Think that the package cigarette you may have every day (several times, in many cases) is weaker than a hand-rolled cigarette? Think again, according to a new lung cancer study out of Norway.

The study found that smokers of hand-rolled cigarettes run a greater risk of developing lung cancer compared to those that smoke manufactured cigarettes. In Norway, one-third of tobacco sales are used for self-made cigarettes, which is an unusually high amount among civilized countries.

Although Norwegian citizens who smoke may smoke less in terms of quantity, the quality is worse for their health due to so much smoking being done with haand-rolled cigarettes, said the study.

Did you know the number one symptom of lung cancer is a persistent cough? Other symptoms include bouts of wheezing, shortness of breath, trouble swallowing, blood-streaked sputum, and a hoarse voice.

Did you know 28 percent of all cancer deaths are due to lung cancer and that it's the number one killer among both men and women?

Did you know that Hookahs -- used to inhale tobacco through a water pipe -- let in the same cancer-causing substances as cigarettes and are just as harmful as smoking, despite the fact that many people believe they are safer?

Now you know.

Source: WebMD: the Magazine, March/April 2007

You might think, like many people do, that smokeless tobacco products are safe alternatives to cigarettes. Wrong.

According to researchers at the University of Minnesota Cancer Center, smokeless tobacco users are exposed to higher amounts of carcinogenic molecules than cigarette smokers. In a study of 182 users of chewing tobacco or oral snuff and 420 cigarette smokers, they found snuff users were exposed to higher levels of 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanone (NNK) than smokers. NNK is a human carcinogen known to produce lung cancer. In laboratory animals, it also contributes to cancers of the pancreas, nasal mucosa, and liver.

Published in the August issue of Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, this study serves to remind us that there is only one safe alternative to smoking -- not smoking.

The city I live in recently banned smoking. I, along with many other people, breathed a huge sigh of relief when the ban was implemented (literally!) because it sometimes seemed downright impossible to have a social life in a city where smoking was allowed in almost all restaurants and bars. I recall an argument I had with someone who was upset because not being allowed to smoke in a public place was unconstitutional -- it was his right to smoke wherever he pleased and if people don't like it, they shouldn't go out. Ever.

What about the right to live and to work in an environment where you're not putting yourself in grave danger? Everyone has the right to a safe work environment, including bar and restaurant staff. And make no mistake--second hand smoke is toxic. According to this report, bar and restaurant workers showed an alarming amount of carcinogenic material in their urine after being exposed to smoke for only minutes.

So I say, if you want to smoke, smoke. Just don't poison everyone else while you're at it. Your thoughts?

The television industry just might owe a bit of its success to the tobacco industry. Cigarette producers were one of the earliest and most consistent advertisers on TV. Big tobacco had large pools of money and were able to take a chance on the new medium of television when it first debuted in the 1940's.

At a time when many sponsors were financially unable to buy advertising spots or unwilling to try TV ads, tobacco companies found opportunities to attach strings to their endorsements. Many shows were required to feature characters smoking during the shows. Stars were expected to use cigarettes and show their enthusiasm for the products. Popular shows such as I Love Lucy showed Lucy happily fetching a smoke for husband and exclaiming, "You see how easy it is to keep your man happy?!"

After television gained popularity and many consumers began to question the health of cigarettes, the products were banned from the air waves. For a more in depth look at this piece of television history, click here.

Every year 4.5 million people die from smoking related to deaths. Of that staggering number nearly half of the deaths are in developing countries where medical care and health education are limited or non-existent. One of the fastest growing smoking populations is among teens in both rich and poor countries across the world. With the above statistics and the growing trend of younger smokers, the overall death toll for smokers could likely reach one billion before the end of the century.

Many governments are flummoxed by how exactly to handle this problem. Singapore, Australia and Thailand have implemented tougher anti-smoking campaigns and have found success in cutting the number of smokers within their borders. Other countries are hoping that drastic measures such as much higher taxes on cigarettes, a ban on public advertising and banning public smoking will help.

The concern for smoking related deaths has prompted representatives from nearly 150 countries to meet and discuss possible solutions to the problem. With so many minds mulling over the issues perhaps some solutions can be found.

When I told my husband that the use of cannabis is being linked to a five percent increase in lung cancer risk -- that's 15 new cases each year in New Zealand where a study was just conducted -- he seemed to think this risk is comparable to his dying from a grasshopper landing in his eye.

A scientist John is not, but his thoughts on the matter seem to parallel international thinking on the drug which goes something like this: the risk marijuana use has on cancer incidence is so very low it's hardly worthy of much worry.

A California study of more than 1600 people last year found no link between cancer and smoking the drug, despite researchers' prediction they would find some kind of connection.

New Zealand researchers have found a connection, though, and however small it may seem, they say it's significant.

They found the risk of developing lung cancer increased by about eight percent each year for people whose cumulative exposure equated to smoking one joint per day -- about the same as the increase for someone who smokes one pack of cigarettes per day. They also found the younger someone starting smoking cannabis, the greater the risk and that contributing risk factors include smokers' deeper inhalation and the tendency to hold smoke in their lungs.

