rance, renowned among Americans as a bastion of Cartesian logic, is currently
questioning itself over its curious, even paradoxical, posture regarding
smoking. The United States has turned sharply against smoking, and readily
accepts no-smoking zones in restaurants, offices, and public places. But in
France things are different, because the French government owns the nation's
cigarette-manufacturing monopoly. It reaps substantial tax revenues from
cigarettes, and clings to its role as tobacco merchant. At the same time, the
government pays the heavy health and social costs that derive from smoking.
Each sale of a pack of Gauloises brings the state five francs in taxes and is
estimated to cost the state around nine francs.
The contradiction became subject to increasingly intent scrutiny after
publication of a proposed law to limit tobacco use, presented by twenty-seven
members of the National Assembly, which said, "The state is pursuing a
shortsighted policy, and cannot reconcile the tax revenue from tobacco with the
health and social cost."
France's cigarette manufacturer and distributor, called SEITA (for Societe
d'Exploitation Industrielle des Tabacs et Allumettes), has the sole right to
manufacture cigarettes within the country, and controls the distribution of
almost all imported cigarettes. It belongs wholly to the government. SEITA
generated 31 billion francs ($5.48 billion) in 1990 tax revenues--some 2.3
percent of the national budget--plus an operating profit of $66.7 million.
The annual cost to the country for health care related to smoking is estimated
at $8.8 billion, plus some $2.6 billion in lost production, for a total social
cost per year of $11.4 billion.
Each year some 61,000 French men and women--almost the equivalent of the entire
population of Cannes--die of ailments related to smoking. An authority on
smoking in France, Professor Jean Marsac, the head of the pneumology department
at Paris's Cochin Hospital, calls cigarettes "the most deadly addiction
epidemic of the twentieth century." Cigarette consumption doubled in France in
the thirty-five years from 1950 to 1985, and although it has stopped increasing
and has even declined slightly in recent years, heavy smokers are much more
numerous today than they have been in the past: 23.5 percent of male smokers
consumed more than a pack a day last year, as compared with 16 percent in 1977.
Overall, 38 percent of people in France smoke, as compared with 29 percent in
the United States, and smoke lies heavy almost everywhere in the land.
The nation's young people are hardest hit by the effects of smoking. They are
the most suggestible, the most vulnerable to the seeming glamour of a
once-forbidden adult habit. The earlier a person starts smoking, some
specialists say, the more damaging the habit will be--and 10 percent of the
smokers in France are under twelve. Sixty percent of all eighteen-year-olds are
smokers.
Those French who smoke do so with avidity, and even light up between courses at
meals, a practice once universally condemned. Watching students outside lycees
or universities in France as they try to master the rituals of veteran smokers
is amusing, although also depressing. Here one sees a latter-day Humphrey
Bogart taking a deep pull on a Camel and throwing his head back dramatically to
blow out the smoke; there a would-be John Wayne takes a hard-bitten draw on his
Lucky Strike, eyes half-closed with menace. The moment they emerge from class,
students light up their Gitanes, Philip Morrises, and Gauloises, and they carry
their cigarettes before them woodenly as though they were fetishes.
Valerie Nicoly, twenty-eight, an assistant television director who studied at
the demanding Institut d'Etudes Politiques de Paris, explains the lure of
smoking: "It has to do with the American image from World War Two, with the
U.S. soldiers in Europe and their parachuted supplies of cigarettes, with the
Far West, heroes, cowboys, films, adventure. All this makes smoking seem
glamorous." She adds that Andre Malraux and other French intellectuals were
usually seen as smokers, and many students aspire to become intellectuals.
Students also spend a lot of time in cafes, she notes, establishments
traditionally hazy with a mantle of blue-gray Gauloise smoke; this reinforces
the habit.
A more clinical view is taken by Guilhem Boutan, twenty-five, a graduate of the
school of management at the University of Paris, Dauphine campus. "Stress leads
people to smoke," he says, drawing deeply on a Marlboro, "and students are
under a lot of stress. There is a lot of competition, a lot of pressure, in the
French educational system." Boutan's view is confirmed by the weekly Nouvel
Observateur, which conducted a study of smoking and concluded that "the major
factor responsible for smoking seems to be 'le stress.'"
Of course, those who find relief from stress through cigarettes are feeling the
effect of nicotine. Nicotine makes its way through the system quickly, reaching
the brain in about seven seconds, and has what many smokers describe as a
soothing effect. Nicotine, however, is also used as an insecticide, and a dose
of as little as fifty milligrams will kill a human being within a few
minutes.
