Washington, D.C., 5 June 2013 (PAHO/WHO) – Tobacco consumption increases the risk of death of people who have high blood pressure. Within the framework of World No Tobacco Day, held every 31 May, the Pan American Health Organization / World Health Organization (PAHO/WHO) urges total bans on tobacco advertising, promotion, and sponsorship in the Americas to help reduce tobacco consumption, and calls for further efforts toward blood pressure control.

In the Americas, 30% of the population over the age of 18 suffers from hypertension, and 21% of those over the age of 15 are smokers. Combined, these two risk factors increase the risk of cardiovascular disease, which is responsible for 30% of all deaths in the Americas.

“Many of the risks of hypertension can be reduced by controlling blood pressure. If smoking cessation is also pursued, the risk of cardiovascular disease can be reduced even further”, noted Adriana Blanco, PAHO/WHO’s regional tobacco control advisor.

Smoking is responsible for 16% of all deaths of people over the age of 30 in the Americas, which corresponds to 1 million deaths each year. Alongside Europe, the region has the highest percentage of deaths attributable to tobacco—12% above the global average.

“It is essential that countries implement all measures contained in the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. This year, we are stressing one such measure in particular: a total ban on tobacco advertising, promotion, and sponsorship, which is one of the most effective ways to reduce consumption of tobacco,” said Blanco. To date, only five countries in the Americas have implemented such measures: Panama (2008), Colombia (2009), Brazil (2011, but regulations are pending), Chile (2013), and Suriname (in June 2013). Others have broad restrictions, and the rest have minimal or no restrictions at all.

High blood pressure, in turn, increases the risk of myocardial infarction, stroke, and chronic kidney failure. In the Americas, cardiovascular diseases cause 1.9 million deaths each year and are the leading cause of death in the majority of the countries of the region.

“Tobacco and hypertension make for a lethal combination. Tobacco cessation contributes to a significant reduction in the number of deaths from heart attack and stroke”, said Pedro Ordúñez, PAHO/WHO advisor on noncommunicable diseases.

“People who are diagnosed with hypertension can be treated and controlled long-term, which significantly improves the likelihood of a long, healthy, and productive life”, added Ordúñez. “Everyone has a role to play in helping prevent and control this disease. Measures that help reduce tobacco consumption are also measures that help reduce and control high pressure”, he stressed.

In addition to avoiding tobacco consumption, hypertension can also be prevented by eating less salt (particularly in processed foods), following a balanced and healthy diet, engaging in physical activity regularly, and avoiding harmful alcohol consumption.

This year’s World Health Day—which is held every 7 April—was dedicated to the risks of hypertension. PAHO/WHO issued a call for people to know their blood pressure numbers and adopt measures to prevent and control hypertension.

LINKS:

• ·         World No Tobacco Day 2013 (PAHO)
• ·         World Health Day—Hypertension (PAHO) 
• ·         http://www.paho.org
• ·         http:/www.facebook.com/PAHOWHO
• ·         http:/www.youtube.com/pahopin
• ·         http://twitter.com/pahoeoc
• ·         http://twitter.com/pahowho
• ·         http://twitter.com/opsoms

By THOMAS CATAN And WILLIAM MAULDIN

WASHINGTON—Europe is encountering fierce opposition from an unexpected source over its efforts to curb smoking: Republican Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.

In a sharply-worded letter, the Senate minority leader has warned the European Union its proposed restrictions on tobacco marketing would violate international trade rules and harm trade relations with the U.S.

Along with three other senators from tobacco-producing states, Mr. McConnell also pointedly reminded the European Union that his legislative body would be considering any free-trade agreement negotiated between the U.S. and EU. The two sides embarked on an ambitious effort to ink a trade pact earlier this year.

“We have serious concerns about the (tobacco proposal) and its impact on trans-Atlantic trade relations,” read the letter, which was reviewed by The Wall Street Journal. “As the Senate considers the potential U.S.-EU free trade agreement, the (proposal) calls into question the EU’s ability to deliver on regulatory commitments to the U.S. that it will have to make under a comprehensive U.S.-EU agreement.”

The May 7 letter was also signed by Sens. Rand Paul (R., Ky.), Richard Burr (R., N.C.) and Kay Hagan (D., N.C.).

A spokesman for Tonio Borg, the European health commissioner who drew up the plans, denied the cigarette rules would affect trade relations. In a reply to the U.S. senators, the EU ambassador in Washington, João Vale de Almeida, said the proposed measures were “fully consistent with the EU’s international commitments.”

