Notes from the publisher's desk:
Clement C. Moore likens the lure of tobacco to "opium's treach'rous aid." ( 1799)
" Twas " was first published anonymously in 1823 and it wasn't until 15 years later that Clement C. Moore laid claim to the rights. The Henry Livingston family and Irving Washington's heirs have challenged Moore's claim to ownership and one of their main arguments is that Moore was known to be a staunch anti-smoking advocate - along with the fact that his writing style is vastly different than the original version of Twas. I have read with interest this discussion and I have chosen to credit Moore with the poem and to affix his portrait on the wall of the living room in the illustrations. I do not know what the final verdict will be on this but I did have the opportunity to visit the New York Historical Museum and view a signed original and given the religious nature of the man I choose to take his word for it. I was very pleased that the New York Historical Library were pleased to accept and add to their collection a copy of this new edition.
RESOURCES AND REFERENCES
" Sophisticated critics within the anti-tobacco movement understood that simply claiming that Joe( Camel) appealed to kids would be inadequate in any successful attack on the industry. These activists duly recognized the importance of translating public assumptions about the goals of Joe Camel campaign into research findings. Just as researchers in the 1940s and 1950s had sought to casually link cigarettes and disease, researchers in the early 1990's sought to casually link advertising with the use of cigaratte smoking among underage children.
... another study reported in the same JAMA issue found that among children between the ages of three and six, Joe's (Camel) recognition rate approached that of Mickey Mouse. This study galvanized the media and generated new outrage among the public. It rates as one of the most influential studies in the history of the modern tobacco wars."
"One could easily conclude from such a study that R.J. Reynolds was eager to create appeals fortobacco that would hold a sympathetic audience from very young ages."
"The Master Settlement Agreement, announced on November 16, 1998, consisted of three major items. ...Finally, there were modest restrictions on advertising and promotion; Joe Camel and other cartoon characters would be prohibited."
Excerpts from Pultizer Prize Finalist Allan M. Brandt's The Cigarette Century.
Brand logo recognition by children aged 3 to 6 years. Mickey Mouse and Old Joe the Camel.
Department of Family Medicine, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta 30912.
Little is known about the influence of advertising on very young children. We, therefore, measured product logo recognition by subjects aged 3 to 6 years.
Children were instructed to match logos with one of 12 products pictured on a game board. Twenty-two logos were tested, including those representing children's products, adult products, and those for two popular cigarette brands (Camel and Marlboro).
Preschools in Augusta and Atlanta, Ga.
A convenience sample of 229 children attending preschool.
The children demonstrated high rates of logo recognition. When analyzed by product category, the level of recognition of cigarette logos was intermediate between children's and adult products. The recognition rates of The Disney Channel logo and Old Joe (the cartoon character promoting Camel cigarettes) were highest in their respective product categories. Recognition rates increased with age. Approximately 30% of 3-year-old children correctly matched Old Joe with a picture of a cigarette compared with 91.3% of 6-year-old children.
Very young children see, understand, and remember advertising. Given the serious health consequences of smoking, the exposure of children to environmental tobacco advertising may represent an important health risk and should be studied further.
ARTICLE| December 11, 1991 JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION.
Brand Logo Recognition by Children Aged 3 to 6 Years: Mickey Mouse and Old Joe the CameLPaul M. Fischer, MD; Meyer P. Schwartz, MD; John W. Richards, Jr, MD; Adam O. Goldstein, MD; Tina H. Rojas
JAMA. 1991;266(22):3145-3148. doi:10.1001/jama.1991.03470220061027.
Conclusion. —Very young children see, understand, and remember advertising. Given the serious health consequences of smoking, the exposure of children to environmental tobacco advertising may represent an important health risk and should be studied further.(JAMA. 1991;266:3145-3148)
Medicine and the Media| March 24/31, 1999
Tobacco and Alcohol Use in G-Rated Children's Animated Films
More AuthorJAMA. 1999;281(12):1131-1136. doi:10.1001/jama.281.12.1131.
There is no excuse for exposing children, especially the very young, to tobacco and alcohol use in children's animated movies. Character development in animated children's movies can clearly proceed without including symbols( tobacco and alcohol) that are addictive and associated with major preventable causes of death in our society. In light of the health consequences of tobacco use and alcohol abuse, the makers of all children's animated films should eliminate the use of tobacco and alcohol by characters in their scripts.
Annette Flanagin, RN, MA, Associate Senior Editor
November 4th. 2012
Nicotine addiction starts as a pediatric disease with 88% of smokers getting hooked before their 18th. birthday - 25% of adult smokers started before the age of 10. 77% of smokers wish they had never started. 98% of children with parents who smoke wish they would stop. 70% of youth will try smoking. Last year 50% of adult smokers made a quit attempt and only 2-3% succeeded. Prevention is the name of the game in winning the public war against the tobacco industry.
