Beta Fulltext view is in preview — article structure may vary. Browse all articles
Contents
Medical Journal of Clinical Trials & Case Studies Research Article 9 min read

Brief Analysis about the Smoking Economic Benefits

Gonzalez ES and Hernandez FF*
* Corresponding author
ISSN: 2578-4838  10.23880/mjccs-16000282  Received: February 20, 2021  Published: March 18, 2021
 — views
 36 references
PDF
Keywords
Smoking Economic Benefits
Abstract

Background: Smoking is given by the tobacco consumption. Thus all smoking economic benefits are based on this fact. Some economic sectors are benefited from the smoking economic impact over the health services demand. The magnitude of these economic benefits is given by the relevancy from the effective demand of health services attributable to smoking. Objective: To describe the main economic benefits attributable to smoking. Materials and methods: As theoretic methods were used the historic – logic the inductive – deductive and the comparative. As empiric method it used the bibliographic research. Results: The financial resources able to access to the health services may be limited by the same reason that motive the health service demand: the smoking. One of the more singular economic benefits from smoking is given by the smoker earlier death. The smoker over-mortality carries to reduce the demand of Social Security services to retired people agree to life expectation reduction. Much times the unquestionable health valued isn´t sufficiently considered by fiscal authorities who consider more important at short time the practice value from the smoking economic benefits. That’s why it isn´t sufficient with the understanding and acknowledge from the smoking impact over the life quality and life expectation. Conclusion: The social and the human development may not be supported in the existence of a risk factor that reduces the life value reducing the health quality and life expectative

Background

The cost – benefit relation is a rate of practice using. It is largely utilized to measure the smoking socioeconomic impact in the researched population. Public Health often supports extended arguments showing the smoking economic consequences over morbidity and mortality in costs form [1]. However, the arguments about benefits attributable to smoking usually are supported by smoking defenders. The smoking economic benefits acknowledge don’t means a position agrees to smoking [2, 3, 4, 5]. Moreover that, it is important to understand these economic benefits for a better understanding about government position agree to smoking extension specially when these political authorities are extensive knowing the smoking impact over morbidity and mortality.

Smoking is given by the tobacco consumption [6, 7]. Thus all smoking economic benefits are based on this fact.

In tobacco producer countries the tobacco industry is an important supplier of employees [8]. At same time the fiscal income obtained from the tobacco economic activities may makes an important contribution to the fiscal equilibrium. Thus the addiction to nicotine given by the tobacco consumption supports the labor stability of the tobacco industry.

It is unquestionable that smoking causes many damages to the individual and social health because of the smoking impact over the morbidity and mortality too [9, 10]. Because of that some economic sectors are benefited because may cover more demand given by the health services incremented attributable to smoking. Example of that is the pharmaceutics, the insurance and the social security sectors [11, 12].

Objective

To describe the main economic benefits attributable to smoking.

Materials and Methods

It made a descriptive research about the main smoking economic benefits. As theoric methods were used the historic – logic the inductive – deductive and the comparative. As empiric method it used the bibliographic research.

Results

The largest smoking impact over morbidity is determined by no-communicable illness. The health services because of these illnesses are covered in specialized health institutions. These services need specific treatments covered by high financial costs given the complexion of these illnesses. That’s why the pharmaceutical industry meets in smokers easy clients because of the addiction to nicotine. The smoking impact over the individual morbidity is directly determined by the tobacco consumption intensity [13, 14]. Thus smokers may afford more expensive health insurance quote. At same time the increase of health services demand because of smoking should raise the general price from the health services and the insurance services too. Nevertheless these economic benefits are questionable.

The magnitude of these economic benefits is given by the relevancy from the effective demand of health services attributable to smoking [15, 16]. Patients with higher tobacco consumption intensity must afford higher tobacco spends to cover the nicotine needs by the tobacco consumption. Then, the financial resources able to access to the health services may be limited by the same reason that motive the health service demand: the smoking. In cases like these patients need choose between tobacco and health. By other side if tobacco consumption increase don´t means that tobacco industry will hire more people or that pharmacy or insurance sector will do too because of the smoking incidence over morbidity [17, 18]. Neither means that fiscal income will increase. However is probable that tobacco industry profits will increase and a much reduced number of persons will be benefited because of the dependence of smokers to the nicotine supported by the tobacco consumption.