“We expect this also to be the case with our future engagement” on the proposed U.S.-EU trade pact, he wrote in a letter reviewed by the Journal.

The brewing spat is just one example of the parochial issues that could make it difficult for the two sides to agree on a trans-Atlantic pact.

The senators leading the charge against Europe’s proposed smoking rules have long-standing ties to the tobacco industry. Sen. Burr has received more money from tobacco companies, $524,000, than any other member of Congress, according to data from the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. Sen. McConnell has received $465,000 from the tobacco industry, making him the second-largest recipient.

Moreover, the U.S. and Europe produce similar types of goods and compete head-to-head in many sectors. The U.S. has four times as many complaints open against Europe at the World Trade Organization than it does against China.

The fight over Europe’s tobacco industry also shows how many individual constituencies must be satisfied for any deal to succeed. France, for example, this week threatened to scuttle the U.S.-EU talks unless it is allowed to keep protecting its movie and music industries. Europe also wants include financial regulation in the trade talks, a move likely to be resisted by the U.S.

The European Commission announced the update to the decade-old rules governing tobacco sales and marketing in December, saying it was needed to take account of new developments such as electronic cigarettes. Among other things, the proposed rules would mandate that at least three-quarters of the cigarette packet should display health warnings, up from the current 40%, and that those include gruesome pictures of the damage smoking can cause. Menthol, flavored or slim cigarettes would be banned.

The proposal has drawn opposition from several Central European countries—Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania and Slovakia,—who say it would hurt tobacco growers and processors in their countries.

But other EU members say it is necessary to curb an estimated 700,000 deaths from smoking in the EU each year. “It’s as if a city like Palermo or Frankfurt were to vanish from the EU every year,” said a spokesman for the Health Commissioner. “We think our proposal, particularly since it targets young people, will help getting down the number of people who smoke in the EU.”

Health ministers from the EU are due to discuss the proposal on June 21. Then it will be debated by the European Council and European Parliament. The Health Commissioner’s office estimates the new rules could come into effect in two to four years.

A U.S. federal appeals court in March blocked the Obama administration’s plans to introduce graphic new warning labels on cigarette packages. The Food and Drug Administration must now propose a new set of labels aimed at discouraging smoking.

Tobacco companies have vigorously opposed the European proposals. Imperial Tobacco Group PLC, which controls Commonwealth Brands, called them “disproportionate and unreasonable,” adding that the gruesome pictures served only to stigmatize smokers. A spokesman for Reynolds American Inc. declined to comment.

Since December, Australia has mandated that cigarettes must be sold in completely unbranded boxes covered in warnings and horrifying images of smokers suffering from cancer. Australia’s move has drawn challenges before the WTO from several countries that produce tobacco products, including Honduras, Dominican Republic and Ukraine. However, the off-putting packaging has been considered a success by health campaigners. New Zealand and Ireland have since announced plans to follow suit.

To view this article at its original location click here>

Tobacco is a Deadly Product

-         Tobacco kills up to half of its users.

-         Tobacco kills nearly 6 million people each year, of whom more than 5 million are from direct tobacco use and more than 600 000 are nonsmokers exposed to second-hand smoke. Unless urgent action is taken, the annual death toll could rise to more than eight million by 2030.

-         Tobacco caused 100 million deaths in the 20th century. If current trends continue, it may cause about one billion deaths in the 21st century.

-         There is no safe level of exposure to second-hand tobacco smoke.

-         In adults, second-hand smoke causes serious cardiovascular and respiratory diseases, including coronary heart disease and lung cancer. In infants, it causes sudden death. In pregnant women, it causes low birth weight.

The World Lacks Protection from Tobacco

-         Under 11% of the world’s population are protected by comprehensive national smoke-free laws.

-         National comprehensive health-care services supporting cessation are available in only 19 countries, representing 14% of the world’s population.

-         Just 19 countries, representing 15% of the world’s population, meet the best practice for pictorial warnings, which includes the warnings in the local language and cover an average of at least half of the front and back of cigarette packs. No low-income country meets this best-practice level. Forty-two countries, representing 42% of the world’s population, mandate pictorial warnings.

-         Only 19 countries, representing 6% of the world’s population, have reached the highest level of achievement in banning tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship.

-         Around 38% of countries have minimal or no restrictions at all on tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship.