The World Health Organization, along with the Center for Disease Control, estimate that one billion people will die from this epidemic in the 21st. century, surpassing the toll of the last century by ten fold - which was more premature deaths than war and famine deaths combined in the 20th. century. This startling statistic was the motivation behind this publication. 70% of all healthcare costs in America, totaling approximately 1 trillion dollars annually are related to lifestyle diseases. Prevention beats tobacco at every turn.
Today in the USA 1200 people died a premature tobacco related death and twice that number of youth became regular addicted nicotine users - or "replacement smokers" as the industry labels them. 50% of people who smoke will die a premature death as a result of this drug and smoking remains the major cause of death and disease in North America. 30% of all cancers illnesses are tobacco related. Prevention is where we need to direct our energies.
Today in America the tobacco industry spent one million plus dollars on advertising. They outspend tobacco prevention 20 to 1.
The decline in smoking rates ended years ago, a fact not readily known outside of tobacco control and public health sectors.
Four USA states spend zero on tobacco prevention in the past fiscal year and the rest are not far behind.
In Canada the three top tobacco control agencies have lost 100% of their funding. These legendary agencies fought for legislative reform that dealt with issues such as second hand smoke and were instrumental in bringing smoking rates into decline over the past several decades. They are now seriously comprised.
Pipe smoking increased by 573% from 2008 to 2011 due to a price differential with government taxed cigarettes.
Exposure to cultural influences such as films depicting smoking have a large impact on subsequent youth uptake to tobacco. This opinion is supported by research and the Office of the Surgeon General of the United States of America, The World Health Organization, The Center for Disease Control, a consortium of over 40+ Attorney Generals of the USA, Physicians for a Smoke Free Canada, the Canadian Cancer Society and other agencies and individuals. Still there are not ratings restrictions to protect children below the age of informed consent from being exposed to tobacco imagery through their favorite film stars smoking away. This is a deplorable situation given tobacco related diseases also place the biggest strain on our health care systems. Stopping smoking in films that kids go to see is a highly cost effective preventive step.
In the past Disney and other studios self imposed limits to smoking in movies, however they have reverted and once again smoking is back in movies from these film makers.
The former editor of French Voque wrote a public apology for all the cigarettes she placed in the photos that appeared in her magazine in recognition of the impact this has had on young women. This is the type of action that the 21st. century needs.
That one in three young women in their child bearing years is smoking has far reaching implications.
For civilization to win the war against tobacco it will take one generation of children to turn their backs on tobacco and say no more. It will take nothing less. That very young children view smoking as "stupid" but then fall into tobacco use as teenagers is a direct result of cultural influences and marketing from the once again very powerful, wealthy and ruthless tobacco industry.
Pamela McColl - The Publisher Twas4kids
Question and Answers with the publisher.
1. Why do you feel that it’s necessary to alter a classic story?
2. Why stop with smoking? Why not change Santa’s weight (obesity) or his use of reindeer?
3. Where should we draw the line in terms of how politically correct we should be in remaking the all-time classics?
4. Why does Twas the Night before Christmas still fascinate children today?
5. In 2011, different publications of the book led it to hit the New York Times best-seller lists for 36 weeks. It’s
considered the most famous poem in American history, dating back to its initial publication nearly 200 years ago
in a newspaper. Isn’t it sacrilegious to tinker with it?
6. Author, Clement C. Moore, was a member of the New York Historical Society. Can you give us some context and perspective on the origins of the poem?
7. You say you would like to see books with depictions of smoking or references to tobacco in children’s libraries to have warnings to make parents aware before they open the book. Isn’t that a form of censorship?
8. What are the goals for your organization, www.youcanstopsmokingnow.com and www.smokefreechildrensbooks.com?
9. What can we do to make more parents, grandparents and teachers aware of the dangers of reading smoke-filled books to young, impressionable minds?
News Release Non-Smoker's Rights Association www.nsra-adnf.ca Tuesday April 17th. 2012
Ottawa – The Non-Smokers’ Rights Association (NSRA) reacted with anger and dismay to newly released details of the budget’s impact on the Federal Tobacco Control Strategy. Research clearly shows that the most effective way to reduce tobacco use is a well-funded and sustained comprehensive plan focused on policy change that involves a partnership between government and non-government organizations. “The Harper Government has ignored the evidence – slashing its tobacco strategy budget by one-third, narrowing the approach to just a few target groups, and ending the decades-long support of health groups through Contribution Funding,” said Melodie Tilson, the Association’s Director of Policy
The Federal Tobacco Control Strategy was arguably the most successful health initiative ever undertaken by the federal government – in terms of lives saved, disease prevented, improvements to quality of life, health care cost savings, and cost-effectiveness. Smoking rates among Canadians age 15+ dropped from 24% to 17% between 2000 and 2010, representing 1.1 million fewer smokers and more than half a million averted tobacco-caused deaths. Rates of tobacco use among youth were cut in half during the life of the strategy, a feat achieved by few other countries. An analysis commissioned by Health Canada concluded that one person quitting smoking results in an average savings of $8,500 in avoided health care costs. This means that the federal government’s investment of $500 million over the ten years of the Strategy is expected to yield savings of $9.6 billion in direct health care expenditures alone – close to a 20-fold return on investment.
