PARENTAL SMOKING PUSHES KIDS INTO POVERTY

Smoking is not only bad for your health; it also puts 400,000 children in poverty. Smoking places a financial burden on low income families, suggesting that parents are likely to forgo basic household and food necessities in order to fund their addiction, according to UK research published in the open access journal BMC Public Health.

This is the first UK study to highlight the extent to which smoking exacerbates child poverty. The findings are based on national surveys which estimate the number of children living in poverty by household structure. In 1999, the UK government announced a target to abolish child poverty by 2020, though this target is unlikely to be met. It is therefore crucial to identify avoidable factors that contribute to and worsen child poverty.

"Smoking reduces the income available for families to feed, clothe and otherwise care for their children living in low-income households. This study demonstrates that if our government, and our health services, prioritized treating smoking dependence, it could have a major effect on child poverty as well as health," says lead author, Dr Tessa Langley from the UK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies at the University of Nottingham.

Smoking is an expensive habit and one that impoverishes millions of people around the world. In the US, smokers spend less on housing than non-smokers and recent research in India showed that smoking cuts spending on food, education, and entertainment.

This new study estimates that 1.1 million children in the UK, almost half of all children in poverty, were living with at least one parent who smokes. A further 400,000 would be classed as being in poverty if parental tobacco expenditure were subtracted from household income.

In July 2014, the weighted average price of 20 cigarettes in the UK was £7 (GB). Although many smokers save money by opting for budget brands or switching to hand rolling tobacco, the cost of their smoking is still a substantial drain on the budgets of families living on low incomes. "The poverty threshold income level for a two parent household with two children is £392. If both parents are smokers, these households will be spending an average of £50 on tobacco per week, which is a big drain on an already tight budget," says Tessa Langley.

This is a key opportunity for the UK Government to take action to improve the lives of millions of children. "Tobacco control interventions to encourage low income smokers to quit, would not only improve health but also alleviate poverty," says Tessa Langley. Future studies are needed to determine what families sacrifice to sustain their habit, whether they do without fresh fruit or food in general; heating bills or clothing. This would provide a better picture on the burden of smoking in poor households.

E CIGARETTES UNHELPFUL IN SMOKING CESSATION AMONG CANCER PATIENTS

In a new study of cancer patients who smoke, those using e-cigarettes (in addition to traditional cigarettes) were more nicotine dependent and equally or less likely to have quit smoking traditional cigarettes than non-users. Published early online in Cancer, a peer-reviewed journal of the American Cancer Society, the findings raise doubts about the potential benefits of e-cigarettes for helping cancer patients give up smoking

Because of the risks of persistent smoking, all cancer patients who smoke should be advised to quit. But the rising use of e-cigarettes has raised many questions among patients and their health care providers including whether e-cigarette use helps or hinders quitting efforts. Even regulators are struggling with the complexities associated with e-cigarettes as they weigh the benefits and risks to the general population and subgroups of individuals.

To examine available clinical data about e-cigarette use and cessation among cancer patients, Jamie Ostroff, PhD, of the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York City, and her colleagues studied 1074 cancer patients who smoked and were enrolled between 2012 and 2013 in a tobacco treatment program within a comprehensive cancer center.

The researchers observed a three-fold increase in e-cigarette use from 2012 to 2013 (10.6 percent versus 38.5 percent). At enrollment, e-cigarette users were more nicotine dependent than non-users, had more prior quit attempts, and were more likely to be diagnosed with lung or head and neck cancers. At follow-up, e-cigarette users were just as likely as non-users to be smoking. Seven day abstinence rates were 44.4 percent versus 43.1 percent for e-cigarette users and non-users, respectively (excluding patients who were lost to follow-up).

"Consistent with recent observations of increased e-cigarette use in the general population, our findings illustrate that e-cigarette use among tobacco-dependent cancer patients has increased within the past two years," said Dr. Ostroff. She stressed that the study had several limitations, and additional studies are required. "Controlled research is needed to evaluate the potential harms and benefits of e-cigarettes as a potential cessation approach for cancer patients. In the meantime, oncologists should advise all smokers to quit smoking traditional combustible cigarettes, encourage use of FDA-approved cessation medications, refer patients for smoking cessation counseling, and provide education about the potential risks and lack of known benefits of long-term e-cigarette use ."