-         Only 27 countries, representing less than 8% of the world’s population, have tobacco tax rates greater than 75% of the retail price.

-         Tobacco tax revenues are on average 154 times higher than spending on tobacco control, based on available data.

The Tobacco Epidemic is Widespread

-         Nearly 80% of the world’s one billion smokers live in low- and middle-income countries.

-         Consumption of tobacco products is increasing globally, though it is decreasing in some high-income and upper middle-income countries.

THERE IS A SOLUTION!

Implement the WHO Framework Convention Alliance: 

MORE INFORMATION:

- Why ban tobacco advertisements?

- Best Practices for Banning Tobacco Marketing

The researchers, led by Stanton Glantz from the Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education at the University of California, San Francisco, reached these conclusions by analysing previously secret documents from the tobacco industry and the Institute of Medicine related to the Institute’s landmark 2001 report, Clearing the smoke — a report that set the tone for the development and regulation of tobacco products in the US, particularly those claiming to be less dangerous.

The authors found that tobacco companies developed and implemented strategies with consulting and legal firms to access the IOM proceedings (that led to the FDA-commissioned Institute of Medicine report on tobacco products) and that the companies used this access to deliver specific, carefully formulated messages designed to serve their business interests.

Although the authors found no evidence that the efforts of tobacco companies exerted direct influence on the IOM committee, the analysis shows that tobacco companies were pleased with the final report, particularly its recommendation that tobacco products can be marketed with exposure or risk reduction claims provided the products substantially reduce exposure and provided the behavioral and health consequences of these products are determined in post-marketing surveillance and epidemiological studies (“tiered testing”). Recommendations within the report have policy implications that were continuing to reverberate in 2012.

The authors say: “There was a lack of clear policy on tobacco industry engagement by the [Institute of Medicine] which, combined with the general presumption of honesty upon which all scientific discourse is based, created an opportunity for the tobacco companies to advocate positions that supported their interests.”

They continue: “The presence of tobacco industry representatives on the FDA’s Tobacco Products Scientific Advisory Committee, combined with the FDA’s official consideration of the tobacco industry as a “stakeholder,” increase the likelihood that the tobacco companies will continue to successfully manipulate the scientific discourse around tobacco product regulation, to the companies’ benefit and to the detriment of public health.”

The authors conclude: “To prevent such an outcome, the FDA and counterpart organizations in other countries need to remain cognizant of the guidelines for implementing FCTC Article 5.3* and that they are dealing with companies with a history of more than 50 years of intentionally misleading the public and who were found by two federal courts to have participated in ”a pattern of racketeering activity” in violation of the RICO Act** when assessing the role of the tobacco companies and the information they present as part of the regulatory process.”

In an accompanying Perspective, Thomas Novotny (uninvolved in the study) from the University California, San Diego says: “[The tobacco industry] should never be treated as a stakeholder because it is unlikely that the industry will ever be part of the solution to the public health challenge of tobacco use.”

Novotny continues: “The profits from selling cigarettes and alternative tobacco products are simply too great for the tobacco industry to simply fade into history. Thus, the public health community needs to do what it does best: to rally popular support for strong, science-based approaches to prevention of tobacco use, to expose the truths about the harms of tobacco use to current users, and to support government agencies in carrying out their legislatively mandated duties to protect public health.”

Notes:

*The World Health Organization’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, developed in response to the globalization of the tobacco epidemic. Article 5.3 relates to the protection of public health policies with respect from tobacco control from commercial and other vested interests of the tobacco industry.

**Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act is a US federal law that provides for extended criminal penalties and a civil cause of action for acts performed as part of an ongoing criminal organization.

Funding: This work was supported by National Cancer Institute grant CA-087472. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

See Original Here

May 20, 2013, ASH’s Chris Bostic testified about tobacco, urging the U.S. to exclude it from the treaty.

The text of his verbal comments is below.

To read ASH’s written comments, click here.

I am here today to urge the United States government to exempt tobacco products from the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, in order to retain policy space for all TTIP partners to address this most destructive cause of preventable disease. This is not an anti-trade message, but the goals and benefits of trade are not compatible with tobacco. Trade has the potential to improve lives, while tobacco devastates lives, providing no benefit whatsoever to its addicted consumers. Let me quickly lay out the arguments for a full exemption.

First, tobacco is the world’s leading killer. Nearly 6 million people die every year, and that number is rising. By the end of the century, we risk a billion premature deaths, ten times the toll of the 20^th century.

