Tax may not make smokers quit but can stop youth from starting

Peter Wong of The Lion Rock Institute is being disingenuous in his criticism of anti-smoking groups and raising the tobacco tax ('Lifestyle choices go up in smoke with tax rises', January 31).

Even describing smoking as a 'lifestyle choice' is misleading - it is is highly addictive.

Mr Wong says that anti-smoking groups want the tax raised to get people to stop, but the message I hear is that a high tax will mainly discourage youngsters from starting and getting addicted.

He claims that the successful model of education has been abandoned, but I see no let-up in education. Recent adverts publicising the proven link between smoking and impotence packed a strong punch.

If Yul Brynner's advert 20 years ago helped so many smokers, why do so many people still smoke? Perhaps the answer is that we have not done enough to discourage youngsters from taking up the drug.

He also characterises an anti-smoking success as a failure. The 2009-10 tax increase may not have reduced the number of smokers, but many of the poisons in cigarette smoke have a cumulative effect, so cutting the number of cigarettes per smoker will have had a positive effect on their health.