US military 'should ban smoking' - BBC News

[Yrys]

US military 'should ban smoking'

The US military should be smoke-free within the next 20 years,
says a government-commissioned report.

The Institute of Medicine (IOM) said 30% of army personnel are
smokers, leading to "very high" economic and health costs. But
it acknowledged that the change could be hard to introduce, as
smoking has "long been associated with the image of a tough,
fearless warrior".

The Pentagon has said it supports the idea and believes it is
"achievable".

The report, commissioned by the Pentagon and the US Veterans'
Administration (VA), says the US Defense Department spends more
than $1.6bn (£1bn) every year on tobacco-related medical care,
hospital treatment and lost days of work. It said that rates of
tobacco smoking in the military have increased since 1998, and
may be as high as 50% among service personnel returning from
duty in Iraq and Afghanistan. Soldiers who smoked were less fit,
had worse night vision, and recovered more slowly from wounds.

"These troops are essentially putting their lives at risk twice: once
in service to their country and once in service to tobacco," said
Stuart Bondurant, chair of the report committee. "Tobacco is a
long term engagement - it kills slowly and insidiously."

'Achievable'

The report said the armed services already "acknowledge that
tobacco use impairs the readiness of military personnel and
results in enormous health and financial costs". But it criticised
them for allowing smoking on military sites, giving less attention
to tobacco use than alcohol abuse and for selling tobacco products
to troops at reduced prices.

A spokesperson for the Pentagon said the department was in full
support of the goal of a tobacco-free military. Cynthia Smith told
the AFP news agency that the goal was "achievable through the
development and execution of a comprehensive plan as recom-
mended by the IOM report". "We look forward to using the
committee's findings and recommendations as we address this
challenging health and readiness issue," she said.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

"acknowledge that
tobacco use impairs the readiness of military personnel and
results in enormous health and financial costs".

So does getting shot at and blown up so the pansy assed PC crowd can sit home and dream up ways of screwing over the people that allow them to make a choice from the comfort of their easy chairs. Assholes

 

[mariomike]

Reminds me of the Andy Donato cartoon I saw a few years ago when they banned smoking in the Legions. It showed a couple of old vets, missing a few limbs between them, saying how kind it was that the government was worried about protecting their health.  ;D

 

[Journeyman]

So does getting shot at and blown up so the pansy assed PC crowd can sit home and dream up ways of screwing over the people that allow them to make a choice from the comfort of their easy chairs. Assholes

:rofl:

Someday, you'll have to get over that shyness and start saying what's really on your mind.  ;D

 

[SeaKingTacco]

I recently attended the mandatory supervisor training for substance abuse in the CF.  The subject of smoking in the CF was raised and it appears that the intention (in at least some quarters of the CF leadership) is to follow the US military and have smoke free bases by 2015.

When I pointed out (as a dedicated non-smoker) that cigarettes are still a legal product in Canada and this might be taking things just a bit far (as far as personal rights/responsibilities go), I was met with looks of puritan disgust from the facilitators.

As an aside- the whole "training" process for supervisors appeared deeply flawed to me.  It treated alcohol, drugs and tobacco as the problem- as if inanimate objects picked themselves up and injected themselves into the unsuspecting bodies of CF members, rather than spending any time at all on why someone might be become addicted in the first place (which is a much more interesting and relevant question to ask).

When I first started out as a young officer  in the late 80's, I dealt with no shortage of alcoholics.  It seemed, however, that we had a much more adult view of things back then- we did not "blame" alcohol as the problem, we simply referred the member to the MO and for counseling at the excellent 28 day "coffee courses" held at various locations around the country.  Usually, the soldier came back to the unit as a much better human being, having just discovered lots of underlying factors that manifested as alcoholism.  It seems that we are back to blaming the substance...

 

[PMedMoe]

We can't even get CF members to give up illegal drugs but they want us to quit smoking?  Better add a few more things to the list:

speeding (accidents)
drinking (obvious)
getting married (stress)
having sex (STDs)
........

