Airlines. Inconsiderate loud, drunk, gesticulating, smoking, garlic-snorting passengers standing in gaggles in the aisles, having animated conversations, drinking, and smoking like chimneys, regardless of the ludicrous "non-smoking" seats and their daft occupants. Absolute bedlam. 9 hours of that.... Now all flights are non-smoking, so common sense eventually prevailed. Whatever happened to Olympic Airways and Alitalia, by the way?

Edited June 1, 2012 by Reasonableman

[farangbanok]

I am one of the "social lepers" who still smokes - but I hope in a considerate manner.

I will not smoke indoors not even in my own home with the windows open. Although a chronically addicted smoker I don't like the smell of cigarette smoke especially while I eat a meal.

I think it is not only the lung health issue that should be considered, but the mental health of those who cannot, or will not, respect the health and wishes of those around.

I always understood that the Buddhists believed in Karma which I believed included being in harmony with oneself and one's surroundings. Perhaps Karma for smokers is different from non-smokers' Karma.

Instead of pictures of putrifying body parts some pictures of important and auspicious amulets should be used to prompt the majority of the population in LoS. (However I think it would be wrong to use an image of the Lord Buddha)

Still time to go outside for a cough and a drag. Wheeze you later TV

Edited June 1, 2012 by farangbanok

[waza]

The headline worried me, then I read it was about cigaretes

[Reasonableman]

The headline worried me, then I read it was about cigaretes

Don't worry, one [smoke] a day probably won't do any long-term harm

Edited June 1, 2012 by Reasonableman

[1bbcd5]

Just what I needed, thanks a lot.

[how241]

"Measures" without enforcement = nothing

It's a start. They have a plan.

[Ferangled]

Good points Yunla. Are you a smoker?

I'm not a smoker. My biggest objection is simply the lack of smoking enforcement by owners and police in bars and restaurants, and inadequate separation for smokers and non-smokers. I like (and in some cases need) to visit these places. But there is no separation from the smokers in many places, mostly the "open air" ones. Apparently there is an exception for that in the law, and it leaves non-smokers breathng second-hand smoke. And the most annoying thing is even when I find a place where there aren't any customers smoking, in the course of the time I will be there someone inevitably will park at a table nearby and be oblivious to his surroundings (that people aren't smoking) and light up.

I guess you're not a fan of BBQs...

[Ferangled]

If we are going to show grotesque pictures of people dying from self-infliced vices & unnecessary pollution, we should go either all the way or not at all. This applies to Thailand but also Europe where these double-standards are also rife.

The shameful double-standards applied to tobacco smoking, it is somehow viewed as acceptable for gory photos of random dead naked people on cig-boxes and on big posters (see OP). How about some photos on the side of junk-food containers, of a clinically obese person being airlifted in a jumbo-harness from the demolished wall of his home, because he can't get off the sofa or through the doorway by himself. Or big billboards showing a 30 year old alcoholic vomiting up his stomach lining into a huge pool of blood on the pavement after a heavy night on distilled spirits. (my friend Tommy RIP)

They should start showing big billboard pictures along the roads of people trapped in car-wrecks and of bloodied limbs scattered allover the road, to show people what happens when they drive dangerously.

Also should be full colour photos lining the roads of 'industrial breathing disorder', industrial asthma & emphysema , show us pedestrians what happens to people who breathe car-fumes all day long. What a hypocrisy.

Nobody is saying that that smoking doesn't harm your lungs, but you get lung cancer just as fast from breathing toxic industrial smog. How many of these placards in the OP are of people who smoked while living on a mountaintop breathing fresh air every day. How do you know those gory photos of tumors are not from diesel fumes & factory emissions. Fact - lung cancer is much rarer in rural areas than in towns, despite similar levels of tobacco smokers.

I would like for you to substantiate your "fact" with the citation of the study from which you quote. I won't hold my breath for your reply.

And, if there is such a study, does "rarer" mean fewer cases due to a lower population or a lower rate when population is taken into consideration? Anyone can skew statistics to suit their need. What can't be faked are the inconsiderate behaviors of smokers who light up regardless of the unhealthy environment they are creating.

Do you drive a car or motorbike?

[fxe1200]

Will I still be able to smoke cigarettes while I am buying my

fake rolex and XXX cd's while on my way for a rub and tug at

the local massage parlor?

May I add:

...bribing the policeman at the corner with 100THB because you drove without helmet / on the right lan of the road or has no driving licens with you...

How about warning signs on police unforms? Beware I take bribes!

[Yunla]

I would like for you to substantiate your "fact" with the citation of the study from which you quote. I won't hold my breath for your reply.

And, if there is such a study, does "rarer" mean fewer cases due to a lower population or a lower rate when population is taken into consideration? Anyone can skew statistics to suit their need. What can't be faked are the inconsiderate behaviors of smokers who light up regardless of the unhealthy environment they are creating.

http://www.ncin.org....s/rurality.aspx

http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/15820590

http://www.second-op...ung_cancer.html

They all confirm my statement, in addition you need to understand that diesel fumes are one of the most harmful possible substances to the human lungs, and you will get a massively larger amount of diesel fumes in the city than in a rural area. Common sense as well as doing some research will show industrial pollution causes lung cancer and you will not find many doctors or scientists who will deny that, and of course industrial pollution is a city not a rural problem.

Edited June 1, 2012 by Yunla

[kiniyow]

Walk around in any city especially in Chiang Mai and the Air quality from Burning--Busses--Diesels all belching toxic smoke is about equal to smoking 2 Packs a day.....

In public I rather walk around Smokers then try to cross the street and being hit by a drunk driver...

[phiphidon]

A quick and easy start would be to get rid of the ridiculous ban on electronic cigarettes..............