General introduction: Historical Background about Tobacco
Cigarette consumption started as early as 16th centuries among the pre-Columbian Americas. However, the natives smoked for medicinal and ceremonial purposes only. The cultivation and smoking methods were completely different as compared in the early 1960’s. The people used to smoke the tobacco in pipes. Tobacco consumption started in Europe at the end of 16th century after Christopher Columbus took with him some few tobacco leaves and seeds. However, its used was largely popularized by such individuals like Jean Nicot who champion for the spread of the significance it had to the users. The main idea of Christopher Columbus when introducing the crop in Europe was to ensure its medicinal purposes was achieved (Michael, 2001). However, in 1612, John Rolfe introduced the crop as a commercial product and was only cultivated within Virginia. Within seven years of its production within Virginia, it grew to be one of the major forms of export in colonial governments.
The production of tobacco for commercial purposes by the colonial government triggered the vast demand for slave to work in the farms for maximum production of this crop in North America. Although cigarette smoking was mainly done through pipes, chewing and snuff purposes, it did not attain strong status of use among the users until early 1800 (Mark, 2005). However, as a result of the great civil war fought in the U.S, cigarette smoking became a widely used form of bright tobacco. In the late 1880s, James Buchanan introduced the first practical machine that produced cigarette in large quantities.
Historical facts about the possible negative side effects of tobacco consumption
Before early 20th century, most physicians described tobacco as being as a form of curative drug. However, at the end of 20th century, the rate of smoking cigarette became increasingly high than was expected by most medical professionals.In order to investigate the reason why most people were involving themselves in smoking, medical professional paid a close attention about this product. The outcome of their research was that the consumption of cigarette had negative effects on the users. In 1930, a scientific based research board based in Cologne, Germany revealed that cigarette smoking andlung cancer was directly related.In 1938; a research published by Dr. Raymond Pearl under the authority of Johns Hopkins University claimed that people who smoke are more likely to have a short life span than non-smokers. However, this effect was not proven as the judgment was pre-determined as a result of negative perception from the prior scientists.
In addition to this report, the American Cancer Society posed an impending danger to the users. This was later regarded as an unproven fact that lied on the hands of the very few individuals who were in favor of their personal interest in tobacco business. If smoking of cigarette really caused lung cancer as they claimed, why didn’t they have evidence on the use of the same? Until then, there was no clear established relationship between lung cancer and smoking. In addition to this, the public just believed in whatever the researchers told them since the public had little knowledge on the body of statistics that conducted the research. At this moment, there was completely no causal correlation that was established to proof their claims over smoking of cigar.
The perception and believes that consumption of alcohol was not harmful to the users was changed in 1952 when an article title “cancer by the carton” was published under the authorization of the Reader’s Digest. The article brought a lot of changes in the tobacco sector. In realization of the negative effects caused by consumption of cigarette, other periodicals started to publish reports on the negative effects of cigarette smoking. Due to the constant pressure from the medical professionals, tobacco sales drastically reduced in large percentage. In order to curb the increasing claims over health complications associated with tobacco consumption, major tobacco companies in the U.S formed industry research councils that responded over these claims.
There have been adequate researches that try to expose the effects of tobacco smoking in the human health. Over the years, the medical researchers have associated tobacco to be the cause of many diseases and even death to human population. According to the 19964 U.S surgeon general reports on smoking and health, it was said that cigarette smoking is associated with a 70% cause of male deaths (Michael, 2001). However, it was noted that the general number of death caused by cigarette smoking in the United States of America cannot be estimated. It was concluded that the mortality rate associated with tobacco in the U.S at that time was high. Consequently, the government was to come up with measures that would see the reduction of tobacco smoking due to its dangerous effects on health.
The call for the banning of tobacco and other measures to reduce the intake of the same was amplified by the media. However, prediction were made that in the short run, the result would be achieved but with time the trend would resume back to normal. This was the case as the first year from the announcement about the tobacco effects by DR. Terry Luther so the intake reduced significantly. This was characterized by reduced sales of tobacco products. However, the trend went back to normal but there was a shift to filter cigarette. These results were similar to earlier results that were reported in the U.S in 1954 and in Britain in1962 (Michael, 2001). Therefore, it came as no surprise when the trend became steeper than prior the announcement. These reports about the Britain scenario were used as a justification to show that the announcement would not offer a long-term solution to smoking. This was so because American could not give up a habit that was so stuck in their culture.
The committee found out that cigarette smoking was also associated with lung cancer in men and thus its negative effects outweigh all the other factors. There has been an indication of the relationship between smoking and lung cancer. According to the reports that were released after three studies, it was proofed that the two were linked. In the first report, cancer patients were questioned about their smoking history and the proportions of their smoking habit was determined as either non-smoker, moderate or heavy smokers. The second study, the same was repeated with non-cancer patients and the third study; the results of the earlier studies were compared to see if there was a real difference (Hammond & Daniel, 2008). This was called the historical method approach. Hospital and other medical records also proof a high link between lung cancer and tobacco smoking. Comparing the economic benefits that accrue from the tobacco business and the effects it has on the human population, the whole business thing is a failure. The amount of money spent on treatment, research and campaigns related to tobacco are expensive than the profits acquired from it. Inclusion of the demographic, social and manpower effects it has on the population, tobacco smoking should permanently be eliminated.
