Tobacco

According to the National Health Interview Survey, conducted in 2008 by the National Center for Health Statistics, an estimated 21 million women and 25 million men are admitted smokers, representing 18% and 23% of the US population respectively. However, the United States is not the only market for tobacco products. Globally there are about 1.2 billion smokers, 20% of the entire population of the Earth, roughly 26 times the number of smokers in America.

Any argument against the negative effects of smoking are laughable. What can be argued, however, is whether or not an informed public retains the right to engage in an unhealthy lifestyle. Is it more ethical to restrict the rights of consumers for their own benefit or to deny them the freedom to make their own choices? People die from tobacco use, but they also die from health issues related to obesity, unhealthy diets, alcohol consumption, sexually transmitted disease, and many other activities which the law completely allows. People know that overeating is unhealthy and that eating fatty foods can lead to complications like coronary disease, yet they do it anyway. People know the risks of contracting HIV or herpes from engaging in unprotected sex, yet they do it anyway. People are fully aware of the dangers of drinking too much, dangers which include not only disease but also the innocent death of others from the recklessness that alcohol creates, but they still drink anyway.

Morally, then, the only thing tobacco companies should be faulted for is attempting to hide the facts of risks associated with tobacco use. Yes, that is a huge fault and redress is demanded, but in this modern age saturated with the availability of information, there is no reason for any consumer to be unaware of the risks associated with smoking. Additionally, the availability of pharmaceuticals designed to help break the addiction to nicotine and strong social pressure against smoking is a possible indicator that those who profess a desire to quit smoking don’t desire it enough to actually do so.

Naturally, government-imposed restrictions are an unfortunate necessity. Although a tobacco company could be extremely diligent in restricting sales of its products, that diligence can not be extended to wholesalers or retailers. The law dictates that no one under the age of 21 is allowed to possess or consume alcoholic beverages, and it likewise imposes a restriction on the sale of tobacco to those under the age of 18. In South Carolina, the law stipulates that “a minor under the age of 18 years must not purchase, attempt to purchase, possess, or attempt to possess a tobacco product,” (SC Code 16-17-500), and the law is similar in other states. This means when a minor is seen smoking a cigarette, he or she is breaking the law and can be fined or required to “successfully complete a Department of Health and Environmental Control approved smoking cessation or tobacco prevention program.” Likewise, those middlemen who sell the cigarettes can face stiff penalties. This rarely happens, however. Instead, the blame is typically shifted to the tobacco company with claims of unfair or illegal marketing practices. In some incidences, such allegations are merited, but absolving those who provide cigarettes directly to minors is equally inexcusable.

A proper target market would include only those people who are of legal age to purchase tobacco products in the nation in which the sales take place. Media restrictions would be largely unnecessary if the laws currently in place were properly enforced or if the consequences for violating the laws were stricter. Take, for example, the advertisement of alcoholic products on television. Underage drinking is as big a problem as underage smoking, yet recently the ban against advertising distilled spirits on television was lifted. Tobacco products once relied heavily on sponsorship of sporting events (such as NASCAR) to increase brand awareness. Cigarettes and other tobacco products still appear in print ads, billboards, and posters, yet they are still one of the most highly regulated forms of advertising.

As to the issue concerning global marketization, so long as the law is followed in the nation for which marketing efforts are planned, why should there be ethical or moral questions concerning socially responsible behavior? It would indeed be a better world if there was nothing available for people to use that would harm them in the short or long term, but so long as the law allows a practice to occur and that practice provides pleasure to a section of the populace, then that practice will continue to occur. Huffing, for instance, the act of inhaling the vapors of common household products such as paint or glue in order to achieve a euphoric high, is legal, yet it causes death and creates long-term negative health issues. Consumption of alcohol, even to excess, is legal even though it is a well-documented source of addiction and destructive behavior. But so long as tobacco remains a legal product and continues to be profitable, then there will always be a market for it.