Curiously enough, in view of its present reputation, tobacco was thought to be
a panacea by those who introduced it in Europe. It came from the Americas, a
precursor of other American imports, benign and malign, from democracy to jazz,
fast food, the samba, and graffiti. Around 1560 Jean Nicot, France's ambassador
to Portugal, sent some tobacco to Catherine de Medicis, the queen mother and
regent of France, in hopes that the plant might help relieve her migraine
headaches, and he won the debatable honor of having the psychoactive substance
in tobacco named after him. Moliere extolled the wonders of tobacco fulsomely
in Don Juan, saying, "There is nothing like tobacco.... Not only does it
rejuvenate and purge the human brain, but it instructs souls with virtue...."
James I of Scotland, more prescient, condemned it as "repugnant to the eye,
detestable to the nose, dangerous for the brain, appalling for the lungs." In
Russia, Czar Alexis Romanov ordered that smokers' noses be cut off.
The ambivalence of these views on tobacco is reflected in the French language,
in which tabac can be used idiomatically to mean either a beating or a huge
success. Whether tobacco was good or bad did not much matter to the French
fiscal authorities, who in 1674, during the reign of Louis XIV, created a state
monopoly controlling its sale. They sought to generate tax revenue, which the
King knew all too well how to spend. The government's monopoly was briefly
interrupted after the Revolution but was renewed under Napoleon, and has been
preserved ever since.
Under today's regulations, cigarettes are sold only in designated stores,
called debits de tabac, whose owners net six percent on every pack sold. The
stores also sell stamps, candy, chewing gum, and other oddments, and many are
operated in conjunction with newsstands or cafes. The rules help impose some
limits on smoking among youths, because cigarettes are sold only over the
counter, not from machines. Of course, underage smokers still find ways to
obtain cigarettes.
France first moved to impose restrictions on smoking in the early 1970s, with
limits on smoking in public places such as hospitals and schools. Then, in
1976, came the milestone "Loi Veil," which limited the advertising of tobacco
products. The bill was named after Simone Veil, the Minister of Health at the
time. Critics of France's efforts to curb smoking claim, however, that a Latin
disinclination to enforce such laws has weakened their effect. Nonetheless,
smoking has been prohibited on commuter trains and domestic French airline
flights, and new rules protecting nonsmokers in workplaces and restaurants are
due to come into effect this year.
Today France is suddenly conscious of both the effects of smoking and the
effects of inhaling secondary smoke. Programs to help smokers stop abound;
there are ad campaigns, seminars, smokeless days, nosmoking signs in cabs, and
a variety of counseling services. A few employers offer salary bonuses to
employees who don't smoke, but the practice is not widespread. An increasing
amount of snarling occurs between smokers and nonsmokers.
The growing tension between the two camps burst into the open last year when
SEITA launched a new brand of cigarettes under the name Chevignon, a maker of
expensive jackets and other garb favored by the young moneyed set in Paris.
Antismoking militants denounced the merchandising tactic as a lure to get young
people to smoke, and demanded the withdrawal of the cigarettes from the market.
The controversy actually shook the Cabinet. Ministers responsible for health
vigorously disagreed with those responsible for the governance of SEITA as
their duties put them on a collision course. Health won: the Chevignon brand
was withdrawn after four months, and has not resurfaced.
Many people in France regard the new furor over smoking warily, having read
horror stories about the antismoking hostilities in America, which are reported
gleefully in French magazines and newspapers. The conflict in the United States
is sometimes portrayed as a form of civil war. Journalists tell of fights, and
write about smokers being made to feel like outlaws, or being ostracized in
business.
Some look beyond the quarrels to what they fear may eventually be a loss of
liberty, a prospect few French will entertain gladly. A Paris paper, Le
Quotidien, whose editor is probably a smoker, reported somberly on new
antismoking rules imposed in New York and observed that "this revolution puts
the fundamental liberty of every citizen in danger."
Indeed, the record so far shows that the controversy surrounding smoking can
provide delicious opportunities for argument among a people known for their
contentiousness. Anecdotes abound. A bus driver near Marseille was set upon by
a woman professor, furious because he had an extinguished cigarette in his
mouth. He applied for six weeks' leave from work to recuperate. Tobacco dealers
in Besancon, angry at a vigorous new municipal campaign to reduce smoking, put
up posters everywhere that said DON'T SMOKE! DON'T DRINK! DON'T MAKE LOVE!
