Number of Scottish smokers trying to kick the habit drops
 |
| TAKING BABY STEPS: Shona Robison with Emma Burton and baby Finley at Stirling Royal Infirmary, which runs a smoking cessation service for mothers. |
The number of smokers attempting to quit dropped by 11% in Scotland in the second year since the smoking ban was introduced.
Ministers admitted the figures released ahead of the second anniversary of the ban today, were disappointing.
They revealed 41,424 people tried to give up with the help of the NHS during 2007, compared to 46,466 the year before.
The trend varied in different parts of the country with NHS Grampian recording a massive 47% fall in the number of people trying to kick the habit.
This is due to "limited services" being in place in the area during the period, according to an official report on the findings, as well as a slump in demand.
Concern is already circulating about the future of NHS smoking cessation services after the Scottish Government announced investment is being frozen at the same level for the next three years.
Dr Richard Simpson, Labour's spokesman on public health, said the real-terms cut in funding would affect some provision.
He added: "The trend of people trying to give up smoking is moving in the wrong direction, with the NHS Grampian figures being the most worrying.
"What is important, is not just the number attempting to quit, but how good the support services are.
"We have really got to focus on this because it is still such a killer. One in four deaths is associated with smoking in Scotland."
The move to ban smoking in enclosed public spaces has been widely applauded.
"A study published last autumn revealed the number of heart attacks treated in nine major Scottish hospitals fell by 17% the year after the law was introduced.
But not all health boards are seeing a decrease in the number of people trying to quit. In fact, half recorded a rise last year, although in some cases this was attributed to better record-keeping.
However, the vast majority of people who attempt to quit are unsuccessful. For Scotland as a whole, the percentage of patients still shunning tobacco three months after giving up last year was 19%.
Shona Robison, Minister for Public Health, said: "While it is disappointing that the number of people trying to quit smoking has fallen since 2006, it is really encouraging that more than 40,000 people tried to give up last year.
"The primary aim of the smoking ban was to reduce exposure to second-hand smoke. It is heartening to see that it is also encouraging
people to stop smoking and in turn reduce ill-health caused by smoking."
She added that a five-year action plan for tackling smoking would be published later this year, and would focus on trying to discourage young people from taking-up the habit in the first place.
Sheila Duffy, chief executive of Ash Scotland, said it was inevitable that more people would try to stop smoking in the immediate aftermath of the ban when there was widespread publicity about the health risks. "This shows
that there is a need for a
continued mass media
campaign to let people know that smoking cessation advice and support is available," she said.
"Giving up smoking has immediate and long-term benefits for all smokers at any age and figures indicate that smoking cessation services are saving lives at a cost of around £800 per life-year saved."
© All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without
permission is prohibited.
Posted by: Iain on 9:43am Wed 26 Mar 08
More lies, if it were possible, from the antismoker cult.
"A study published last autumn revealed the number of heart attacks treated in nine major Scottish hospitals fell by 17% the year after the law was introduced
The study has still NOT been published . This "fact", in other words another great big lie, was just announced at one of the annual ceremonies.the cult hold. The actual report has never been seen by anyone outside of this crazed faction.
Would be fascinating to see mathematical derivation used to come up with the £800 per life-year saved figure!
More lies, if it were possible, from the antismoker cult.
"A study published last autumn revealed the number of heart attacks treated in nine major Scottish hospitals fell by 17% the year after the law was introduced
The study has still NOT been published . This "fact", in other words another great big lie, was just announced at one of the annual ceremonies.the cult hold. The actual report has never been seen by anyone outside of this crazed faction.
Would be fascinating to see mathematical derivation used to come up with the £800 per life-year saved figure!
Posted by: GJS, Glasgow on 10:02am Wed 26 Mar 08
As I thought would happen with the smoking ban... it seems it's cool to be an outlaw!
As I thought would happen with the smoking ban... it seems it's cool to be an outlaw!
Posted by: Eddie D, Scotland on 1:04pm Wed 26 Mar 08
What has the Smoking ban achieved?, NOTHING apart from costing the taxpayer millions, lining the pharmaceutical companies pockets, creating an ever increasing Anti-Smoking jobsworth industry, destroying the hospitality sector and finally causing division and hatred amongst society.
What has the Smoking ban achieved?, NOTHING apart from costing the taxpayer millions, lining the pharmaceutical companies pockets, creating an ever increasing Anti-Smoking jobsworth industry, destroying the hospitality sector and finally causing division and hatred amongst society.