Something favorable to smoking economic benefits is the fact that these appear first than smoking economic costs [19, 20]. That’s why the less frequent tobacco consumers may carries to a positive position in the benefit – cost relation attributable to smoking. One of the more singular economic benefits from smoking is given by the smoker earlier death [21, 22]. The smoker over-mortality carries to reduce the demand of Social Security services to retired people agree to life expectation reduction.

However, the transversal analysis of the smoking economic benefits doesn’t consider that across smoker life the dynamic from the smoking economic benefits is minor that the dynamic of the smoking economic costs [23, 24]. Also this relation becomes more significant considering the money value at time. Moreover, that it is important to consider that the individual and the social health are untouchable goods, which lose value can´t back at short time, especially taking account the oldness process [25, 26]. Much health research supports that health value is as high that may not be evaluated since the financial point of view [27, 28]. Agree to this argument the opportunity cost from the smoking existence is too high and unjustifiable the existence of this risk factor because there aren’t sufficient arguments from the smoking economic benefits to compare to the health value.

Much times the unquestionable health valued isn´t sufficiently considered by fiscal authorities who consider more important at short time the practice value from the smoking economic benefits [29, 30, 31, 32]. This fact is more often in tobacco producer countries where the signification from the tobacco industry is too high.

That’s why it isn´t sufficient with the understanding and acknowledge from the smoking impact over the life quality and life expectation [33, 34]. It is important to make significant transformations inside these economies to reduce the dependence to the tobacco industry [35, 36].

Conclusion

The social and the human development may not be supported in the existence of a risk factor that reduces the life value reducing the health quality and life expectative at same time, which raise the living cost and favor to a reduced people number across the addiction to the nicotine.