Why would the Harper Government gut a program that saves the government money, that saves the lives of Canadians, and that safeguards the health and well-being of young Canadians? “Consider who wins by this decision: the only winner - and they are big winners - is Big Tobacco,” asserted Garfield Mahood, founding executive director of the NSRA. “By slashing funding to health groups, the Harper Government has virtually assured that tobacco companies will have the upper hand in influencing federal policy decisions.” Historically the federal government funded health groups in part to help level the playing field and ensure that the bottomless resources of the tobacco companies did not overwhelm public health.
Without health groups shining a bright light on the aggressive and sustained lobbying by tobacco companies to block the new tobacco package warnings and their preferential access to policymakers, the federal government would not have approved them. “The Harper Government’s initial decision to shelve the warnings in response to tobacco industry lobbying,” cautioned Tilson, “is only one example of what we can expect in the future." Since the first major scientific report proving that smoking causes cancer was published 50 years ago, tobacco companies have sought to weaken, delay, or defeat progressive measures to protect the public from their deceptive marketing practices and their addictive and deadly products. In recognition of their destructive role, the global tobacco control treaty (the World Health Organization’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control) requires all Parties to enact measures to ensure that the tobacco industry has no influence on tobacco control policies. “Not only has the Harper Government failed to fulfill this treaty obligation, it has sent a strong signal to Big Tobacco that it is open for business,” said Tilso “Experience in other jurisdictions makes it clear that tobacco use rebounds when tobacco control weakens,” said François Damphousse, director of the NSRA’s Quebec office. “Tobacco control does not take place in a vacuum—public health efforts to reduce tobacco use continually meet with pushback from a well-resourced, creative, and predatory industry whose raison d’être is to maximize profits by addicting another generation of youth to tobacco products.” With the gutting of Grants and Contributions funding to national and regional health agencies, the Harper Government has severely weakened the ability of tobacco control organizations to have well-researched and meaningful input into tobacco control policies. So, while the Australian government implements legislation requiring cigarettes to be sold in plain brown packaging, imposes substantial tobacco tax hikes, undertakes an intensive multi-year social marketing campaign, and increases support for smokers wanting to quit in order to achieve its ambitious goal of 10% prevalence by 2018, Canada abandons its successful comprehensive tobacco control strategy and its own target of a 12% smoking rate by 201Despite significant progress, tobacco use remains the number one cause of disease and death – all completely preventable. “This is not the time to change course or abandon ship,” asserted Tilson. “Not when almost 5 million Canadians still smoke, including 22% of young adults.” Smoking rates can be driven much lower, but not without collaboration between the federal government and non-profit health organizations, and not without a sustained federal commitment to a comprehensive, well resourced tobacco control strategy.
Uptick in Cinematic Smoking
Top box office films last year showed more onscreen smoking than the prior year, reversing five years of steady progress in reducing tobacco imagery in movies, according to a new UCSF study.
Moreover, many of the top-grossing films of 2011 with significant amounts of smoking targeted a young audience, among them the PG-rated cartoon Rango and X-Men: First Class.” The more smoking young people see in movies, the more likely they are to start smoking, the U.S. Surgeon General has reported.
The study will be available September 27, 2012 in Preventing Chronic Disease Journal, an online, peer-reviewed publication of the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion.
“Hollywood has still not fixed this problem,” said lead author Stanton A. Glantz, PhD, a professor of medicine at UCSF and director of the Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education. “The result of the increase in onscreen smoking in youth-rated films will be more kids starting to smoke and developing tobacco-induced disease.”
The UCSF study was conducted in conjunction with Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!, a project of Breathe California of Sacramento-Emigrant Trails, which annually tracks tobacco use in the nation’s top-grossing movies.
Altogether, the 134 top-grossing films of 2011 depicted nearly 1,900 tobacco “incidents,” the analysis found. An incident is defined as one use or implied use (such as a lit cigarette) of a tobacco product by an actor.
Total tobacco incidents per movie rose seven percent from 2010 to 2011. Among movies rated G, PG or PG-13, smoking incidents per movisoared by 36 percent.
