Tobacco tax spending debated in Colorado

Colorado's health department is coming under scrutiny from a western Colorado lawmaker who says the agency is wrongly using tobacco tax money for lobbying efforts. Health officials reply that lobbying local governments to pass anti-tobacco policies not covered by the state's no-smoking ban is an appropriate use of the money.

Republican Sen. Steve King says he may propose a bill to ban tobacco taxes to be used on lobbying. The (Grand Junction) Sentinel reports that the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment has been spending about $3.5 million a year promoting local anti-tobacco policies. The practice was reviewed by a legislative audit. Auditors concluded that the law wasn't clear on whether the tobacco tax could be used to lobby for policy initiatives.

The smoking ban that wasn't

Buy here branded cigarettes tax free and 100% legal from Europe.

Although it really was not my issue, the St. Charles County Council decided it for me. For those not keeping up at home, this year’s perpetual attempt toward a countywide smoking ban in indoor public places was haphazardly written, causing a second opt-out question to also go on the ballot to exempt bars, casinos and some other establishments. Then it appears the council did not follow the correct procedures in putting the ban on the ballot, causing county Elections Director Rich Chrismer to remove the issue from the ballot altogether.

I have to say I don’t understand the continued push toward enacting a smoking ban on privately owned businesses, especially from a mostly Republican council that should favor less regulation. All businesses cater to a clientele, and they know their customers. For those people who go into businesses such as restaurants, bars and Ameristar Casino for lengthy periods and want to have the opportunity to have a smoke, I don’t begrudge the owner of the establishment for allowing them.

It should be the owner who has every right to determine whether to allow patrons to smoke in their business. Tobacco is a legal product, whether some like that fact or not. I have been in several restaurants in the St. Charles area that have become smoke-free, and they don’t seem to have a problem with their patrons who want to smoke. They just have to go outside. While this policy seems to work for those businesses, the important thing to remember is it was their choice, not something thrust upon them by the government.

If there must be a crackdown on smoking in public places, I believe there is a simpler solution than an outright ban. Just as with mercury, lead, carbon monoxide and other items that have been labeled as poisonous, there is a certain level of exposure that can be considered not to be threatening. Bars, restaurants, VFWs, casinos, etc., can, through the use of air filtration products, create an atmosphere in which their patrons are better protected from tobacco smoke.

The county could come up with what level is reasonably acceptable, and I think most businesses would make their best effort to provide that level, especially as opposed to banning smoking altogether. There could be answers in Jefferson City. State Rep. Mark Parkinson of Harvester has proposed that no community that bans smoking can benefit from the sales tax on tobacco products sold within their boundaries. There could also be an outright ban statewide. Or the state could pre-empt all local tobacco ordinances, thus throwing them all out in favor of state laws.

 Unfortunately, County Council members seems to think they have to continue trying to put together a smoking ban package that can appease everybody. They don’t seem to realize that won’t happen. What bothers me even more is that they seem to favor putting this up for a popular vote. The best public policy doesn’t always come from a popular vote, which is why we are a republic, not a democracy. The council should make a decision and vote to create the policy of St. Charles County rather than punting the issue to the voters while they duck and cover. I expect them to do their job when it comes to these issues.

Thank you for not smoking?

Puffing a cigarette on the Animas River Trail or at a restaurant and bar patio could soon be punishable by up to a $100 fine for a first-time offense and fines of $200 to $300 for additional violations within the same year. Durango City Council on Oct. 2 will schedule a public hearing for a proposed smoking ordinance that would prohibit smoking at most public outdoor areas such as bus stops, the river trail, ball fields, playgrounds, picnic pavilions and other city recreation areas. It also would restrict smoking at enclosed and open-air patios of businesses and any hookah bar where water pipes are smoked. 

The city manager would also be given additional authority to impose further smoking restrictions on any city-owned property. City Manager Ron LeBlanc promised not “to go crazy” under the proposed ordinance advocated by the anti-smoking group Lasso Tobacco Coalition, and the San Juan Basin Health Department, but Councilor Paul Broderick thought the proposal was “harsh,” especially for unaware tourists and out-of-towners. 

“Welcome to Durango, here’s a $100 fine,” Broderick said at a study session on Tuesday. Councilor Sweetie Marbury supported the proposal, arguing that it was good to have standards. “It speaks highly of our community,” she said. “Reasonable people will abide by the law. It’s an OK thing to have standards,” she said, noting that Texas imposes $1,000 fines for littering on the highway. Patricia Senecal, the health policy and systems director for the San Juan Basin Health Department, said young people have been very supportive of banning smoking at restaurant patios because they want to eat “without somebody blowing smoke” in their face. 

