Bradford becomes first council in country to stop logging numbers who quit smoking

GOING ALONE: Joanne Nykol, tobacco lead for Bradford Council, with Sufyaan Mia and Raija Begum, smokeless tobacco advisors, with a selection of smokeless tobacco products

GOING ALONE: Joanne Nykol, tobacco lead for Bradford Council, with Sufyaan Mia and Raija Begum, smokeless tobacco advisors, with a selection of smokeless tobacco products

First published in News Bradford Telegraph and Argus: Photograph of the Author by , T&A Reporter

BRADFORD Council has become the first local authority in the country to opt out of collecting data about people quitting smoking, saying monitoring the issue using old NHS targets is "not an effective use of taxpayers' money".

A new report by the Health and Social Care Information Centre (HSCIC) has revealed the number of people using local NHS Stop Smoking Services to set a quit date fell by 19 per cent in England in 2013/14, with Yorkshire and the Humber showing the highest regional percentage decrease at 24 per cent.

This marked the first time the number had fallen for two consecutive years since the services were set up in all Health Authorities in England in 2000/01, but figures from 2012/13 had to be used to generate data for the Bradford district, with the council the only authority which chose not to submit any figures for the year up to March 2014.

The 2012/13 figures used in the HSCIC report put the percentage of successful quitters across the district at 40 per cent, the lowest rate across Yorkshire and the Humber, which had an average of 54 per cent, above the 51 per cent national rate.

The figures are based on specific former-NHS stop smoking four-week quit targets, established before the responsibility for stop smoking services was transferred from primary care trusts to local authorities in 2013, which the council states does not reflect the wider picture of the work it is carrying out.

As a result, it is no longer collecting the old NHS data as other local authorities continue to do, but is instead basing its stop smoking provision around levels of smoking by prevalence, collected via the Government's annual Integrated Household Survey.

Joanne Nykol, tobacco lead for Bradford Council, said: "The move away from the PCT to the local authority means that Bradford would have had to invest in a database system to accurately collect and analyse the data, and a decision has been made that this is not an effective use of taxpayers' money.

"As key public health outcomes are based on smoking prevalence statistics, the number of people accessing support to quit is now used to inform service planning and service delivery.

"By measuring smoking prevalence, we can get a more accurate picture of how many people are actually smoking in the district.

"The four-week quit rate measures the throughput of smokers using the stop smoking services, rather than reflecting the wider smoking cessation initiatives being carried out, including investment in tackling illegal tobacco, underage sales, and investment in the midwifery-led stop smoking service to address smoking in pregnancy."

The number of smokers using the stop smoking service across the district fell from 7,451 between April 2012 to March 2013, to 5,522 during the same period in 2013/14, a decrease of 26 per cent.

In 2012, the latest figures available, smoking prevalence among adults across the Bradford district was 22.8 per cent, above the national average of 19.5 per cent.

A regional spokesman for Public Health England in Yorkshire and the Humber said although the number of people using stop smoking services were down, smokers were still four times more likely to succeed by accessing local support.

"Public Health England regards specialist stop smoking services as an essential part of any local plan to reduce smoking and help smokers to quit," said the spokesman.

"We are creating new guidance for local authorities to help them commission effective services, and are discussing with Bradford Council how best to support them.

"What is really important is what is happening locally to smoking prevalence at local authority level."

Comments (12)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:08am Fri 29 Aug 14

Mike Strutter says...

I'm not convinced having a tobacco lead and smokeless tobacco advisors is the most affective use of taxpayers money either !
I'm not convinced having a tobacco lead and smokeless tobacco advisors is the most affective use of taxpayers money either ! Mike Strutter
  • Score: 22

8:24am Fri 29 Aug 14

Thee Voice of Reason says...

The council leader smokes about 20 a day, he always by the side of the pond **** it, so why would he be bothered with figures like this.
The council leader smokes about 20 a day, he always by the side of the pond **** it, so why would he be bothered with figures like this. Thee Voice of Reason
  • Score: 11

12:24pm Fri 29 Aug 14

hortonite says...

so monitoring NHS targets is not an effective use of taxpayers money. However spending it on a puddle, commissioning countless artists impressions of things that will never be built is obviously the way forward if we want to improve the health of Bradfordians
so monitoring NHS targets is not an effective use of taxpayers money. However spending it on a puddle, commissioning countless artists impressions of things that will never be built is obviously the way forward if we want to improve the health of Bradfordians hortonite
  • Score: 5

12:35pm Fri 29 Aug 14

MontyLeMar says...