Second, there is a global consensus on how to deal with the tobacco epidemic, the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. The U.S. has signed this treaty, and every member state of the European Union, as well as the European Commission, has ratified it.

Third, the tobacco industry has consistently abused international trade and investment rules to stall, block or roll-back implementation of the tobacco treaty. Trade is the strongest arrow in their litigation quiver, and TTIP as it is currently envisioned is a dream come true for an industry that kills half of its customers.

Fourth, while health exceptions are built in to many trade systems, those systems did not envision an industry that would use trade rules to create legal chill. It is clear from past trade and investment disputes that the tobacco industry need not win trade disputes to achieve their goal. The cost of litigation is a barrier unto itself, and many small governments simply cannot afford to win these disputes. We already have examples of countries that have delayed or discarded plans to advance tobacco control legislation due to the threat of trade litigation.

Fifth, the incompatibility of trade liberalization and tobacco is already recognized under U.S. law. The Doggett and Durbin Amendments, as well as Presidential Executive Order 13913, prohibit federal agencies from promoting the sale or export of tobacco products. These laws have been ignored in recent trade negotiations.

Sixth, the U.S. has joined the world on a path to addressing the growing problem of non-communicable diseases, or NCDs. The leading risk factor for NCDs is tobacco use, and the UN Political Declaration on NCDs, which the U.S. joined, calls for accelerated implementation of the tobacco treaty. By giving the tobacco industry new tools to block meaningful tobacco regulation, the U.S. undermines the NCD initiative and reneges on its promises.

Seventh, the slippery slope argument is a red herring. The tobacco exception that the U.S. has drafted – but not tabled – for the Trans-Pacific Partnership recognizes the uniqueness of tobacco in international trade.

Finally, half measures or weak exceptions will not address the core problem. Complicated legal tests and chapter exclusions invite litigation and increase legal chill. The easiest and most elegant solution is a blanket exclusion for tobacco products.

“It is with great pleasure that I announce, ahead of World No Tobacco Day on Friday, that I have received Government approval to begin the process of introducing standardised/plain packaging of tobacco products in Ireland. While many arguments will be made against such an introduction, I am confident that this legislation will be justified and supported purely by the fact that it will save lives” stated Minister Reilly today.

As you are aware, smoking places an enormous burden of illness and mortality on our society with over 5,200 people dying every year from tobacco related diseases – one in two of all smokers will die from their addiction.

To replace the smokers who quit, the tobacco industry needs to recruit fifty new smokers in Ireland every day just to maintain smoking rates at their current level. Given that 78% of smokers in a survey said they started smoking under the age of 18, it’s clear that the tobacco industry focuses on children to replace those customers who die or quit.

The theme of World No Tobacco Day is “Ban tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship”. “The introduction of standardised packaging will remove the final way for tobacco companies to promote their deadly product in Ireland.” the Minister said. Cigarette packets will no longer be a mobile advertisement for the tobacco industry. Research has shown that packaging has been used effectively to reassure consumers about the risks of smoking for example with the use of the words “mild” or “light” on packs in the past. Research has also shown that imagery and colours are also used to influence consumers. Pack shape and design are also key measures with packets available that resemble a lipstick box.

Standardised packaging of tobacco products will remove all form of branding – trademarks, logos, colours and graphics. The brand name would be presented in a uniform typeface for all brands and the packs would all be in one plain neutral colour.

There is strong evidence that standardised packaging will:

• Increase the effectiveness of health warnings;
• Reduce false health beliefs about cigarettes; and
• Reduce brand appeal particularly among youth and young adults.

Minister Reilly concluded “plain packaging is one of a number of measures that are required to effectively denormalise smoking in our society. As such this initiative should not be looked at in isolation. Education and awareness, cessation services and extending the smoking ban to other areas are just some of the other measures which I am currently progressing.”

NOTES FOR EDITOR:

An informative video by Cancer Research UK on the power that cigarette packaging has on children is available online at: www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_z-4S8iicc

WASHINGTON, DC. 30 May – The days of actors dressing up as doctors to promote cigarette brands may be long over, but if you think tobacco advertising has been effectively banned, think again. Slick ads in magazines, in stores and on the Internet still reach millions of consumers a day, perpetuating their cycle of death and disease and effectively replacing “customers” who have succumbed to tobacco use.