Senecal also argued that workers, such as servers and bartenders, need to be protected from secondhand smoke, too. Teal Stetson-Lee from the Lasso Tobacco Coalition said their objective was not to trample on the rights of smokers, but to go after the tobacco industry. Revenue generated by the fines would be earmarked for anti-smoking and cessation efforts because Senecal said the health departments gets many calls from smokers who want help quitting the habit.

LeBlanc clarified that enforcement will be on a complaint basis only. “We won’t have a smoking patrol,” he said. Officials also acknowledged that teenage smoking is prevalent on the section of the Animas River Trail behind the Durango High School. The ban will be supported with signs, including a playground sign that reads: “Young lungs at play.” 

Marbury said the public signs would be helpful in confronting a smoker in a public space. Without the sign, “I’m just a grouchy grandmother,” she said. Exceptions to the ban would be made for private homes, entranceways for treatment centers of nicotine addiction, retail tobacco businesses and city-owned open spaces and natural lands such as Horse Gulch.

Sales catch fire as pot shops go up in smoke

The medical marijuana dispensaries are gone, and there's a mixed reaction from nearby businesses on what changes they've seen. The dispensaries were forced to shut down in most areas of Kern County in early July. After hearing from one store owner who said it's been positive for her shop, Eyewitness News checked with other nearby businesses. "I've seen growth not only in merchandise, but growth in customers, as well," Juanita Bradshaw said Tuesday. She owns Fashion Plus Size on North Chester Avenue.

Two doors down there was a marijuana dispensary until voters passed Measure G. Bradshaw said since that happened, she's had to find more places to put additional merchandise. But can she be sure the uptick in business is because the medical marijuana shop is gone? "I don't know for a fact that that's it," Bradshaw said, "but I've certainly seen my business grow." The new county rule bans storefront medical marijuana dispensaries, except in certain industrial zones. In those areas, any dispensaries must be a mile apart, and a mile from any school, daycare center, park or church. At Apple Tree Health Foods on North Chester, owner Carl Neal is also pleased with changes he's seen after the ordinance went into effect.

 "There are fewer people milling around," Neal told Eyewitness News. "I've had people comment, tell me that they're glad they are gone." A few other store owners who didn't want to be identified said they see fewer groups of people loitering and fewer instances of obvious smoking of marijuana or what appeared to be people on the sidewalk or street selling or sharing marijuana. These store owners also said there are fewer parking and traffic problems, and less trash and litter. But, other stores say the absence of the medical marijuana facilities has made no difference on their business, and some say they never had any problems with the dispensaries or their customers. However at Apple Tree Health Foods, Neal said there were negative impacts.

 "I remember one day, we actually had somebody under the influence of drugs fell and hit his head on the front door," Neal said. He's sure his customers were uncomfortable with the presence of the dispensaries. "They didn't like it," Neal said. "I'm sure some of them, although they didn't say it, were intimidated." Bradshaw said the dispensary near her shop caused trouble for both herself and her customers. She had real problems with the first man who operated the facility. "He would sit out in his truck, the back of his truck, in front of my store and cuss me," Bradshaw said.

"Cuss my customers, and just cause havoc." But several other store-owners in the area said they had no problems with dispensaries near them, and wondered if there were big differences in the way some were operated. One store owner said the dispensary near his business was well-run, the the managers made a clear effort to clean up any trash and prevent problems like loitering.

 Eyewitness News tried to contact some of the operators who ran dispensaries in county areas before Measure G. Of the five we tried to reach, the two who responded said they think dispensaries actually brought in customers and business to nearby stores and shops. But Bradshaw is convinced she's getting more business, and more customers now that the marijuana facility is gone. "They feel more comfortable and confident in stopping here," Bradshaw said. "Now that (the dispensaries) are gone, it's very nice and it's very pleasant."

Pacific Islanders Have High Obesity and Smoking Rates

“Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders are the second fastest growing minority population in the U.S.,” said Sela Panapasa, a researcher at the U-M Institute for Social Research and principal investigator of the Pacific Islander Health Study.

“But they are often underrepresented in national surveys. “This is the first scientific study to assess the health, well-being and health care use of two subgroups of this important population — Samoans and Tongans. Our hope is that this will lead to the development of evidence-based interventions and policies to improve the health of these groups, and also serve as a model for similar studies of other subgroups of this population.” For the study, the research team interviewed a random sample of 239 California households in 2011 and 2012.

