Tobacco Growing And Marketing: Ethical Dilemma

Source from:  Financial Gazette (Harare) 06/11/2004

Zimbabwe is the second largest exporter of tobacco in the world after Brazil and, before cotton took over very recently, it has been the largest foreign currency earner, contributing 15 percent to the Gross Domestic Product. Discovered in the western hemisphere in pre-Columbian times, this plant, it is believed, reached Zimbabwe during trade with Portugal. Cigarette smoking is not the only use for tobacco and it will surprise many people to know that there are some beneficial uses for this plant. For centuries the tobacco plant has been revered in many different ways. It has been used by many native American tribes as a ceremonial aid and over and above that, to show respect for the taking of any life form. There is evidence that tobacco has been used since around the 17th century in various types of poultice for drawing out infections and poisons. When mixed with a small amount of spittle and applied to stings, tobacco is said to stop the pain and relieve swelling. Tobacco in its raw form can be used as manure and enhances the growth of vegetables and lawns. More recently, a study has shown that the chemicals in tobacco may be a factor in preventing Parkinson's disease. This study, although so far done on lab rats, has shown that the tobacco compound is a derivative of naphthoquinone. Naphthoquinone works by interfering with an enzyme of the brain that breaks down neurotransmitters. The study was done when it was noted that fewer tobacco smokers have incidents of contracting Parkinson's disease. The smoking of tobacco became prevalent early in the 20th Century. The production of flue-cured tobacco, the development of cigarette rolling machines, and a public health concern over tuberculosis germs being spread through the cuspidors associated with snuff and chewing tobacco, all contributed to an increase in cigarette smoking. As smoking became more common, health problems emerged which seemed to be related to smoking. In the 1950s, Sir Richard Doll, a British researcher, studied the smoking habits of more than 34 000 physicians and found a strong correlation between smoking and disease. Throughout the 1950s, research data on the effects of tobacco on human health began to accumulate. In 1964, the Surgeon General of the United States issued a report titled "Smoking and Health" in which more than 6 000 studies were reviewed. This report concluded that "cigarette smoking is a health hazard of sufficient importance in the United States to warrant appropriate remedial action." Since then, each medical practitioner proclaims smoking to be the number one preventable cause of disease and death. Medical science is in general agreement that the use of tobacco endangers one's health. Lung cancer was the first health effect to be linked to smoking. Subsequent research has linked tobacco usage to heart disease, emphysema, and several other forms of cancer. Recent research has even suggested harmful effects to the unborn children of smokers and to those non-smokers exposed to the side-smoke of smokers. Dr Seymour Grufferman offered results of numerous epidemiological studies showing a high correlation between cigarette smoking and death from lung cancer. He stated that cigarette smoking is responsible for approximately 30 percent of all cancers, and that smoking increases the chances of lung cancer ten-fold. Because of these and other health risks involved, smoking is either prohibited or alternatively there are designated points for smokers in places like hospitals, planes, buses, restaurants etc. The following extract is from the WHO Report of 1999 and this sums up the general consensus on the harmful effects of tobacco: " . . . analyses by the World Health Organisation (WHO) have concluded that by 2030, current smoking patterns will produce about 500 million premature deaths from tobacco-related diseases among people alive today (WHO 1999). WHO further estimates that by 2030 tobacco is expected to be the single greatest cause of deaths worldwide, accounting for an estimated 10 million deaths per year . . ." (WHO Report, 1999). The dilemma that we are faced with as a nation is that whereas we acknowledge the health risks associated with tobacco, its importance to our economy can not be over-emphasised. Therefore, from the foregoing, it can be appreciated that as a nation we have a dilemma. This is an ethical (moral) dilemma because whatever course of action is taken, someone is going to get hurt. As such, this dilemma is going to be analysed from an ethical (moral) perspective. Morality is to do with the concern for the welfare of others and by extension, the promotion of human-based impartiality. Impartiality demands that the interests of different people or different groups of people be accorded the same importance. The theory of utilitarianism directs that an action is morally acceptable if it provides the greatest good for the greatest number of people. Two key interests take the centre stage of this discussion i.e. health and economic well-being of a nation. Health is intrinsically good and money is a means to an end. From a utilitarian point of view should we promote the production and marketing of tobacco, the main foreign currency earner for Zimbabwe, given the health risks involved? Can one group's desire for health be given the same weight as another group's desire for wealth? Even if a greater number of people is better off financially because of tobacco-dollars than those whose health is negatively affected by the active or passive consumption of tobacco, (which is doubtful) can we conclude that the promotion of tobacco is justified from a utilitarian point of view? Good health is an infinitely more important good than tobacco dollars which seem impressive in the balance of payments and Gross National Product (GNP) calculations that do not factor in the cost of health problems. Because it is far more central to human welfare, we cannot morally justify subjecting