The was obtained by counting tobacco incidents in movies whose box office sales ranked in the top 10 for at least a week.
Some of the films that showed the most smoking were “period” movies, such as
“Movies continue to deliver billions of smoking images to adolescents,” the authors reported.
Those three studios with tobacco reduction policies are: Time Warner (established policy in 2005), Comcast (2007) and Disney (2004). The three companies with no such policies: Viacom, News Corp. and Sony.
The study authors, noting that about two-thirds of subsidies for top-grossing movies are earmarked for productions with smoking, recommended that health departments work with policy makers to correlate movie subsidies with public health interests in reducing smoking.
“These results underscore a need for an industry-wide policy to keep smoking out of films marketed to youth,” Glantz said. “An R rating for movies with smoking would give film producers an incentive to keep smoking out of movies aimed at young viewers. The exception would be when the movie clearly reflects the dangers and consequences of tobacco use, or represents the smoking of a real historical figure.”
Tobacco, the leading cause of preventable and premature death, kills an estimated 443,000 Americans annually, according to the United States Department of Health and Human Services. Every day in the U.S., an estimated 3,800 young people smoke a cigarette for the first time, the agency reported earlier this year.
Co-authors are Anne Iaccopucci, youth program manager, and Kori Titus, chief executive officer, of Breathe California of Sacramento-Emigrant Trails; and Jonathan R. Polansky, a consultant with Onbeyond LLC.
The analysis was funded by the American Legacy Foundation.
For decades, Glantz and UCSF have been at the forefront of tobacco research, disclosing how the tobacco industry manipulated its products and led the public into cigarette addiction. Smoke Free Movies, a project run by Glantz at UCSF, centers on reducing cinematic smoking. The UCSF Legacy Library, now 12 years old, has more than 13 million documents on file that were released as a result of litigation against the major tobacco companies related to their advertising, manufacturing, marketing, sales, political, public relations and scientific activities.
UCSF is a leading university dedicated to promoting health worldwide through advanced biomedical research, graduate-level education in the life sciences and health professions, and excellence in patient care.
The full paper is available at http://www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2012/12_0170.htm
For a list of top-grossing movies with the most tobacco use: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/d3tsbpekecwh0a6/vtdrk3y95G
ALA’s Too Hot List for 2012 Pamela McColl and Paul McCartney.
The American Library Association’s criticism of the Canadian published smoke –free Twas The Night Before Christmas (Clement C. Moore) goes too far. The ALA told national CBC Radio on The Current the edit is an act of “literary vandalism” by publisher Pamela McColl. The nicotine industry in publically released statements have jumped on the accusatory band-wagon and criticize McColl for needlessly trying to rewrite history. These tactics can be expected from the predatory nicotine industry but surely not academia.
McColl says “The ALA on National Public Radio out of L.A. last week acknowledged that I had not breached any copyright law but they wouldn’t stop there going and publically denounced the edit as a misrepresentation of the author’s original work. McColl rejects these comments and the claim that this edit is in any way censorship, “You can still buy a smoking Santa book. I just think you should be given the choice of editions. We get to decide what we read to our children not librarians. McColl’s edition is supported by many in the public health sector, has garnered “legitimate and excellent status” by major book reviewers, won two first place awards and is a bestseller on amazon.com in three categories thanks to the buying public.
“Santa should have stopped smoking a long time ago.” Said Cynthia Callard, executive director of Physicians for A Smoke-Free Canada. “Parents should not have to choose between depriving their children of a cultural classic or exposing them to role-modeling for smoking – especially from their hero and a magical figure who is given a special role in family events.” Callard said in an interview about the book with Medical Post.
ALA says this edit is depriving the public of the opportunity to “grabble with difficult literature. “ McColl isn’t buying that and asserts people want to read this wonderful poem on Christmas Eve and not expose their children to as powerful a model as Santa puffing away. Kids don’t want Santa smoking either and McColl asserts this edit was done for them.
Sir Paul McCartney is refusing to sing about “turkeys” and altered the lyrics in a classic carol to suit his views. Watch out Sir Paul the librarians are sharpening their pencils and you well be next on the ALA’s vandals list
"There Was an Old Woman Who Lived in a Shoe" is a popular English language nursery rhyme, with a Roud Folk Song Index number of 19132. Debates over its meaning and origin have largely centered on attempts to match the old woman with historical female figures who have had large families, although King George II (1683–1760) has also been proposed as the rhyme's subject.
The most common version of the rhyme is:
The earliest printed version in Joseph Ritson's Gammer Gurton's Garland in 1794 has the coarser last line:
Many other variations were printed in the 18th and 19th centuries. Marjorie Ainsworth Decker published a Christian version of the rhyme in her The Christian Mother Goose Book published in 1978:
Origins and meaning