Interesting to note that the numbers accessing the Stop Smoking service is down. Makes me wonder if that is because many have decided to take up vaping instead - you get the nicotine but avoid the harmful smoke produced by burning tobacco leaf? Either way it seems that the use of nicotine patches and gum is becoming less popular because it simply does not work.
Interesting to note that the numbers accessing the Stop Smoking service is down. Makes me wonder if that is because many have decided to take up vaping instead - you get the nicotine but avoid the harmful smoke produced by burning tobacco leaf? Either way it seems that the use of nicotine patches and gum is becoming less popular because it simply does not work. MontyLeMar
  • Score: 3

12:50pm Fri 29 Aug 14

hortonite says...

MontyLeMar wrote:
Interesting to note that the numbers accessing the Stop Smoking service is down. Makes me wonder if that is because many have decided to take up vaping instead - you get the nicotine but avoid the harmful smoke produced by burning tobacco leaf? Either way it seems that the use of nicotine patches and gum is becoming less popular because it simply does not work.
I can only speak for my own experience about the stop smoking service. last year I made three appointments to attend smoking cessation sessions, all three were cancelled with one days notice and rebooked on some arbitrary date. I had to contact my practice and book appointments for dates I could attend, which were months away from the original appointments. I got the impression the receptionists didn't understand the concept that I have a job and cannot wander in and out of work to attend an appointment which may or may not take place. I finally quit by using e cigarettes with no assistance from the so called service paid to help smokers.
[quote][p][bold]MontyLeMar[/bold] wrote: Interesting to note that the numbers accessing the Stop Smoking service is down. Makes me wonder if that is because many have decided to take up vaping instead - you get the nicotine but avoid the harmful smoke produced by burning tobacco leaf? Either way it seems that the use of nicotine patches and gum is becoming less popular because it simply does not work.[/p][/quote]I can only speak for my own experience about the stop smoking service. last year I made three appointments to attend smoking cessation sessions, all three were cancelled with one days notice and rebooked on some arbitrary date. I had to contact my practice and book appointments for dates I could attend, which were months away from the original appointments. I got the impression the receptionists didn't understand the concept that I have a job and cannot wander in and out of work to attend an appointment which may or may not take place. I finally quit by using e cigarettes with no assistance from the so called service paid to help smokers. hortonite
  • Score: 18

12:56pm Fri 29 Aug 14

Not so simple says...

What a waste of money and resources.
What a waste of money and resources. Not so simple
  • Score: 12

2:27pm Fri 29 Aug 14

MontyLeMar says...

hortonite wrote:
MontyLeMar wrote:
Interesting to note that the numbers accessing the Stop Smoking service is down. Makes me wonder if that is because many have decided to take up vaping instead - you get the nicotine but avoid the harmful smoke produced by burning tobacco leaf? Either way it seems that the use of nicotine patches and gum is becoming less popular because it simply does not work.
I can only speak for my own experience about the stop smoking service. last year I made three appointments to attend smoking cessation sessions, all three were cancelled with one days notice and rebooked on some arbitrary date. I had to contact my practice and book appointments for dates I could attend, which were months away from the original appointments. I got the impression the receptionists didn't understand the concept that I have a job and cannot wander in and out of work to attend an appointment which may or may not take place. I finally quit by using e cigarettes with no assistance from the so called service paid to help smokers.
Sounds like a complete shambles then. Well done for trying the e-cig cure. It works and is a lot more enjoyable than this pseudo quack medicine of patches and gum. I hope you are also feeling healthier and fitter?
[quote][p][bold]hortonite[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MontyLeMar[/bold] wrote: Interesting to note that the numbers accessing the Stop Smoking service is down. Makes me wonder if that is because many have decided to take up vaping instead - you get the nicotine but avoid the harmful smoke produced by burning tobacco leaf? Either way it seems that the use of nicotine patches and gum is becoming less popular because it simply does not work.[/p][/quote]I can only speak for my own experience about the stop smoking service. last year I made three appointments to attend smoking cessation sessions, all three were cancelled with one days notice and rebooked on some arbitrary date. I had to contact my practice and book appointments for dates I could attend, which were months away from the original appointments. I got the impression the receptionists didn't understand the concept that I have a job and cannot wander in and out of work to attend an appointment which may or may not take place. I finally quit by using e cigarettes with no assistance from the so called service paid to help smokers.[/p][/quote]Sounds like a complete shambles then. Well done for trying the e-cig cure. It works and is a lot more enjoyable than this pseudo quack medicine of patches and gum. I hope you are also feeling healthier and fitter? MontyLeMar
  • Score: 12