DON'T DRIVE YOUR CAR! YOU COULD DIE FROM IT! When the management of a
Hewlett-Packard branch in France sought to impose smoking restrictions for
health reasons, staff members threatened to barricade the company restaurant
and keep fat people out, on the grounds that more food would be bad for their
health.
Some other responses have been exaggerated too, like those of the antitobacco
leader Jean Tostain, who denounces tobacco profits as "nicodollars" and equates
smokers with Nazis. Another militant, Bertrand Schmitt, confronts smokers in
public places and hectors them priggishly. He even goes so far as to claim that
smoking interferes with lovemaking. The moralizing of such activists, who are
often reformed smokers themselves, is probably encouraging smokers to persist.
Mort Rosenblum, an Associated Press correspondent who has covered France for
years, calls them "health Fascists." To counter such tactics and unsettling
allegations, efforts have begun to create a smokers' rights movement, but with
unimpressive results.
The potential for violent disagreement over the use of tobacco helps explain
why the tobacco lobby in 1987 began a major $530,000 advertising campaign
emphasizing tolerance and courtesy between smokers and nonsmokers. The ads and
posters showed engaging-looking people, presumably smokers, saying, "Let's
ensure that life together remains a pleasure. Liberty works both ways."
This clever, low-key campaign generated a good deal of positive response,
chiefly because it seemed nonpartisan but nevertheless upheld smokers'
rights.
France has no bearded prophet like the redoubtable C. Everett Koop, the former
U.S. Surgeon General, to lead an anti-smoking campaign and galvanize public
opinion, but several vigorous private groups and forces in the government are
striving to reduce the toll of smoking. Their aims, enunciated in reports and
at public forums, include raising the price of cigarettes, reducing or
eliminating cigarette advertising, putting bolder warnings on packages,
creating more no-smoking areas, and lowering tar content.
They have made some discernible progress: cigarette prices were increased by
five percent last September and will go up 10 percent more this year;
advertising is being reduced by government order and will be eliminated by
1993; and SEITA is bringing the tar content of its cigarettes down to the
15-milligram level agreed on by the European Community for 1993. And a new,
bolder legend now appears on the front of cigarette packages, announcing: NUIT
GRAVEMENT A LA SANTE ("Seriously endangers health"). Other ominous messages are
printed on the package backs, warning that smoking is harmful to others, is
dangerous for unborn children, and causes cardiovascular diseases and cancer.
The earlier, more modest warning said only ABUS DANGEREUX, and appeared in type
approximately a sixteenth of an inch high.
But problems--of politics, price, and publicity--persist. "France is a somewhat
peculiar country," says Dominique Lefebvre, an official in the Ministry of
Culture and Communication. "You can't coerce people here." Speaking of the
1980s, he adds, "The political class did not show the political courage needed
to make progress."
Raising cigarette prices, now the third lowest in Europe and half those in many
other European countries, will reduce smoking, but it will also, from the
politicians' point of view, adversely affect France's cost-of-living index.
Surprisingly, 1.8 percent of that index is made up of tobacco products. When
the index goes up, salaries and wages escalate along with it, increasing
inflation and generating political problems. Anti-smoking forces demand a
cost-of-living index that omits tobacco, so that cigarette prices can be raised
without causing index escalation.
The publicity problems arise because advertising agencies have become critical
to political campaigns and political fund-raising. Lefebvre says pointedly that
the agencies "open whole boulevards of influence." The prohibition on
advertising for cigarettes may also lead to curbs on ads for alcoholic drinks,
and all this is highly hazardous to politicians' financial health.
Nevertheless, the government senses the changing climate and the desire for
action. It is aware that 76 percent of French people believe that smoking
shortens life. Accordingly, it plans to increase the pressure to reduce
smoking. SEITA, which has already announced plans to reduce its work force by
245, is introducing cigarettes made with lighter tobacco and is expected to
diversify, perhaps into food-related businesses. And a new cost-of-living index
omitting tobacco may be adopted.
Such measures will be steps, but only steps, toward resolving the present-day
policy contradiction in France, which is described by Albert Hirsch, a leading
researcher on smoking damage, as "a major paradox, an incoherence." In
fairness, the paradox is grounded in history. It was logical in the seventeenth
century to impose taxes on tobacco. It was logical in the twentieth century to
provide a national healthcare system. Some observers critical of the present
arrangement recall the French Finance Minister of some years ago who was
reminded that his treasury paid out three francs in health costs for every
franc it took in from tobacco sales. He replied, "I get the one franc. It is my
successor who will have to pay out the three francs."
Copyright © 1992 by Judson Gooding. All rights reserved.