Tobacco smoking is also associated with causing chronic bronchitis in the United States, according to the surgeon general report. This increases the risk of death from chronic bronchitis and emphysema. It is found that the exposure to cumulative tobacco causes chronic bronchitis and other respiratory disease (Mark, 2005). Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, (COPD), affect approximately 10% of the North American and European population. Cigarette smoking is the main cause of this disease but there is about 2% which cannot be directly pointed at tobacco intake. Exposure to tobacco smoke is attributed to cause asthma and also COPD because tobacco contains potent airway irritants and could lead to obstruction, inflammation and chronic air irritation.
Cigarettes and other tobacco products introduce many toxic chemicals in the human body. They are responsible for causing many diseases and death in human. The cigarette companies, since the 1950s, embarked on producing ‘safe cigarettes’. However, this effort proved futile in the 1980s as there were lawyers who claimed that the safe cigarette would make way for the production of its low quality product. The idea of the safe cigarette was production of a product that is less toxic and therefore it would contain less tar (Mark, 2005. The failure of the project introduced the filter cigarettes. Their introduction saw the cigarette companies encouraging people to smoke or delay smoking using marketing strategies such as advertising.
Tobacco companies’ do all they can to ensure the influence the finding of various researchers and thus create controversy on the dangers associated with tobacco intake and also influencing scientific standards of the research conduction and interpretation. The companies collaborate with lawyers and consultants to influence the Institute of Medicine and thus at the end the report produce favors them and they embark on how to advance their business. The involvement of the experts from the tobacco industry sways the finding to favor them. Consequently, the real dangers of the tobacco products are not exposed. The tobacco companies were left to regulate the information about their products which they would tell to the public. This has been the case and therefore the companies do not reveal all the possible health hazards associated with tobacco in the human health (Mark, 2005. This is a strategy that the tobacco industry uses to serve its business needs. The tobacco industry used their legal and regulatory staffs to successfully access the IOM information and influence the finding to meet their interests.
Smokeless tobacco
Smokeless tobacco is divided into two forms, that is; snuff and chewing tobacco. Chewing tobacco is long strands of loose leaves, plugs or twists of tobacco. This tobacco is chewed or at times it is just placed between the cheek and teeth or gum and the tobacco is absorbed through the mouth tissues. Snuff on the other hand is finely ground tobacco which is packed and sold as dry or moist (Wickholm et al, 2012). The moist snuff is consumed by placing the stuff the lower lip or cheek and gum and is absorbed through the tissues of the mouth. The dry snuff is however consumed by sniffing or inhaling the powder up the nose. There are other forms of smokeless tobacco like the dissolvable tobacco. This form is available as sweet, candy-like orbs or pallets and strips. They contain tobacco and nicotine; they are either chewed or sucked till they dissolved and their juices are swallowed. This form is minted flavored, looks like candy and therefore is easily consumed by kids or pets.
According to data collected in the year 2012, it showed that 3.3 % of people aged 12 and above in the United States uses smokeless tobacco; this is approximately nine million people in the population. The large portion of consumers however lies between the ages of 18-25 years. This data is supported by the Center for Disease Control which shows that high school students, 11% male and 1.5% female uses this type of tobacco; a population that is higher than that of the young adults (Wickholm et al, 2012). The increased use of tobacco in teens is due to factors such as peer pressure, examples set by parents, presence of gangs, use of alcohol and illegal drugs, economic conditions and lifestyle and fashion among others.
The ban of smoking tobacco has created the market for smokeless substitute. The tobacco companies have invested heavily on the production of smokeless tobacco to counter the sales of the ban. Studies show that the ban on smoking has just shifted the consumers to the smokeless tobacco. The use of smokeless tobacco does not decrease the risk of cancer to smokers. Additionally, people who smoke and use smokeless tobacco find it hard to quit smoking. Though the intake method of smokeless tobacco is different from smoking, the nicotine addiction is the same. Smokeless tobacco like any other form of tobacco has health effects that include, mouth, tongue, gum, throat, esophagus, stomach and pancreatic cancer; it also increases the risk of heart attack, heart disease and stroke (Wickholm et al, 2012). These tobacco products contain high level of cancer-causing agents called tobacco-specific nitrosamines. Other cancer causing agents include other polycyclic aromatic carcinogens and benzo (a) pyrene.
Works Cited
Hammond, Cuyler E., and Daniel Horn. "Tobacco and Lung Cancer." A Cancer Journal for Clinicians 2.3 (2008): 97-98. Web.
Mark D Eisner, John Balme, Patricia P Katz, Laura Trupin, Edward H Yelin, and Paul D Blanc. "Lifetime environmental tobacco smoke exposure and the risk of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease." Environmental Health Journal (2005): Web. <http://www.ehjournal.net/content/4/1/7>.
Michael Housman. "Smoking and Health." Harvard Computer Society | People. Technology. Awesome. 2001. Web. 18 Dec. 2013.
Wickholm S, Lahtinen A, Ainamo A and Rautalahti M.: "Smokeless Tobacco." American Cancer Society. 2012. Web. 18 Dec. 2013.
