ShareThis Page
Letter to the editor: Help, don’t penalize, smokers |
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: Help, don’t penalize, smokers

Letter To The Editor
| Tuesday, December 4, 2018 10:03 a.m

Regarding “Pittsburgh suspends employee ‘tobacco surcharge’ until 2020” (Nov. 14, TribLIVE): The American Lung Association applauds the City of Pittsburgh’s effort to help employees’ health, but we disagree with punitive measures, like tobacco surcharges, that have not been proven effective in reducing tobacco use.

Tobacco surcharges may reduce enrollment in health care plans and may decrease smoking cessation rates. The American Lung Association recommends adopting legislation to prohibit tobacco surcharges across health insurance plans in the commonwealth.

Additionally, we want all Pittsburgh city employees to know that proven-effective programs to quit smoking are available through the PA Free QuitLine, 1-800-QUIT-NOW (784-8669) and Tobacco Free Allegheny, which provide free, in-person cessation with no-cost nicotine replacement therapy, like the patch and gum, to Pittsburgh/Allegheny County residents.

Instead of penalizing employees for the addiction, we encourage the city to promote in-person, by phone and online quit programs that provide free medication to Pittsburgh and Allegheny County residents to help them quit and stay quit.

Learn more about how the American Lung Association can help tobacco users quit at .

Sarah Lawver


The writer is director of advocacy, Pennsylvania, for the American Lung Association.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.