Posted by: DaveA100, London on 1:12pm Wed 26 Mar 08
I see Sheila Duffy is at her most misleading. There was some research in The Netherlands completed recently where the cost of treating a smoker through out their life costs £185,000, while a non smoker costs £220,000. That is 25% less of a burden because we live on average 5.2 years less than non smokers. We cost the NHS £1.7 billion to treat (sports injuries are £1 billion, obesity £3.7 billion) but rake in £10 billion a year in taxes.
My experience of the smoking ban is the people who just smoke down the pub (5 a day and doing no harm to themselves) are the ones who are most likely to give up, while the 20 a day people carry on puffing. As GJS quite rightly says the "cool factor" of smoking is now kicking in and the anti smoking lobby have managed to alienate even previous anti smokers with their ludicrous nannying. E.g. banning the open sale of cigarettes, smoking only in 18 certificate films.
Also one of the unintended consequences of the ban is that youngsters in the streets can see workers smoking outside their place of work and people previously inside pubs and clubs smoking on the streets 24 x 7. So maybe ASH are increasing the numbers of younsters smoking in the streets. Hoist by their own petard.
I see Sheila Duffy is at her most misleading. There was some research in The Netherlands completed recently where the cost of treating a smoker through out their life costs £185,000, while a non smoker costs £220,000. That is 25% less of a burden because we live on average 5.2 years less than non smokers. We cost the NHS £1.7 billion to treat (sports injuries are £1 billion, obesity £3.7 billion) but rake in £10 billion a year in taxes.
My experience of the smoking ban is the people who just smoke down the pub (5 a day and doing no harm to themselves) are the ones who are most likely to give up, while the 20 a day people carry on puffing. As GJS quite rightly says the "cool factor" of smoking is now kicking in and the anti smoking lobby have managed to alienate even previous anti smokers with their ludicrous nannying. E.g. banning the open sale of cigarettes, smoking only in 18 certificate films.
Also one of the unintended consequences of the ban is that youngsters in the streets can see workers smoking outside their place of work and people previously inside pubs and clubs smoking on the streets 24 x 7. So maybe ASH are increasing the numbers of younsters smoking in the streets. Hoist by their own petard.
Posted by: DaveA100, London on 1:37pm Wed 26 Mar 08
A quick PS to Ms Duffy, we all know ASH and the truth are strangers but their grasp of maths is not much better. £1.7 billion divided by 12 million smokes = £141.67 per year, where does £800 come from?
Also £10 billion divided by 12 million smokers £833.33 lost revenue to the treasury.
Therefore 833.33 - 141.67 = £691.67
I also assume non smokers never trouble the NHS again.
So a person giving up is a net loss to the country of £691.67.
ASH really need to buy a calculator and take some lessons in integrity.
A quick PS to Ms Duffy, we all know ASH and the truth are strangers but their grasp of maths is not much better. £1.7 billion divided by 12 million smokes = £141.67 per year, where does £800 come from?
Also £10 billion divided by 12 million smokers £833.33 lost revenue to the treasury.
Therefore 833.33 - 141.67 = £691.67
I also assume non smokers never trouble the NHS again.
So a person giving up is a net loss to the country of £691.67.
ASH really need to buy a calculator and take some lessons in integrity.
Posted by: ex labour voter, glasgow on 6:32pm Wed 26 Mar 08
Can nanny liar Sheila Duffy, chief executive of Ash Scotland please explain why tobacco sales have increased since the forced smoking ban?
Thought not.
Can nanny liar Sheila Duffy, chief executive of Ash Scotland please explain why tobacco sales have increased since the forced smoking ban?
Thought not.
Posted by: mandy vincent, Cambs on 10:50pm Wed 26 Mar 08
Have a word with Micheal Siegel, about those so called miracle heart attack figures - The once upon a time antis hero. Stop the lies, they are getting boring.
http://www.bmj.com/c
gi/content/full/326/
7398/1057
Enstrom/Kabat study
http://tobaccoanalys
is.blogspot.com:80/2
008/03/anti-smoking-
group-corrects-false
-claim.html
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Anti-Smoking Group Corrects False Claim that 30 Minutes of Secondhand Smoke Can Cause Atherosclerosis
On January 14, 2008, I reported that an anti-smoking group in Missouri - the Campus-Community Alliances for Smoke-Free Environments (CASE), run out of the University of Missouri in Columbia - claimed that 30 minutes of secondhand smoke exposure can cause atherosclerosis (hardening of the arteries) in nonsmokers.