Cannabis, the most commonly used recreational drug in the world with 161 million users, has been thought to have a protective effect against cancer due to its chemical THC, which appears to kill aging cells and keep them from becoming cancerous. This study may prove otherwise.

According to the American Cancer Society, smoking damages most organs in the human body and is linked to at least 10 different cancers. Smoking accounts for nearly 30 percent of all cancer deaths. Yet one in four Americans still lights up. So how many days are you taking away from the longevity of your life every time you light up.

According to studies on smokers, if you smoke 1 pack of cigarettes a day for 10 years you lose 2 years of your life. If you smoke 2 packs in 10 years time you lose 4 years. If you have smoked one pack of cigarettes a day for 20 years you lose 4 years off of your life and if you smoke 2 packs a day in 20 years you lose 9 years off of your life.

You are just as much at risk if you are breathing second hand smoke. Make the commitment today to quit smoking and live longer or help someone you love give up the habit that strips away years of their lives.

Business is business. Maybe it's about making a difference in the world of consumers but mostly, it's about making money. I get that -- and if I owned my own company and offered some sort of product, surely my goal would be to reap a financial reward. And if I wanted to increase my reward, I guess I would consider new markets, new advertising, and new techniques for hauling in loads of cash.

So I see what's going on with the new Camel No. 9 cigarettes, in their hot-pink fuscia and minty-teal green packages with the slogan Light and Luscious. I understand this brand is targeting female smokers with enticing wording that Camel maker R.J. Reynolds executives say is meant to suggest dressed to the nines, putting on your best. I even get that it's a pretty savvy strategy. But somehow, it all seems so wrong.

In a world where more women die of lung cancer than breast cancer -- by a large margin -- how can anyone, even business people whose sights are set on profits, feel OK with the decision to encourage women to smoke?

Think about these passages that just recently published in a New York Times article:

Wall Street analysts praise the introduction of Camel No. 9, in regular and menthol flavors, as a further step by the R. J. Reynolds, a unit of Reynolds American, toward a new marketing strategy. The goal is to refocus on the biggest, most popular -- and most profitable -- brands, which include Kool as well as Camel.

"What we're about is giving adult smokers a choice," says one executive, "with products we believe are more appealing than existing products." The introduction of Camel No. 9 is part of plans to "focus on products that are 'wow,' " she added, "that add fun and excitement to the category."

Fun and excitement? Believe me, there's nothing fun and exciting about cancer. Now if I could only package that truth and market it to the world. I suspect I'd be a rich woman -- and I don't mean financially.

If you are trying to ward off cancer by making a change in your smoking habits, cutting back isn't enough. Cutting out cigarettes altogether is the only way to really protect your health.

Think about this tidbit I found in the March 2007 issue of Woman's Day Magazine.

A 20-year-study of more than 50,000 people in Norway recently revealed that patients who smoked fewer cigarettes -- even those who cut back by half -- were just as likely as heavy smokers to suffer from early death due to cardiovascular disease, cancer, and other tobacco-related problems.

Beginning January 1st, an additional $1 dollar cigarette tax will be added to each pack of cigarettes purchased in Texas. CBS 11 News is reporting that this will raise the price of a pack of cigarettes to $4 dollars, or ten more dollars a carton, and smokers are stocking up on cartons of cigarettes before the tax hike goes into effect.

In the past, states that have increased taxing of cigarettes have seen a positive effect on the number of people who quit smoking, for no other reason than purchasing cigarettes becomes too cost prohibitive. The American Cancer Society (ACS) is looking forward to this happening, as they predict it will keep 300,000 people from starting up and cause 100,000 current smokers in Texas to quit.

Smoking has indeed become an expensive habit since the days when the government gave away cartons of cigarettes to World War II soldiers in the belief it calmed their nerves.

Meanwhile, back in Texas, CBS 11 News quoted Discount Cigarettes manager Patrick Ingram as saying, "Every state has their own tax, so you're not supposed to take large quantities across the border. So, people will go buy truck loads and bring across the border, or just steal."

That's probably true, to a lesser extent, but the ACS is right, the increased overall price for a pack of cigarettes when the new tax is implemented will prompt more people to quit smoking and deter even more from starting a habit that is not only increasingly expensive but just plain bad for your health.

New Zealand Christchurch Hospital radiation therapists are in a dispute over pay and have threatened to stage a strike beginning the first week of January. According to the hospital's clinical director of radiation oncologist Dr. Chris Wynne, the amount of money being argued over is so small that the other doctors have offered to pitch in and make up the difference to end the dispute and avert a strike that would affect 250 cancer patients.

Because Dr. Wynne has not received a response from the District Health Board or the radiologists regarding the monetary offer made by the doctors, he has decided to bring attention to the dispute by doing something even he admits is stupid -- he has started smoking. That's right. He is standing outside the hospital smoking cigarettes in a play for media attention. Obviously, it is working, as the story has been picked up around the globe.

