A different view of smoking

I am very surprised to see an ad for cigarettes appearing in the Sept. 11, edition of The Jakarta Post. The ad which appeared on page 14, took up half a page and was in full color.

I was disappointed by the Post's sanction because the paper over the last few years has seldom missed an opportunity to condemn tobacco and the industry. You even devoted a strongly worded editorial on the subject on June 20, in which you argued that cigarette ads should be restricted.

There you argued that tobacco use in Indonesia was "a growing hazard...seriously threatening the nation."

The crux of your argument seemed to be that while the tobacco industry contributes significantly to tax revenue, the social costs outweigh any monetary advantage.

I find this smacks of disingenuous paternalism for a paper, which in one edition, derived some of its profit from tobacco.

Few smokers can be unaware of the health concerns regarding smoking, but your editorial failed to acknowledge significant reasons for smoking; it allays stress, calms and soothes the spirit and staves off hunger pangs, for many, the taste of a kretek is something to be enjoyed after a day's labor.

It is all very well for middle-class editors in smart air- conditioned offices to condemn the foolishness of smoking, when few of you can know first hand the misery of the poor, the sheer lack of joy in their lives and the hardship of long hours of work with a pittance of pay at the end of it all. A cigarette to a pedicab driver, a factory worker or farmer, whose life is more likely to be shortened by poor nutrition and exposure to infectious disease than the possibility of lung cancer in old age seldom reached, is something to be enjoyed.

It cannot be argued that in Indonesia the medical costs of treating tobacco related diseases is a burden on the sate. How many Indonesians actually have access to state funded medical care for cancer? How much of the tax payers' money (which the smoker of any class so significantly contributes to in the packet cost) is actually spent on the care of those with tobacco related diseases? I suspect very little.

In a perfect world a rational person wouldn't smoke, but life here is far from perfect for most and who are we to deny one the simple pleasure derived from a cigarette when life is so otherwise squalid?

GRAEME T. STEEL

Surabaya