Price, not packet size, influences smokers

I was pleased to read the article by Anthony Zarb-Dimech (Size Of Cigarette Packets, December 14). As currently at the University of Malta one of our optional credits is "The effects of tobacco smoke on health", which incorporates addiction control and legislation, I could not help replying to the letter.

Having different packets containing different numbers of cigarettes can be considered a two-edged sword. It may not serve as a determinant of smoking to the extent that one might think, or reflect a decrease in the expenditure of the smoker. In actual fact it would be more of an addiction enhancer.

Statistics show that the greatest number of new smokers in society are teenagers. Having cigarette packs with a smaller number would obviously reduce the price of these particular packs, thus making them more available. This is because teenagers usually have a low and irregular income. It is also important to note that they often start smoking in the weekend, in front of friends to show off or feel part of the group. For these teenagers smoking represents a fashion statement or a cool way of life, together with a statement of power. Having 10 cigarette packets at a lower price would be the perfect stepping stone in the transformation process from a non-smoker to a fully addicted smoker.

Unfortunately, studies show that an increase in the price of packets of cigarettes is the most effective weapon to induce smokers to quit, together with educational campaigns and family support. Therefore I agree with Mr Zarb-Dimech on the levying of tax and duty.

This can be further sustained when considering the fact that the cost of curing diseases related to tobacco is increasing from year to year and therefore indirectly punishing the non-smoking taxpayers. Unfortunately, educational campaigns only help the open minded smokers who had already considered quitting before.

Some of the hardcore smokers manage to somehow isolate themselves from the realties of smoking and only consider such a proposition when a price increase is declared in the budget speech. Although a drastic price increase can have a negative effect on the low income groups, it might be an incentive to quit the addiction.

There are smokers who are ready to give up basic necessities such as food because they are not able to control their addiction and continue smoking. The result here is the creation of an even bigger social problem.

Unfortunately, unless one decides to quit, no measure to reduce cigarette numbers is going to ease a smoker's financial burden. Not to mention the ripple effect through smoking on the individual's health expenses. Therefore a fine balance must be struck between the price burden and the educational front to best influence smokers to quit.