Globally, tobacco use kills nearly six million people each year, and about 450,000 in the United States. Unless urgent action is taken, the annual death toll could rise to more than eight million worldwide by 2030. Studies have shown that tobacco advertising, promotion, and sponsorship (TAPS) is the driver of this global epidemic.

Although the U.S. has since fallen behind in its efforts, it was among the earliest to impose various restrictions, including a ban on tobacco advertising on billboards, radio and television. However, this does not stop the industry from spending nearly $10 billion a year on domestic marketing. In fact, this money is accomplishing its goal – every day, about 3000 children try smoking, and about 1000 become long-term smokers.

While 19 countries, representing 425 million people or six per cent of the world’s population, have now established comprehensive measures to eliminate TAPS, another 74 countries  currently have no or very limited restrictions.

In addition, nearly every established global measure is challenged by the powerful multinational tobacco industry.  For example, in 2012 Australia became the first country in the world to mandate plain tobacco packages – free of manufacturers’ logos, colors, and other brand imagery, and instead dominated by graphic health warnings. The tobacco industry immediately launched legal challenges in national courts and under a trade agreement with Hong Kong. Fortunately, such challenges have galvanized public health supporters around the world leading other governments, including New Zealand, the UK, South Africa and India, to consider plain packaging.

Big tobacco has spent a century creating a dream world where attractive, young, empowered people express their individuality with a cigarette in hand. The reality is more like a nightmare – addiction, disease, and an early death.

On May 31, 2013, the 26th annual World No Tobacco Day, the global community must recognize Big Tobacco’s schemes to undermine bans on TAPS, and must support governments that are trying to protect public health.

For World No Tobacco Day 2013, ASH will release a video that showcases the nightmare world that tobacco companies strive to achieve through the use of advertising, promotion, and sponsorships.

“If done properly, bans on tobacco advertising, promotion, and sponsorship do work,” says Laurent Huber, Executive Director of Action on Smoking and Health, the nation’s oldest anti-tobacco organization. “These efforts must include monitoring opposition from the tobacco industry and other groups, and amending bans as required in response to innovations in industry tactics and media technology.”

Parliament’s tobacco products directive rapporteur Linda McAvan told theparliament.com, “The biggest worry for me is that more young people smoke than adults in the European Union.

“We have to do something to tackle the recruitment of children and young people into smoking.”

The British MEP, who is a member of parliament’s environment, public health and food safety committee, said that 28 per cent of European citizens’ smoke. According to the European commission, the figure for 15 to 24-year-olds is slightly higher, at 29 per cent.

Tobacco packaging is considered to be a crucial aspect of the directive because it is about how the industry sells its products, she said.

With some cigarette packages designed to resemble perfumes and others advertising chocolate flavoured tobacco products, McAvan said, “We know from the tobacco companies themselves that they are designed to attract young women.

“But we know its children and young girls who buy these, so we think this kind of packaging should go.”

McAvan wants to see picture warnings on the packaging of tobacco products, with images of the health effects of smoking clearly visible.

“We want packaging with big photographs, big warnings because that puts people off smoking,” she said.

She added, “The tobacco industry says it has no impact, but then why have they employed some 70 new lobbyists to lobby the European parliament?”

On the issue of e-cigarettes, McAvan said, “We’ve taken a lot of evidence about e-cigarettes and the evidence I’ve seen tells me that for people that smoke e-cigarettes can help in terms of harm reduction.

“So I don’t want to see e-cigarettes disappear from the market, I want them to be available for smokers. What I don’t want though, is to see young people start using e-cigarettes who have never smoked.”

The Socialist MEP said that schools in the UK have had to ban e-cigarettes to prevent children from bringing them in.

“We have no laws, we have no regulation of e-cigarettes, so what I want is a regulatory framework,” she said.

“I do think we need some regulation about the quality of e-cigarettes, about manufacturing processes to make sure they’re safe because they mainly come from China, and even the companies themselves know that there are problems with the way they’re manufactured.

“We need to make sure they’re available widely on the market so that they can compete with cigarettes.

“That’s why medicines regulation wouldn’t work in many countries, because in many countries you can only buy medicines at a pharmacy, you can’t buy them when you’re out on a Friday night.

“So that’s why I proposed a system of regulation which doesn’t go as far as making them medicines but nevertheless will stop them becoming gateway products for young people.”

The tobacco directive includes proposals for a pre-authorisation process for all new tobacco products on the EU market.