Half were Tongans living in the San Mateo area and half were Samoans living in the Los Angeles area. Trained Samoan and Tongan interviewers collected information on a wide range of health conditions and health behaviors among adults and adolescents in the households. Among the key preliminary findings:

 • Smoking rates among Pacific Islanders were three to four times higher than for other Californians, and more than twice as high as in the U.S. overall. About 46 percent of Pacific Islander adults said they were current smokers, compared to 13 percent of all California adults and 20 percent of U.S. adults. Among Pacific Islander adolescents, 23 percent said they had tried smoking cigarettes, compared to just 3.5 percent of California teens.

 • More than half of Pacific Islander adolescents were overweight or obese based on their body mass index. More than 80 percent of Pacific Islander adults had a BMI that indicated they were overweight or obese.

 • Pacific Islander adults were much less likely than other adults to see a dentist (47 percent, compared to 86 percent of all Californians), and Pacific Islander women were less likely to have ever gotten a mammogram (53 percent, compared to 73 percent of Californians).

• Pacific Islander adults age 50 and older were much less likely to have ever had a colonoscopy (31 percent, compared to 78 percent of Californians). Only 24 percent of Pacific Islander women ever had a colonoscopy, compared to 79 percent of California women.

 • Pacific Islander teens were much more likely than other adolescents to engage in risky behaviors such as drinking alcohol and smoking marijuana. For example, nearly 47 percent of Tongan teens surveyed admitted to trying alcohol, compared to 36 percent of California teens overall. And 25 percent of Pacific Islander teens had tried any drug, compared to just 14 percent of California teens overall.

Regulate marijuana to improve public safety

Prohibition of marijuana doesn't benefit those prosecuted nor make the larger community any safer. It makes the community less safe by ensuring police and courts have less time to deal with real crimes like murder, rape and theft. We have seen that cuts to public safety budgets endanger both civilians and public safety professionals. Amendment 64, the measure to regulate marijuana like alcohol on November's ballot, would counteract these reductions, allow police to focus attention where it's most needed and stop ruining people's lives for consensual "crimes."

That is why we and many other law enforcement officers urge you to vote yes on Amendment 64. Essential public services are like air. You only notice when you need them and they're not there. In 2010, the budget situation in Colorado Springs got so bad that the city slashed bus services, stopped maintaining its parks and reduced its public safety budget by 8 percent. The 39 firefighters that got laid off were badly needed this June, when despite heroic efforts by their colleagues, the Waldo Canyon wildfire killed two, destroyed 350 homes and burned more than 18,000 acres of land.

There's no telling how much difference having the extra firefighters would have made, but to some of the families who lost their homes, their extra effort may have made all the difference in the world. The wildfire was a terrible tragedy that should not be underestimated. But it's a worst-case scenario version of tragedies that occur every day when governments are forced to make cuts to essential services. The police force was also reduced in Colorado Springs in 2010 — they now have 50 fewer employees.

That means more officers going into potentially dangerous situations alone, longer response times for calls and more violent criminals on the streets. People die because of all of these things, too, though they make for a less dramatic news story. But the news isn't all bad in Colorado Springs. Two years after those budget cuts, many services have been restored. The buses are running on Saturdays and the parks are being watered again — largely because of a new revenue source that brings the city $50,000 a month: taxes on medical marijuana.

Amendment 64, on the ballot this November, would do for the state of Colorado what medical marijuana has done for Colorado Springs on a much grander scale. In addition to saving money spent now on arresting people for marijuana, the Colorado Center for Law and Policy estimates the measure would generate new revenue to the tune of $32 million a year for the state and $14 million for local governments, including $24 million that would go directly to schools. That $24 million will help kids more than prohibiting marijuana ever did. Criminal markets aren't as choosy about their customers as those regulated by the government, and many studies suggest regulation would make it less likely that those under 21 could get access to marijuana.

But the measure helps communities in another way, too. One hundred million Americans have tried marijuana. Most of them got away with it. They went through an experimental phase, tried marijuana and then moved on with their lives. But for those convicted of marijuana crimes, many can't grow out of it. They have an arrest record that will follow them for the rest of their lives, affecting their ability to get jobs, pay for school and buy homes.