:

I can be out before 2015, so I guess I won't worry about being in "Big Brother's" military.  There goes the IPS.........

 

[mariomike]

I remember my dad's car had four cigarette lighters, and no seat belts ( other than my mother's outstretched arm ).  ;D
Riding my bike to the "Smoke Shop", and when he wouldn't sell to me without a note from my mother, going to the cigarette machine instead. The only concern with smoking, and it was a big concern, was fire prevention. We could smoke in bed, but only if both feet were on the floor.

 

[Thermal]

I just saw this news on CNN website, and thought it'd be interesting to post it here.
This is for the US soldiers for now, but if this really happens in the future, it might effect us in Canadian Forces as well. I'd like to share this news and see what others in Canadian Forces think about this.

Source: CNN
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/US/07/12/military.smoking.ban/index.html

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- You've seen the iconic picture of a soldier with a cigarette dangling from his mouth, but that could soon be a thing of the past.

A new study commissioned by the Pentagon and the Department of Veterans Affairs recommends a complete ban on tobacco, which would end tobacco sales on military bases and prohibit smoking by anyone in uniform, not even combat troops in the thick of battle.

According to the study, tobacco use impairs military readiness in the short term. Over the long term, it can cause serious health problems, including lung cancer and cardiovascular disease. The study also says smokeless tobacco use can lead to oral and pancreatic cancer.

The Defense Department's top health officials are studying the report's suggestions and will make recommendations to the Pentagon's policy team and Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

The study recommends phasing out tobacco products such as cigarettes and cigars over a five- to 10-year period.

However, the suggested ban does not sit well with many in uniform, including retired Gen. Russel Honore, best known for coordinating military relief efforts for Hurricane Katrina-affected areas with an ever-present stogie. He said soldiers at war need to puff.

"When you're tired and you've been going days on end with minimum sleep, and you are not getting the proper meals on time, that hit of tobacco can make a difference," said Honore, who was in charge of the Army's training programs before he retired.

Other soldiers questioned whether this was a good time to stamp out smoking, given the Army's concern with a high suicide rate.

"For some, unfortunately, they feel that smoking is their stress relief. Well if you take it away, what is the replacement?" said Sgt. 1st Class Gary Johnson.

The Pentagon supports the goal of a tobacco-free military, said spokeswoman Cynthia Smith.

"However, achieving that goal will depend on coincident reductions of tobacco use in the civilian population," she said.

Dr. Ken Kizer, the author of the study, found that civilians don't smoke as much as soldiers. One in three active duty soldiers smoke, he said, adding that among the general population, that number is less than one in five.

The Pentagon banned smoking in buildings on bases years ago. It has counselors on call to help service members quit. But while local governments have heavily taxed tobacco, the commissaries often sell it at deeply discounted prices.

"The military sends very mixed signals," Kizer said. "This is what's confusing to people."

The study found that profits from those tobacco sales -- $80 million to $90 million -- often pay for recreation and family programs on base.

 

[starseed]

Well, their Navy is dry, is it not? And what could be more synonymous with the navy than drinking?

Not being a smoker myself, I won't claim I know how difficult it is to quit. I grew up with 2 smoker parents, though my mother did successfully quit - my father has never tried, and I do believe he started smoking at Chilliwack.

I recognize the touchiness of the issue, but I think it would be hard to deny that the forces would be better off if its members and bases were smoke free.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Are you for real? Do you think thats all we do? While we do have our share of drinkers so does every other cross section of society. Give your head a shake sometime and wakeup before buying into the stereotype.  :

Now produce the proof or withdraw the comment otherwise standby for the Warning ladder.

Milnet.ca Staff

 

[The Bread Guy]

A bit more grist for the mill from a couple of weeks back in the US "military media" (Mods - feel free to close down the old thread and bring it here):
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/87384.0.html

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Well, their Navy is dry, is it not? And what could be more synonymous with the navy than drinking?