In explaining how this would be managed, McAvan said, “In the US they do have a pre-authorisation system for all new tobacco products, which is managed by the food and drug administration (FDA).

“We don’t have an FDA, but each country does have national regulators who regulate health products.

“It seems a little bit strange to me that we would allow tobacco companies to place new products on the market, and then we try to catch up and find out what was in them after.

“Tobacco products are harmful, they kill people and in my view governments should be able to see what the tobacco companies are putting on the market before they do it, and regulate them accordingly.”

McAvan also said the world health organisation’s framework convention on tobacco control was “really, really important”.

“It’s one of the first public health international laws and every single European country is signed up to it, plus the EU as a whole,” she added.

“We’ve got legal obligations to implement that law and that law asks us to bring in picture warnings on cigarettes, it asks us to tackle young people and smoking.

“So this is what this new law is doing, it’s helping us implement a legally binding law that we’ve all signed up to freely.”

Chris Bostic Deputy Director for Policy

I wonder if Philip Morris International (PMI) researchers have studied the ‘length of public memory.’ If so, the resulting answer seems to be ‘about 15 years.’ That’s how long it has been since the Tobacco Institute closed its doors, after 40 years of obfuscating the science on tobacco addiction, disease and death. A key aspect of industry strategy to forestall meaningful regulation has always been to question the causal link between tobacco and disease.

PMI has just launched phase two of its sbv IMPROVER project (the title is short for “systems biology verification of industrial methodology for process verification in research”). The theme is “species translation challenge,” and PMI, in collaboration with technoogy giant IBM, will award three US$20,000 grants to scientists who can best poke holes in translating disease lab results in rodents to humans. In one online article very sympathetic to Philip Morris, the reporter states “not every smoker suffers all or any of those health effects, suggesting that a combination of environmental and genetic factors lead to disease.” This years project follows on the “diagnostic signature challenge,” in 2012 which gave a US$50,000 award for showing genetic markers for diseases linked to tobacco.

The main purpose of IMPROVER seems clear – remuddy the waters on the causal link between tobacco and disease. But they actually get much more. By enticing young researchers to compete, PMI pushes back against the trend among major universities to not do business with big tobacco. These researchers are also a natural recruitment pool for the next generation of scientists who are untroubled by the ethics of working with big tobacco. By linking with IBM, working with universities, and comparing the effort to legitimate scientific endeavors such as DREAM, PMI gains legitimacy among the scientific community.

Finally, IMPROVER is a rather brilliant example of corporate social responsibility marketing. Turning the purpose of the scheme on its head, PMI says its “number one objective is to do something about our dangerous products.” How can anyone argue with that? That’s not rhetorical – I invite responses on all the ways we can argue with that.

On a side note, is the name IMPROVER a subtle nod and affront to MPOWER?

Mr. Jacobs was a true pioneer in the public health movement. His vision prompted him to take action against the tobacco epidemic. He was instrumental in founding ASH as the nation’s first organization devoted specifically to the fight against the harms of tobacco in 1968 and served continuously on ASH’s Board of Trustees. He assumed the chairmanship in 1975 and remained in that position until 2010.  Under his leadership, ASH played a leading role in educating the public about the dangers of smoking, in protecting non-smokers from the harmful effects of second-hand smoke and in taking the fight for health and against the harm caused by tobacco to a global level through its support of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Following his tenure as Board Chair, Mr. Jacobs served as Chair of ASH’s investment committee and devoted his energy to assuring the future of the organization. His loyalty and fierce dedication of over 45 years to ASH and the tobacco control movement won the admiration of his fellow Trustees and staff at ASH.

“Martin Jacobs was an incredibly bright man who used his intellect not to enrich himself, but to fight for justice and for a world free from the shackles of big tobacco,” said Dr. Alfred Munzer who succeeded Mr. Jacobs as Chair of ASH, “we will miss his wit, his vision and his ability to bring people together.”

“Martin Jacob’s leadership helped ASH become a true catalyst for health, here in the US and all around the world. The vision of this brilliant, passionate but humble man will prevent millions of unnecessary premature deaths,” said Laurent Huber, ASH Executive Director.

In addition to his years of service to the health movement through ASH, Mr. Jacobs retired only recently as a highly regarded software systems designer at the CME Group, formerly New York Mercantile Exchange.

Mr. Jacobs will be sorely missed by his family, friends at ASH, and fellow advocates for health and civil rights.

Our thoughts remain with Mr. Jacob’s family during this difficult time.