What about those people? Some of us may overlook them, because those who get caught up in the criminal justice system tend to be in groups that get overlooked — people of color, the poor. But we've seen it happen more times than we care to recall. Half of Americans between the ages of 18 and 50 have used marijuana and could have been among them. This November, think about them when you go into the voting booth. Think about your local fire department or the neighborhood park. There are lots of reasons to vote for Amendment 64. Take it from three law enforcers who have seen the harms and ineffectiveness of our current marijuana prohibition laws up close. It's time for change.

Change to marijuana law moves closer

It looks like B.C.'s municipal leaders will boldly go where most senior governments fear to tread, when it comes to getting real about marijuana. Delegates at the Union of B.C. Municipalities convention in Victoria are expected to vote today on a resolution endorsing the decriminalization of marijuana. It will be surprising if it doesn't pass fairly easily. The resolution is the latest move in a well-thought-out campaign that's been carefully executed over the last while. It's based on opening a second front for the decriminalization movement, which has been mostly in the hands of the zealots for years.

The true believers in pot, like former NDP leadership candidate Dana Larsen, are still hammering away. Just last week they unveiled plans to start an initiative drive to collect 400,000 signatures to force a referendum on setting a new provincial policy that would effectively legalize simple possession. But last fall a new and different campaign began. It's based on bringing in respected mainstream community leaders to validate two general themes. The first is that the status quo isn't working. The second is that decriminalization would be a common sense response to the absurdities that the current laws on marijuana continue to create.

The campaign is organized and directed by a group called Stop the Violence B.C., an organization with a long list of members with impeccable credentials in health policy, law enforcement and the political sphere. They opened with a poll establishing that British Columbians by a fairly wide margin don't support the status quo laws on marijuana, and most think it should be regulated and taxed. Working with a public-relations firm, the group has built momentum since then to bring policy in line with those findings and to cajole politicians into coming onside.

They organized the appearance last November of four former Vancouver mayors to endorse the movement. Sen. Larry Campbell, Mike Harcourt, Sam Sullivan and Philip Owen went public and signed an open letter stressing the gang-related violence that stems from marijuana prohibition. It also challenged current politicians to consider the alternative - to legalize and regulate the plant, to eliminate the illicit market, increase tax revenue and eliminate some of the costs associated with processing people through the criminal courts on marijuana charges.

A few months later, they staged another round of validation, where four former attorneys general said effectively the same thing. That was followed up in April by another open call for regulation and taxation, this time by a coalition of municipal leaders. Various mayors from all over B.C. endorsed Stop the Violence B.C.'s goal. There had been an earlier round of resolutions passed by municipal councils saying the same thing. So although delegates have never tackled the issue before, they are not being hit with it cold. A lot of groundwork has been done. The resolution - to decriminalize and study the regulation and taxation of pot - also has a prime spot on the agenda, and is favourably framed by the committee that checks the motions.

It was preceded by a panel discussion on the pros and cons of decriminalization. Even though it was staged early Monday, before many delegates had arrived, the room was jammed to capacity. It's a subjective call, but it seemed like the decriminalization side easily carried the day. The leading opponent - criminologist Darryl Plecas - made an unfocused argument that descended into slapstick at one point ("Smoking marijuana is stupid and you become stupider"). He cited the harms associated with marijuana - impaired driving, lost opportunity costs - but acknowledged they affect a small share of the population. And none of his arguments defended the status quo, which is getting pretty indefensible.

Plecas also assured people the black market and gang violence would continue even if it was decriminalized, something that is emphatically disputed by others. Decriminalization advocate Geoff Plant said he was paralyzed as attorney general on the issue by all the arguments that U.S. authorities would react strongly if moves were made in B.C. But with various marijuana-initiative votes on the ballots in neighbouring states, he said B.C. may soon be playing catch-up if the issue isn't addressed. What he called the "multi-generational obsession with 'reefer madness' " still has a way to run. But it feels like the end to prohibition is closer than it used to be.

Smokeless Vapor Cigarettes Provide A Viable Alternative

In September 2012, the American Journal of Public Health included an article titled “E-Cigarette Awareness, Use, and Harm Perception in US Adults”. The online study cited in the article shows that awareness and use of e-cigarettes among current and former smokers is on the rise. Over 40 percent of those taking the survey at least knew about e-cigarettes, with current smokers being the most aware. Over 11 percent or current smokers, 2 percent of former smokers, and less than 1 percent of people who have never been a smoker say they are using e-cigarettes.