References

  1. Hernández FF, González ES (2019) Health Economic Evaluations for the Health Education Management. International Journal of Education Advancement 2019.
  2. Fernández Hernández F, Sánchez González E (2020) Contributions Since the Health Economy Research to the Smoking Control in Cuba. Biomedical Journal of Scientific & Technical Research 30(1): 23102-23104.
  3. Sánchez González E, Fernández Hernández F (2020) Characterization of the socioeconomic inequity attributable to smoking. Journal of Quality in Health care & Economics 3(4).
  4. Hernández FF, González ES (2020) Smoking incidence over the labor health. Journal of Medical Care Research and Review 3(8): 417-419.
  5. González ES, Hernández FF (2020) Rates to measures the social inequity attributable to smoking. Journal of Clinical Research and Reports 2(4).
  6. González ES, Hernández FF (2020) The fiscal policy and the smoking control in Cuba. Journal of Clinical Research and Reports 2(4).
  7. Hernández FF, González ES (2020) The social and economic inequity from smoking in Cuba. Annals of Medical & Surgical Case Reports 2(2).
  8. Hernández FF, González ES (2020) Analytic validation of a formula estimating the smoking economic burden. MOJ Public Health 9(1): 5-7.
  9. González ES, Hernández FF. Brief Appointments about Fiscal Policy for the Smoking Control. Journal of Clinical Research and Reports 2(5).
  10. González ES, Hernández FF (2019) The smoking fiscal space in Cuba. Journal of Clinical and Medical Research 1(3): 1-5.
  11. Hernández FF, González ES (2020) The Smoking Economic Burden in the National Institute on Oncology and Radiology from Cuba. Journal of Medicine and Healthcare 2(2).
  12. González ES, Hernández FF (2019) A view for the morbidity attributable to smoking since the microeconomic. OAT Trends in Research 3.
  13. Hernández FF, González ES (2017) Impacto del tabaquismo en el presupuesto sanitario de Cuba 1997- 2014. Revista del Hospital Psquiátrico de La Habana 14(2).
  14. Hernández FF, González ES (2020) The absolute socioeconomic inequity attributable to smoking. Clinical Reviews and Clinical Trials 2(1).
  15. González ES, Hernández FF (2020) The smoking economic control across the primary health services. Clinical Reviews and Clinical Trials 2(2).
  16. Hernández FF, González ES (2020) Personal spend on cigarettes and tobaccos in Cuba from 2013 to 2016. Clinical Reviews and Clinical Trials 2(2).
  17. Hernández FF, González ES (2018) Algorithm to calculate the smoking economical burden in active and passive smokers. MOJ Toxicology 4(6): 373-375.
  18. Hernández FF, González ES (2019) Estimating the economic burden attributable to some risk factor. OAT Journal of Clinical Investigation and Studies 2.
  19. Hirono KT, Smith KE (2018) Australia’s $40 per pack cigarette tax plans: the need to consider equity. Tobacc0 Control 27: 229-233.
  20. Owen AJ, Maulida SB, Zomer_E (2019) Productivity burden of smoking in Australia: a life table modelling study. Toaccob Control 28: 297-304.
  21. Hernández FF, González ES (2017) Carga epidemiológica vs carga económica del tabaquismo por morbilidad. Revista de Ciencias Médicas de Pinar del Río 21(2): 210- 216.
  22. Hernández FF, González ES (2020) The Smoking Epidemiologic Control across the Primary Health Service. Asclepius Medical Research and Reviews 3(2): 1-3.
  23. Kuipers MAG, Partos T, McNeill A, Beard E, Gilmore AB, et_al. (2019) Smokers’ strategies across social grades to minimise the cost of smoking in a period with annual tax increases: evidence from a national survey in England. BMJ Open 9: e026320.
  24. Cher BP, Chen C, Yoong J (2017) Prevalence-based, disease-specific estimate of the social cost of smoking in Singapore. BMJ Open 7: e014377.
  25. Virtanen SE, Galanti MR, Johansson PM, Inna Feldman (2017) Economic evaluation of a brief counselling for smoking cessation in dentistry: a case study comparing two health economic models. BMJ Open 7(7): e016375.
  26. Goodchild M, Nargis N, Tursan d’Espaignet E (2018) Global economic cost of smoking-attributable diseases. Tobacco Control 27(1): 58-64.
  27. Rosselli D, Gil Tamayo S (2017) Costo por años de vida perdidos: una propuesta para estimar el impuesto al tabaco. Rev Salud Pública 19(5): 591-594.
  28. Jha V, Narayanan BG, Wadhwa D, Tesche J (2020) Economic and environmental effects of reduction in smoking prevalence in Tanzania. Tobacco Control 29: 24-28.
  29. Macinko J (2018) Austeridad, inequidad y resiliencia en España. Salud Colectiva 14(4): 675-678.
  30. Laurentino dos Santos I (2020) Equality, equity, and justice in health in the light of bioethics. Rev bioét (Impr.) 28(2): 229-38.
  31. Lightwood J, Glantz SA (2016) Smoking Behavior and Healthcare Expenditure in the United States, 1992– 2009: Panel Data Estimates. PLoS Med 13(5): e1002020.
  32. Hernández FF, González ES (2020) Postgraduate Course: Smoking Vs. Labor Productivity. Journal of Quality in Health care & Economics 3(6): 000191.
  33. González ES, Hernández FF (2017) El rol de las autoridades fiscales en el control del tabaquismo. Revista de Ciencias Médicas de Pinar del Río 21(3): 362-367
  34. González ES, Hernández FF (2018) La relación entre la política tributaria y el control del tabaquismo en Cuba/ Tributary policy related to smoking control in Cuba. Correo Científico Médico 22(2): 238-249.
  35. González ES, Hernández FF (2018) Costo social por pérdida absoluta de productividad laboral. Revista Cubana de Salud y Trabajo 19(1): 33-39.
  36. Hernández FF, González ES (2019) Coeficiente de inequidad económica del tabaquismo en los servicios de la salud pública. Correo Científico Médico 23(4).
More from this journal

Cite this article

BibTeX
APA
RIS
@article{gonzalez2021,
  title   = {Brief Analysis about the Smoking Economic Benefits},
  author  = {Gonzalez ES and Hernandez FF},
  journal = {Medical Journal of Clinical Trials & Case Studies},
  year    = {2021},
  volume  = {5},
  number  = {2},
  doi     = {10.23880/mjccs-16000282}
}
Gonzalez ES and Hernandez FF (2021). Brief Analysis about the Smoking Economic Benefits. Medical Journal of Clinical Trials & Case Studies, 5(2). https://doi.org/10.23880/mjccs-16000282
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Brief Analysis about the Smoking Economic Benefits
AU  - Gonzalez ES and Hernandez FF
JO  - Medical Journal of Clinical Trials & Case Studies
PY  - 2021
VL  - 5
IS  - 2
DO  - 10.23880/mjccs-16000282
ER  -