the health of a population to a utilitarian exchange with wealth. This is more so when one considers that the wealth created by tobacco goes towards satisfying the higher level needs of only a few. It does not seem like our support for tobacco meets the utilitarian demands of maximisng benefits and minimising harm. Can we justify the promotion of tobacco because some people have preference for cigarettes? Utilitarians argue that if products work against the maximisation of public welfare they should be ruled out since they frustrate the preferences of others. As a nation are we not guilty of moral incontinence? We have clear knowledge that the trend worldwide is against smoking and that almost all governments and world bodies e.g WHO, are putting concerted efforts to ban smoking. Below is a statement from Chattanooga Times Free Press on 22 May 2003: "The World Health Organisation adopted a sweeping anti-tobacco treaty on Wednesday (21 May 2003) in an unprecedented global push to regulate a product it says kills half of its regular users. Crowning four years of turbulent negotiations, WHO's policy-making annual assembly unanimously adopted the accord amid thunderous applause." We continue not only to passively rely on the crop, but to actively encourage reliance on it by investing in it. "... .GREAT stress has been laid in recent months on the need for Zimbabwe to generate more hard currency from exports and to ensure that all such foreign currency is brought into the banking system rather than being traded on either the black or parallel markets. Traditionally tobacco has been Zimbabwe's largest foreign currency earner and, thanks to a very orderly marketing system, it has proved easy to have proceeds from the sale of this crop accounted for. Unfortunately, there has been a slump in production... ." (The Herald, Boost Incomes, rebuild tobacco sector, Tuesday 11 May 2004.) Zimbabwe is by and large a Christian country and from a Christian point of view smoking is morally bad. Why is that so? · Regarding the use of tobacco, the Christian churches have long spoken on the use of substances which injure health. Often this has been done by pointing out that our bodies are God's temples. If tobacco is injurious to one's health, it becomes (along with alcohol, illegal drugs, overeating, etc.) a viable area of concern for Christians. · Christians have long expressed concern that we should not be stumbling blocks for our brothers and sisters regarding the production and use of tobacco. (Romans 14:21 It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.) If the use of tobacco by others is injurious to their health, then our production, advertising, and modelling of its use must be of concern to Christians. Christians in many parts of the country and the world over agree that the use of tobacco is immoral. Even if we were to totally ban smoking in Zimbabwe, in view of the health risks involved, and export all the tobacco that we grow to earn the much needed foreign currency, it would still be immoral because it would be the same as manufacturing bombs to kill people in another country. Immanuel Kant developed a moral theory that is still very influential today. Kantians emphasise that a person is praised or blamed for their actions based on the intentions with which they act. In other words, the person's motives are the major factor in determining whether that action is moral. According to Kantians, actions done in accordance with the categorical imperative are moral actions (and the person who performs such actions is a moral person). This imperative makes moral judgments similar to scientific ones because the proper behavior is supposed to be objectively recognizable through the use of reason. Kant's theory also emphasizes the importance of duty. An important part of this theory is a focus on what is best for the individual. Morality requires that we respect every human being, and Kant emphasizes that we cannot use other people simply as a means for attaining any goal (no matter how worth while we believe that goal is). Human beings should be treated as "ends in themselves". By exporting tobacco knowing pretty well the adverse effects that it has, we are using other people to attain our goal of earning foreign currency. The media has of late been inundated by advertisements of cigarettes. Surprisingly, all these advertisements acknowledge that "smoking is hazardous to your health" yet they encourage the audience to buy the cigarettes. The motive for these companies (which according to Kantians determine whether it's moral), is to maximise profits, at the expense of people's health. This then means that they are using the people as a means to an end. Conclusion Tobacco has been the largest foreign currency earner for Zimbabwe until just recently when cotton took over and, from the foregoing presentations it is evident that the harmful effects of tobacco outweigh the benefits accruing from it. As such, farmers should be encouraged to put more effort into producing more cotton and other safe exportable crops such as paprika, flowers e.t.c instead of continuing to passively rely on the crop. Surprisingly as a nation, we are actually hoping that production increases from last year's 80000kgs instead of working towards reducing it gradually to where the crop plays an insignificant role in the economy. Is it not time for deeper introspection? The writing is on the wall that this product is in the dying stages of its life-cycle, but we choose to play illiterate. Are we waiting for forced changes or are we waiting for our economy to die together with the product? Surely it is preferable, in a moral sense, for a society in its major economic activities to produce goods and services which enhance human health and welfare. Most individuals, given the option, would prefer to earn their livelihood producing goods and services that are healthful and socially beneficial. The issue of alternative forms of economic activity is, therefore, critical to the entire subject. Enditem