2:55pm Fri 29 Aug 14

Celine123 says...

Well when i initially went i was smoking 20+ cigarettes a day after 3 weeks i was down to just 3-4 a day but because i hadn't completely stopped , i had just cut down the advisor made me feel as if i shouldn't carry on going to the smoking cessations because i had to stop. So they may have better statistics if they actually made you feel good about what you have achieved rather than just try to get their numbers. 3-4 cigarettes is a lot better than 20 a day.
Well when i initially went i was smoking 20+ cigarettes a day after 3 weeks i was down to just 3-4 a day but because i hadn't completely stopped , i had just cut down the advisor made me feel as if i shouldn't carry on going to the smoking cessations because i had to stop. So they may have better statistics if they actually made you feel good about what you have achieved rather than just try to get their numbers. 3-4 cigarettes is a lot better than 20 a day. Celine123
  • Score: 12

4:15am Sat 30 Aug 14

harleyrider1776 says...

Clean Air Quality Law

It is hereby ordered that all things that generate chemical releases simular in nature to tobacco smoke are hereby OUTLAWED.

1. Automobiles and gas or diesel engines or any other contivance that emits chemcial releases. This savings equals to the public not being forced to inhale 100s of billions of cigarettes each day.

2. All plants are outlawed as they releases tons daily of the Carcinogen ISOPRENE. Equal in volumes of Millions of cigarettes each day.

3. Restaraunts will be outlawed from preparing any cooked foods as these release 100s of millions of equal cigarettes each day.

4. In home cooking is also outlawed as it produces upwards of 10s of thousands of equal cigarettes inside and outside the home.

5. Outdoor cookouts and fireworks are outlawed as they releases 100s of millions of equivalent cigarettes a day or on weekends in the yards and parks of our city.

6. Humans are hereby outlawed from existence insode the city limits as their own human breath contains hundreds of the same chemicals as found in tobacco smoke!

7. Nature itself is outlawed as it generates Billions of chemcial releases naturally into the atmosphere a day hense posing a threat to human life.

8. This Clean air law becomes effective Immediately.

9. Your preference of suicide is a personal choise,Police will write tickets and lock up any survivors after this law becomes effective. A grace period of 30 days will be in place to educate the public on its existence.

Signed into law by the GHOSTOWN ADMINISTRATION
Clean Air Quality Law It is hereby ordered that all things that generate chemical releases simular in nature to tobacco smoke are hereby OUTLAWED. 1. Automobiles and gas or diesel engines or any other contivance that emits chemcial releases. This savings equals to the public not being forced to inhale 100s of billions of cigarettes each day. 2. All plants are outlawed as they releases tons daily of the Carcinogen ISOPRENE. Equal in volumes of Millions of cigarettes each day. 3. Restaraunts will be outlawed from preparing any cooked foods as these release 100s of millions of equal cigarettes each day. 4. In home cooking is also outlawed as it produces upwards of 10s of thousands of equal cigarettes inside and outside the home. 5. Outdoor cookouts and fireworks are outlawed as they releases 100s of millions of equivalent cigarettes a day or on weekends in the yards and parks of our city. 6. Humans are hereby outlawed from existence insode the city limits as their own human breath contains hundreds of the same chemicals as found in tobacco smoke! 7. Nature itself is outlawed as it generates Billions of chemcial releases naturally into the atmosphere a day hense posing a threat to human life. 8. This Clean air law becomes effective Immediately. 9. Your preference of suicide is a personal choise,Police will write tickets and lock up any survivors after this law becomes effective. A grace period of 30 days will be in place to educate the public on its existence. Signed into law by the GHOSTOWN ADMINISTRATION harleyrider1776
  • Score: 7

4:16am Sat 30 Aug 14

harleyrider1776 says...

Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence: Third Edition

nap.edu

This sorta says it all

These limits generally are based on assessments of health risk and calculations of concentrations that are associated with what the regulators believe to be negligibly small risks. The calculations are made after first identifying the total dose of a chemical that is safe (poses a negligible risk) and then determining the concentration of that chemical in the medium of concern that should not be exceeded if exposed individuals (typically those at the high end of media contact) are not to incur a dose greater than the safe one.

So OSHA standards are what is the guideline for what is acceptable ''SAFE LEVELS''

OSHA SAFE LEVELS

All this is in a small sealed room 9x20 and must occur in ONE HOUR.

For Benzopyrene, 222,000 cigarettes.

"For Acetone, 118,000 cigarettes.

"Toluene would require 50,000 packs of simultaneously smoldering cigarettes.

Acetaldehyde or Hydrazine, more than 14,000 smokers would need to light up.

"For Hydroquinone, "only" 1250 cigarettes.

For arsenic 2 million 500,000 smokers at one time.

The same number of cigarettes required for the other so called chemicals in shs/ets will have the same outcomes.

So, OSHA finally makes a statement on shs/ets :

Field studies of environmental tobacco smoke indicate that under normal conditions, the components in tobacco smoke are diluted below existing Permissible Exposure Levels (PELS.) as referenced in the Air Contaminant Standard (29 CFR 1910.1000)...It would be very rare to find a workplace with so much smoking that any individual PEL would be exceeded." -Letter From Greg Watchman, Acting Sec'y, OSHA.

Why are their any smoking bans at all they have absolutely no validity to the courts or to science!
Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence: Third Edition nap.edu This sorta says it all These limits generally are based on assessments of health risk and calculations of concentrations that are associated with what the regulators believe to be negligibly small risks. The calculations are made after first identifying the total dose of a chemical that is safe (poses a negligible risk) and then determining the concentration of that chemical in the medium of concern that should not be exceeded if exposed individuals (typically those at the high end of media contact) are not to incur a dose greater than the safe one. So OSHA standards are what is the guideline for what is acceptable ''SAFE LEVELS'' OSHA SAFE LEVELS All this is in a small sealed room 9x20 and must occur in ONE HOUR. For Benzo[a]pyrene, 222,000 cigarettes. "For Acetone, 118,000 cigarettes. "Toluene would require 50,000 packs of simultaneously smoldering cigarettes. Acetaldehyde or Hydrazine, more than 14,000 smokers would need to light up. "For Hydroquinone, "only" 1250 cigarettes. For arsenic 2 million 500,000 smokers at one time. The same number of cigarettes required for the other so called chemicals in shs/ets will have the same outcomes. So, OSHA finally makes a statement on shs/ets : Field studies of environmental tobacco smoke indicate that under normal conditions, the components in tobacco smoke are diluted below existing Permissible Exposure Levels (PELS.) as referenced in the Air Contaminant Standard (29 CFR 1910.1000)...It would be very rare to find a workplace with so much smoking that any individual PEL would be exceeded." -Letter From Greg Watchman, Acting Sec'y, OSHA. Why are their any smoking bans at all they have absolutely no validity to the courts or to science! harleyrider1776
  • Score: 8

4:17am Sat 30 Aug 14

harleyrider1776 says...

This pretty well destroys the Myth of second hand smoke:

http://vitals.nbcnew
s.com/_news/2013/01/
28/16741714-lungs-fr
om-pack-a-day-smoker
s-safe-for-transplan
t-study-finds?lite

Lungs from pack-a-day smokers safe for transplant, study finds.

By JoNel Aleccia, Staff Writer, NBC News.

Using lung transplants from heavy smokers may sound like a cruel joke, but a new study finds that organs taken from people who puffed a pack a day for more than 20 years are likely safe.

What’s more, the analysis of lung transplant data from the U.S. between 2005 and 2011 confirms what transplant experts say they already know: For some patients on a crowded organ waiting list, lungs from smokers are better than none.

“I think people are grateful just to have a shot at getting lungs,” said Dr. Sharven Taghavi, a cardiovascular surgical resident at Temple University Hospital in Philadelphia, who led the new study...............
............

