Fifty years ago this month, the U.S. surgeon general published a landmark, groundbreaking report that scientifically linked smoking to cancer and other illnesses. With the help of American Cancer Society research, the report became a launching pad in the fight against tobacco and spurred the progress we've made in curbing tobacco consumption and reducing related diseases, like cancer.
Fifty years ago, 42 percent of the population smoked and there were no restrictions on where one could do so, even on airplanes. Today, the smoking rate has dropped to 19 percent and, thanks to comprehensive “smoke-free” laws, almost two-thirds of the population is protected from deadly toxins in secondhand smoke. But a lot of work remains.
There are still 44 million smokers — and every day, more than 3,000 kids pick up their first cigarette. Last year, 20,000 deaths in Pennsylvania were connected to tobacco.
The tobacco industry continues to develop new products to addict more people and keep current customers from quitting, as well as to fight proven tobacco-control measures, such as “smoke-free” laws and taxes that can protect our kids from a lifetime of addiction.
Let's use this anniversary to turn up the heat on Big Tobacco and finish the fight we started 50 years ago against this deadly, addictive product.
Let's start by increasing the Pennsylvania cigarette tax by $1, which would increase revenue by $356.43 million in the first year and save $3.11 billion in health-care costs in the long run.
Fewer people using tobacco means fewer people dying from diseases like cancer. Join me in finishing the fight.
The writer, a patient navigation services coordinator at UPMC's Hillman Cancer Center, is an American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network Pittsburgh volunteer.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Corbett over Wolf II
- Inconsistent Wolf
- Corbett over Wolf I
- Corbett is the honest choice
- Watson in 33rd
- Gross in 45th
- An Obama clone
- Gun questions for mayor I
- Embrace domestic energy production
- Hospital’s hero & more
- Justice incomplete