But surely, was this the only way he could think to bring attention to the dispute? Who knows -- you and I might have chosen a different course of action -- but Dr. Wynne thinks it is the only thing left to do to bring attention to the innocent victims who will be affected by the strike -- the cancer patients who will have to go without timely treatment. Dr. Wynne says he will continue doing a stupid thing by smoking for as long as it takes until the stupidity of the entire situation ends.

Smoking is not an easy habit to break, and of the many methods tried, only a handful seem to work. Of the methods that do seem to work -- nicotine-replacement products; bupropion drugs; counseling; classes; calling a helpline or talking to a health professional -- younger smokers between the ages of 16 and 24 years who smoke and try to quit only use one of the recommended methods of help by talking to a professional. Because of this, younger smokers are less likely to be successful in quitting, according to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

During the 2003 National Youth Smoking Cessation Survey, the CDC found that younger smokers most often tried to quit smoking by cutting back on the number of cigarettes they smoked each day; not buying cigarettes; exercising; using the buddy system and trying to quit with a friend; telling others they were quitting and changing to a lighter brand of cigarette, switching to chewing tobacco, snuff, or other tobacco products. None of these methods are recommended by the US Public Health Service.

According to the National Youth Smoking Cessation Survey, 77 percent of younger smokers have tried to quit at least once without success. Over a third have tried to quit smoking numerous times without success. Researchers suggest that many younger smokers may need help with other high-risk behaviors such as binge drinking; depression or ADD/ADHD.

If you are a younger smoker who is trying to quit, the CDC encourages you to call 1-800-QUIT-NOW or talk to your physician about methods that might lead to more success. The 2-page summary of the National Youth Smoking Cessation Survey is available as a pdf document.

This past summer, a man in the business of helping smokers quit, was diagnosed with inoperable lung cancer. Just months later, anti-smoking guru Allen Carr lost his battle with cancer. On November 29th, Carr died at his home in Malaga, Spain.

A heavy smoker for 33 years before quitting 23 years ago, Carr claimed to have found an easy way to quit smoking. From that discovery, he founded The Easy Way to Stop Smoking Program, which would eventually grow into 70 clinics in 30 countries. In addition, his company publishes how-to quit smoking books, CDs, tapes and DVDs.

Using cognitive therapy, Carr told smokers interested in quitting that they could do it without willpower, without suffering withdrawal and without gaining weight. The celebrity endorsements for his program include Sir Anthony Hopkins, Sean Bean, Marie Helvin, Johnny Cash, George Harrison, Lisa Stansfield, Sir Richard Branson, Britney Spears, Susannah York, Bruce Oldfield, Stefano Gabbana and Julie Christie.

Carr is credited with helping over 25 million people to quit smoking.

An Easy Way to Stop Smoking Program clinic spokesperson was quoted as saying, "Allen spent many years in smoke-filled rooms after he quit, while treating smokers for addiction. He is certain that had he not quit, he would have died 20 years ago." Near the time of his death, Carr wrote a letter to Tony Blair urging his government and NHS to accept the easy method program. Carr was 72.

The local chapter of the New York City American Cancer Society is asking that candy-flavored cigarettes be banned from sale because they feel it is a tobacco industry marketing ploy to appeal to teens. During a City Council meeting, the bill introduced would prohibit the sale of cigarettes with fruity flavors, like Twista Lime, and Midnight Berry; candy flavors like Warm Winter Toffee; and any cigarettes with flavors resembling chocolate, vanilla, honey, candy, mint, cocoa, dessert, or an alcoholic beverage.

But is this the way to go? According to the Epoch Times, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, an anti-smoking advocate, who has not shown support of the ban, is concerned that banning fruit and candy-flavored cigarettes will make them more popular with kids they are trying to protect, and end up having a reverse effect of what the bill intends. Bloomberg has raised taxes on cigarettes, banned smoking in restaurants and bars, and donated $125 million of his own money in campaigns and programs to stop smoking. We have not contacted Bloomberg for a direct comment on the ban and are merely sharing what the Epoch Times has published about his position.

Forty states have addressed the issue of candy and fruit-flavored cigarettes after frustration that the federal government has not take a stand against R.J. Reynolds marketing of cigarettes to young people. R.J. Reynolds has agreed to a settlement with the attorney generals of 40 states to stop selling candy, fruit and alcohol-flavored cigarettes in the United States.

Along with the ban on Camel Exotic Blends including Mandarin Mint, Dark Mint, Crema, Izmir Stinger, Twist, Cinnzabar, Mandalay Lime, Aegean Spice, Bayou Blast, Beach Breezer, Margarita Mixer, Midnight Madness, Back Alley Blend, Kauai Kolada, Twista Lime, Winter MochaMint, Warm Winter Toffee, Blackjack Gin, Screwdriver Slots and SnakeEyes Scotch; Salem Silver including Dark Currents, Fire & Ice, Deep Freeze and Cool Myst; and Kool Smooth Fusions including Mintrigue, Mocha Taboo, Midnight Berry and Caribbean Chill, the tobacco company agreed to stop promotional materials that suggest candy, fruit or alcoholic beverages.

What do you think the best solution is to the problem of cigarettes that appear to be marketed to appeal to our youth? A ban? Increased taxing on cigarettes? Or do you have a more creative solution?