Lots more information in there. Please report truthful things, what are we supposed to ever believe.
Have a word with Micheal Siegel, about those so called miracle heart attack figures - The once upon a time antis hero. Stop the lies, they are getting boring.
http://www.bmj.com/c
gi/content/full/326/
7398/1057
Enstrom/Kabat study
http://tobaccoanalys
is.blogspot.com:80/2
008/03/anti-smoking-
group-corrects-false
-claim.html
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Anti-Smoking Group Corrects False Claim that 30 Minutes of Secondhand Smoke Can Cause Atherosclerosis
On January 14, 2008, I reported that an anti-smoking group in Missouri - the Campus-Community Alliances for Smoke-Free Environments (CASE), run out of the University of Missouri in Columbia - claimed that 30 minutes of secondhand smoke exposure can cause atherosclerosis (hardening of the arteries) in nonsmokers.
Lots more information in there. Please report truthful things, what are we supposed to ever believe.
Posted by: Tich, York on 2:26am Fri 28 Mar 08
[quote]'This is due to "limited services" being in place in the area during the period, according to an official report on the findings, as well as a slump in demand.'[/quote]
Sounds like bad management to me, a total failure to anticipate market forces .
They should be sacked and ordered to pay back all the money they have wasted
'This is due to "limited services" being in place in the area during the period, according to an official report on the findings, as well as a slump in demand.'
Sounds like bad management to me, a total failure to anticipate market forces .
They should be sacked and ordered to pay back all the money they have wasted
Posted by: Jon, manchester on 11:55am Fri 28 Mar 08
As Iain says, there was no published study showing that heart attacks had decreased by 17%. Dr Simpson must know that the the data for the whole of Scotland-not just for 9 hospitals - has been available for several months. This shows a small decrease in line with the long term downward trend. Dr Simpson, you're a disgrace.
As Iain says, there was no published study showing that heart attacks had decreased by 17%. Dr Simpson must know that the the data for the whole of Scotland-not just for 9 hospitals - has been available for several months. This shows a small decrease in line with the long term downward trend. Dr Simpson, you're a disgrace.
Posted by: Jon, manchester on 2:35pm Fri 28 Mar 08
"Giving up smoking has immediate and long-term benefits for all smokers at any age and figures indicate that smoking cessation services are saving lives at a cost of around £800 per life-year saved."
What calculation has Sheila Duffy made? Each life year saved costs £5000 in pension payments. Each of us consumes on average £1500 per year in NHS costs. Twenty a day smokers pay over £1000 a year in tobacco duty. Dying of dementia is far more expensive than dying of lung cancer.
"Giving up smoking has immediate and long-term benefits for all smokers at any age and figures indicate that smoking cessation services are saving lives at a cost of around £800 per life-year saved."
What calculation has Sheila Duffy made? Each life year saved costs £5000 in pension payments. Each of us consumes on average £1500 per year in NHS costs. Twenty a day smokers pay over £1000 a year in tobacco duty. Dying of dementia is far more expensive than dying of lung cancer.
Posted by: chas, suffolk on 6:40pm Fri 28 Mar 08
Anybody thinking of giving up see signs with lit cigarettes on every shop door and inside every shop. They also see smokers outside every pub and club. How can people be expected to give up when they are constantly reminded of cigarettes?
Anybody thinking of giving up see signs with lit cigarettes on every shop door and inside every shop. They also see smokers outside every pub and club. How can people be expected to give up when they are constantly reminded of cigarettes?
Posted by: Robert Feal-Martinez, Swindon on 8:33am Sat 29 Mar 08
What posters neglect to say about the 17% figure is that less than 6 months later the official NHS Scotland figures for all hospital admissions, by type, was published the figure for heart attacks was in fact 8% down, 2% less than the two previous years without the ban, and if my memory serves me correctly the lowest reduction in 10 years. Some success story.
What posters neglect to say about the 17% figure is that less than 6 months later the official NHS Scotland figures for all hospital admissions, by type, was published the figure for heart attacks was in fact 8% down, 2% less than the two previous years without the ban, and if my memory serves me correctly the lowest reduction in 10 years. Some success story.
News
INDEX
Comment | Read Comments (12)