Ive done the math here and this is how it works out with second ahnd smoke and people inhaling it!

The 16 cities study conducted by the U.S. DEPT OF ENERGY and later by Oakridge National laboratories discovered:

Cigarette smoke, bartenders annual exposure to smoke rises, at most, to the equivalent of 6 cigarettes/year.

146,000 CIGARETTES SMOKED IN 20 YEARS AT 1 PACK A DAY.

A bartender would have to work in second hand smoke for 2433 years to get an equivalent dose.

Then the average non-smoker in a ventilated restaurant for an hour would have to go back and forth each day for 119,000 years to get an equivalent 20 years of smoking a pack a day! Pretty well impossible ehh!
This pretty well destroys the Myth of second hand smoke: http://vitals.nbcnew s.com/_news/2013/01/ 28/16741714-lungs-fr om-pack-a-day-smoker s-safe-for-transplan t-study-finds?lite Lungs from pack-a-day smokers safe for transplant, study finds. By JoNel Aleccia, Staff Writer, NBC News. Using lung transplants from heavy smokers may sound like a cruel joke, but a new study finds that organs taken from people who puffed a pack a day for more than 20 years are likely safe. What’s more, the analysis of lung transplant data from the U.S. between 2005 and 2011 confirms what transplant experts say they already know: For some patients on a crowded organ waiting list, lungs from smokers are better than none. “I think people are grateful just to have a shot at getting lungs,” said Dr. Sharven Taghavi, a cardiovascular surgical resident at Temple University Hospital in Philadelphia, who led the new study............... ............ Ive done the math here and this is how it works out with second ahnd smoke and people inhaling it! The 16 cities study conducted by the U.S. DEPT OF ENERGY and later by Oakridge National laboratories discovered: Cigarette smoke, bartenders annual exposure to smoke rises, at most, to the equivalent of 6 cigarettes/year. 146,000 CIGARETTES SMOKED IN 20 YEARS AT 1 PACK A DAY. A bartender would have to work in second hand smoke for 2433 years to get an equivalent dose. Then the average non-smoker in a ventilated restaurant for an hour would have to go back and forth each day for 119,000 years to get an equivalent 20 years of smoking a pack a day! Pretty well impossible ehh! harleyrider1776
  • Score: 8

8:50am Sat 30 Aug 14

MontyLeMar says...

Celine123 wrote:
Well when i initially went i was smoking 20+ cigarettes a day after 3 weeks i was down to just 3-4 a day but because i hadn't completely stopped , i had just cut down the advisor made me feel as if i shouldn't carry on going to the smoking cessations because i had to stop. So they may have better statistics if they actually made you feel good about what you have achieved rather than just try to get their numbers. 3-4 cigarettes is a lot better than 20 a day.
As I said earlier, sounds like a complete shambles. Only interested in statistics which will boost their numbers of successes, the rest can get lost! Afraid that cutting down your consumption by 80% does not count. Reminds me of the school which would exclude pupils which were likely to get less than a C in GCSE so they could boost their success rate and get big bonuses from central government no doubt. The whole stop smoking racket stinks - literally. Take up vaping, you'll soon quit for good.
[quote][p][bold]Celine123[/bold] wrote: Well when i initially went i was smoking 20+ cigarettes a day after 3 weeks i was down to just 3-4 a day but because i hadn't completely stopped , i had just cut down the advisor made me feel as if i shouldn't carry on going to the smoking cessations because i had to stop. So they may have better statistics if they actually made you feel good about what you have achieved rather than just try to get their numbers. 3-4 cigarettes is a lot better than 20 a day.[/p][/quote]As I said earlier, sounds like a complete shambles. Only interested in statistics which will boost their numbers of successes, the rest can get lost! Afraid that cutting down your consumption by 80% does not count. Reminds me of the school which would exclude pupils which were likely to get less than a C in GCSE so they could boost their success rate and get big bonuses from central government no doubt. The whole stop smoking racket stinks - literally. Take up vaping, you'll soon quit for good. MontyLeMar
  • Score: 3
Post a comment

Remember you are personally responsible for what you post on this site and must abide by our site terms. Do not post anything that is false, abusive or malicious. If you wish to complain, please use the ‘report this post’ link.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree