Smoking: Bittersweet for the State government

In my opinion, anytime the government gets less of our money, the better. While I don't smoke, and therefore don't pay these taxes, it's still a drain on our economy and will eventually hit my pocketbook. If tax money dries up, then GREAT! That means fewer people are smoking (which is good for the health of Ohioans) and more money is kept in the citizens' hands. Of course the government could respond by raising other taxes (be it other "sin" taxes, fines and fees, or income tax), but hopefully they'd be smart and find a useless program to cut instead.

In my opinion, anytime the government gets less of our money, the better.

Get less of your money? They'll get it one way or another.

Front page story in the Wall Street Journal talks about Mr. Michael Fiore who is in charge of revising federal guidelines on how to get smokers to quit. He also runs an academic research center partially funded by drug companies that make quit-smoking aids. But Fiore says that this isn't a conflict of interest because his opinion - reflected in the current federal guidelines - is based upon scientific evidence.

Unfortunately, the site requires a subscription to see, but they include a chart which shows that the percentage of abstinence after 3 months is between 23-31 for medication and 24% for no medication.

However, after 9 months, the percent still abstinent is 14% with medication and 16% for those who went cold-turkey.

The point of the article is that companies that make quit-smoking products are impacting public regulations and guidelines. It says:

"Pressure may be growing for doctors to follow the federal guidelines. An article in the December issue of the journal Tobacco Control argued that failure to follow the guidelines could be deemed medical malpractice."