www.bewet.fora.pl

saleszxfgp

1) searching out a new cigarette is my way of mixing things up a bit and dealing with a mid-life crisis, 2) I like the exclusivity of the new brand as it’s harder to find and two rupees more expensive than my old cigarette, 3) I have become disaffected with the company that manufactures my old cigarette, since it’s been downright embarrassed to even consider itself to be a tobacco company after branching out in other sectors.
But what I can’t fathom for the daylights of me is how people can stick to one brand for decades ― whether for 30 years in Egypt or 34 years in West Bengal. Is it because of the addictive thrall that Hosni Mubarak and the Left Front government had, till recently,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych],[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], over Egyptians and the people of Bengal? Or is it really because they had no other choice but to be loyal to cancerous brands? If so, why then the sudden hankering for a new brand? Unlike the loyalists of the two well-past-their-expiry-dates brands in Cairo and Calcutta, I’m still comfy with an old brand.
Eleven years ago this week, I joined this newspaper. As the world watches to see if, after my radical break with my smoking past, I will now demand a ‘regime change’, all I can say is that the illusion of having a choice is not to be scoffed at. Or, for that matter,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych],[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], the illusion of having none. They wonder if state funding for effective anti-tobacco programs will ever be restored or, if in next year’s budget, it will be wiped out entirely. They wonder if the number of deaths tied directly to smoking in New Jersey ― 11,201 last year ― and the economic cost on our state ― nearly $5.6 billion in 2010 ― will rise.
The state Department of Health and Senior Services says it will closely monitor new smoking figures to see if the increase was an anomaly or a new trend. “The bottom line is that despite an extraordinarily difficult budget situation,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], the Department of Health and Senior Services remains committed to tobacco prevention as a key public health issue and that is why we have merged tobacco prevention efforts as part of an overall chronic disease strategy,” said Donna Leusner, spokeswoman for the department.
“If you look at our rankings for funding, New Jersey is near the bottom. New Jersey may have fallen the farthest over time,” McGoldrick said. “We used to hold New Jersey up as a model to other states for its programs. We don’t hold it up as a model anymore.” “It is really devastating to the residents of New Jersey, who have no programs or very limited programs to help them quit,” said Deborah Brown, CEO of the American Lung Association for the mid-Atlantic region. “People in New Jersey are going to be paying for (the funding cuts) down the road.”
The numbers back up Brown’s assertion. Smoking-related health care costs total $3.17 billion annually in New Jersey,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych],[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], nearly $1 billion of which is picked up by taxpayers through the state’s Medicaid program. According to McGoldrick, for every $1 spent by government on anti-tobacco efforts,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], at least $2 to $3 is saved in health care costs. “These are evidence-based programs that have shown results. . . . Ultimately, these programs pay for themselves.”