Of the total population that responded, just 3.4 percent currently use e-cigarettes. Current smokers, non-Hispanic Whites, and people with at least a high school diploma are most likely to recognize e-cigarettes as less harmful than tobacco cigarettes. E-cigarette companies are not interested in attracting people who have never been smokers. Instead, they hope to get more existing smokers and former smokers to use their products. With such low percentages of e-cigarette users within those populations, they have a long way to go.

E-cigarettes offer another option for people who want to quit smoking, or who want to find a less harmful alternative to tobacco products. Some smokers find that they are just unable to break the addiction to nicotine. Others enjoy the oral stimulation, and still others are concerned about potential weight gain. Nicotine quells the appetite, and often when a person quits smoking, they replace the habit by eating more. So e-cigarettes provide two advantages for those trying to quit smoking. The first is the prevention of intake of deadly chemicals, and the second is the circumvention of weight gain.

Often, when a person wants to quit smoking, the withdrawal symptoms can be overwhelming, and they continually backslide into smoking again. According to WebMD, these symptoms can include, but are not limited to, tobacco cravings, headache, irritability, difficulty concentrating, drowsiness, fatigue, and insomnia, nausea, constipation or diarrhea, falling heart rate and blood pressure, anxiety, depression, increased hunger, increased desire for the taste of sweets, and increased caloric intake. It’s easy to see why quitting smoking is an extremely difficult trial for almost all who attempt it. The use of an e-cigarette can help a person cope with all of these symptoms.

The levels of nicotine being consumed can be reduced over time, and eventually eliminated all together. There are many, many stories of people who have had great success using e-cigarettes. SmokeStik is one of the leading brands in the market today, and has been a market leader longer than most e-cigarette brands in existence. SmokeStik Coupon Code website, the leading e-cigarette news and discounts site offering the absolute best deals on smokestik brand e-cigarettes, has launched an awareness campaign on their new website smokestikcouponcode.net.

They hope to assist people in making the switch from smoking cigarettes to using e-cigarettes, and potentially save some lives. SmokeStik is offering incentives to switch through product promotion codes, and provides some impressive starter kits. SmokeStik has been a superior brand in the e-cigarette market for many years, and carries the endorsement of celebrities such as Audrina Patridge, Dennis Quaid, and Charlie Sheen. SmokeStik even made an appearance on the David Letterman show when Katherine Heigl talked about and shared her e-cig with David himself while promoting a new film. Smokers who want to make the switch now can enjoy 10% off on all SmokeStik Products, with no minimum order size. Click on the link below for discount codes on a large variety of starter kits.

Norway court deals a blow to tobacco companies

A Norway court has upheld a ban on store displays for tobacco products in a blow to cigarette companies. Philip Morris, maker of Pall Mall cigarettes, took the Norwegian government to court over the ads, arguing that it violated a free trade agreement that implicates Norway and the European Union. The cigarette-maker, which the court ruled against, said that it would appeal. Reuters said that the court decided that the ban did not consitute a violation of the free trade agreement.

It also said that the ban was necessary due to public health reasons. Philip Morris was, needless to say, unhappy with the ruling. More from GlobalPost: Tobacco on pace to kill 1 billion people this century "We are disappointed with the court's decision and are considering our options for appeal," said Nordan Helland, a spokesman for Philip Morris Norway, reported USA Today. Norway's health ministry said that the ruling had put public health over profits.

"We are glad that the court has decided that looking after people's health is more important than the profits of the tobacco industry," said Tord Dale, political advisor to the Norwegian Health Minister, reported Reuters. Numerous other countries are considering similar bans, including Canada, India and the United Kingdom. Britain has already implemented a similar ban among large vendors. The Associated Press said that this isn't a first for Philip Morris. The tobacco company has challenged laws in many countries that impose marketing restrictions, including most recently in Uruguay and Ireland.

Malawi Kwacha still tumbles despite tobacco sales

Malawi Kwacha is still struggling on the market though tobacco sales which are a major source of the country’s forex have just been closed. According to the National Bank of Malawi’s Economic Newsletter released in September, the country is still struggling to match with other foreign currencies. An Economist working at the National Bank of Malawi, Shadreck Malenga, has revealed that the Malawi Kwacha will continue to suffer on the world market for some time before it becomes stable.

He said this is so because of other external factors which are affecting the country. Malawi Kwacha “Malawians should wait a bit longer before the economy bounces back to the right truck because there are a number of factors which have tightened up the country due to late resumption of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) programme, which essentially resulted in most bi-lateral donors not participating in aid disbursement in the first fiscal quarter (July – September),” said Shadreck.