Not being a smoker myself, I won't claim I know how difficult it is to quit. I grew up with 2 smoker parents, though my mother did successfully quit - my father has never tried, and I do believe he started smoking at Chilliwack.

I recognize the touchiness of the issue, but I think it would be hard to deny that the forces would be better off if its members and bases were smoke free.

The USN is "technically" dry.  And I would submit they have no end of problems with smuggled booze and really drunken behaviour ashore because of it.

Just because you ban something, does not make a problem go away.  In fact, it often magnifies the problem (The Prohibition Era, anyone?).  You want to cut smoking amongst soldiers?  Give them positive reasons to quit.  Disciplining them to quit will just drive soldiers out and make a mockery of of the chain of command.

And, it should be noted, I am a dedicated non-smoker.  However, the product is still legal in the greater society.  Let us not be puritan idiots and treat our soldiers like children, just because it appears the US military is poised to.  Yeah smoking kills- so do IEDs and RPGs.

 

[Yrys]

Why a smoking ban is not being applied to US troops, BBC News

The Pentagon says banning smoking
would add to the stress for troops

American troops are not to be banned from smoking in war zones,
the US Defence Department says. The decision comes despite a
recent study which recommended the US military should be tobacco-
free.

Pentagon spokesman, Geoff Morrell, said US troops were already
making enough sacrifices in Iraq and Afghanistan. He said Robert
Gates, the US defence secretary, did not want to add to the stress
of the troops by taking away their right to smoke.

But Mr Morrell said the Pentagon would examine the recent study
to see what else could be done to move towards banning tobacco
in the military. He said: "Obviously it is not our preference to have
a force that is using tobacco products."

'Fearless warrior'

A report commissioned by the US government said last week that
the US military should be smoke-free in the next 20 years. The
Institute of Medicine (IOM) said 30% of army personnel were smokers,
leading to "very high" economic and health costs. But it acknowledged
that the change could be hard to introduce, as smoking had "long been
associated with the image of a tough, fearless warrior".

The Pentagon has said it supports the idea and believes it is "achievable".

The report, commissioned by the Pentagon and the US Veterans Affairs
Department (VA), said the Pentagon spent more than $1.6bn (£1bn) every
year on tobacco-related medical care, hospital treatment and lost days of
work. It said that rates of tobacco smoking in the military had increased
since 1998, and may be as high as 50% among service personnel returning
from duty in Iraq and Afghanistan.

 

[tomahawk6]

I dont think the military has any right to tell soldiers,sailors,airmen or marines that they cannot smoke.Civilians havent been banned from smoking - not yet anyway.

 

[Roy Harding]

I think the whole thing (banning smoking in the US military) is silly.  As others have pointed out - banning a substance doesn't make it go away.

I think such things as drinking to excess, smoking, etcetera are societal norms which change over time.  The military (all militaries) is a sub-population which is drawn from the overall society.  As societal norms change, so will military norms.

During my service ('77 - '04) I saw the "norm" of excessive drinking become the exception.  When I left the service I was impressed with the number of young guys who didn't go to the mess and get pissed up.  Instead, they were on sports teams, off on camping trips - whatever.  When I was a Pte soldier it was the NORM to get hammered on a Friday night.  People who DIDN'T were considered "abnormal".  Of course - this trend has contributed to the decline and financial troubles of many messes.

Same goes for smoking.  When I joined - EVERYBODY smoked.  We smoked at our desks, "smoke 'em if you got 'em" was almost considered an order.  Over the years, societal norms changed - so did military norms.

For the record - I do smoke, and I STILL occasionally drink to excess (not like the old days, though).  From what I saw in my latter years of service, however - I would no longer be considered "the norm".

My advice to the US military?  (I just know they are hanging on my every word)  Have patience, give it time.  Smoking will die out on its' own.  Forcing the issue will only give rise to more resentment and bitching from the troops.  And gawd knows they've already got ENOUGH to bitch about.

Roy