Impact of smoking on the economy

QUITTING smoking should be a top priority for the millions of smokers in the country, not least because of its link to impotency reported recently. In fact, there was a small, inconspicuous but significant report entitled "Smoking and cashflow" tucked away at the bottom of page 8 (NST, Dec 28) that could increase our resolve to combat the tobacco-addiction menace.

Smoking has by and large been overshadowed by many more interesting issues that took centrestage last year. However, this particular report seemingly unimportant as it looks, gave a new insight into the impact of smoking on the country's ailing economy. It reported that smoking is indeed one of the main contributing factors to the nation's cash outflow amounting to about RM3 billion annually.

All along we were made to believe that the revenue from tobacco-related activities has contributed enormously to Malaysia's economic well-being. For example, in August 1998 the chairman of the National Tobacco Board was quoted as saying that RM1 billion was being saved annually as a result of the local production of tobacco. And more recently, the Confederation of Malaysian Tobacco Manufacturers was reported to have paid RM1.2 million in taxes to the Government.

But this is not such a big sum as compared to the annual RM3 billion cash outflow as revealed by the Penang State Youth Council vice-president when launching the Belanja Berhemat, Kita Selamat (Thrifty Spending, We Are Safe) campaign in Penang recently. He hit the nail on the head by asserting that as "cigarette manufacturers are foreign-based companies, purchasing cigarettes means additional monetary outflow".

In fact, according to the State Youth vice-chairman, the amount of cash outflow is expected to more than double, up to RM7 million, when Malaysia reaches a fully developed status in the year 2020. By then too, the number of deaths due to cigarette smoking is expected to be in the region of 10 million annually, with at least 70 per cent from developing countries.

As far as smoking is concerned, we can be safe not only economically, but also healthwise when Malaysians decide to quit smoking. It looks as though that the economic argument so often used to prop up the tobacco industry is now losing currency.

In short, the so-called 'saving' hyped up by the tobacco lobby is not a saving after all. This becomes even more convincing after taking into consideration the health impact of tobacco use. For this purpose, let's examine some figures recently published from a study on the economic impact of medical effects on children due to parental smoking. For example, it has been reported that in the US:

• Maternal smoking resulted in approximately 46,000 births with low birth weight and 2,800 perinatal deaths per year, leading to a direct medical cost of approximately US$1.2 billion (about RM4.8 billion) and loss of life costs of US13.7 billion;
• There were 2,000 smoking-related cases of sudden infant death syndrome each year, with loss of life costs of US$2.7 billion;
• Approximately 22,000 hospitalisations and 11,000 deaths per year from respiratory syncytialyus bronchitis are attributable to passive smoking with resulting costs of US$130 million and US$1.5 billion respectively;
• About 3.4 million cases of acute otitis media are attributable to involuntary smoking, at a cost of US$50 million annually;
• Cost attributable to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) is estimated at US$180 million for direct medical expenditures and US$19 million for loss of life;

The overall cost associated with parental smoking for the various paediatric illnesses is about US$4.6 billion per year for direct medical expenditure resulting from 5.4 million cases of disease, with the loss of life cost of more than US$8 billion due to more than 62,000 childhood deaths annually.

All these examples showed that tobacco exacted a very high toll on society in terms of health and economic costs rather than any form of saving.

Although Malaysia lacks similar detailed data, the trend should be no different despite the differences in demography and market size. It may well be worse off. Studies carried out recently in Canada, also showed a similar trend where tobacco accounted for approximately US$9.56 billion in health costs, including US$6.82 billion for loss of productivity.

We have yet to consider other indirect costs associated with tobacco use, for example, the occupational hazards faced by the tobacco farmers themselves.

It is therefore time that we appreciate the seeming financial benefit said to be accrued from the tobacco industry. It is indeed a dismal amount weighed against illness, addiction, injury and death it causes in the long run.

We sincerely hope that the National Tobacco Board, industry and the government will factor this into the overall tobacco equation for the country so that we can arrive at a more rational decision for the benefit of the majority. All along Malaysians have been paying enormously for the short-term financial gain for a handful in the tobacco trade.

The current economic downturn must bring new awareness on this matter as part of our nation's resolve to further protect the health of Malaysians in the new year and beyond.