The economist said, donors stayed away from this country claiming that Malawi has poor governance and bad policies in economics, which disappointed them, forcing them stop in assisting Malawi. Malenga further said another factor was the shunning away of many farmers from growing the golden leaf in the year, 2012 due to poor prices and high rejection rates experienced in the 2010/11 auction season.

Cleveland State weighs campus ban on tobacco use

Officials at Cleveland State University are considering a ban on tobacco use on campus. The (Cleveland) Plain Dealer reports that the board of trustees' financial affairs committee recommended Thursday that the university develop a policy to ban all tobacco products, including smokeless tobacco.

The full board is expected take up the policy at its November meeting. School officials estimate about 4,400 students and about 300 faculty and staff smoke. The policy comes after the Ohio Board of Regents voted unanimously in July to urge the state's public campuses to ban all sales and use of tobacco products, including smoking outdoors.

At least seven public colleges or universities in Ohio currently have tobacco bans, including Miami University, Hocking College, and the health science campus of the University of Toledo.

Smokers Have More Sleep Troubles, Study Finds

The findings, published in the journal Addiction Biology, suggest that smokers are more likely to not get enough sleep each night and have disturbed sleep than people who don't smoke cigarettes, Reuters first reported. The study is based on the sleep habits of 1,071 people who smoke and 1,243 people who don't smoke. The researchers found that 28.1 percent of the smokers had disturbed sleep quality, compared with 19.1 percent of nonsmokers.

And 17 percent of smokers also reported getting six or fewer hours of sleep a night, compared with 7 percent of nonsmokers, Reuters reported. "It appears likely that smoking is a behaviourally modifiable risk factor for the occurrence of impaired SQ [sleep quality] and short sleep duration," the researchers wrote in the study. In 2008, scientists from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention also found that people who get fewer than six hours of sleep every night had higher rates of smoking, as well as obesity, alcohol use and physical inactivity, PsychCentral reported.

And in another study in the journal CHEST, researchers from the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine found that smokers have a four-times higher risk of unrestful sleep than people who don't smoke. They are also more likely to experience light -- rather than deep -- sleep. "It is possible that smoking has time-dependent effects across the sleep period," study researcher Dr. Naresh M. Punjabi, M.D., Ph.D., FCCP, said in a statement. "Smokers commonly experience difficulty falling asleep due to the stimulating effects of nicotine. As night evolves, withdrawal from nicotine may further contribute to sleep disturbance."

Passive smoking affects neurodevelopment in babies

A new study shows that newborns that have been exposed to nicotine from both active and passive smoking mothers show poor physiological, sensory, motor and attention responses. Smoking during pregnancy has been linked to many different problems in infants like learning difficulties, attention deficit disorder with hyperactivity and even obesity. However, although the paediatric and obstetric disorders linked to tobacco during this stage are well defined, the effects on neonatal behaviour have not yet been studied in depth.

A new study headed by experts at the Behaviour Evaluation and Measurement Research Centre (CRAMC) of the Rovira i Virgili University and published in the 'Early Human Development' journal goes further and analyses the effects of passive smoking during pregnancy on the newborn. The scientists evaluated the behaviour of 282 healthy newborns using the Neonatal Behavioural Evaluation Scale. This allows for interaction with the newborn in order to evaluate its behaviour and responses between 48 and 72 hours after birth.

From those mothers studied, 22% smoked during pregnancy and hardly 6% were exposed to passive smoking. Out of the smoking mothers, 12.4% had between 1 and 5 cigarettes a day; 6.7% had between 6 and 10 a day; and 2.8% had between 10 and 15 a day. None of them smoked more than 15 cigarettes a day. "Newborns who have had intrauterine exposure to nicotine, whether in an active or passive way, show signs of being more affected in terms of their neurobehavioural development. This could be an indicator of pathologies, independently of sociodemographic, obstetric and paediatric factors," as explained to SINC by Josefa Canals and Carmen Hernández, the lead authors of the study.

The results reveal that those born to smoking and passive smoking mothers score low in their ability to inhibit stimuli that could alter the central nervous system. Furthermore, children of passive smoking mothers have poor motor development and those of smoking mothers have less ability to regulate behaviour and response in physiological, sensor, motor and attention terms.

"Health professionals should encourage future mothers and their families to eliminate or reduce tobacco consumption," states Canals, who outlines the importance of informing mothers on the effects of involuntary exposure to cigarette smoke in order to prevent direct damage to the foetus and infant development.