By Deborah Cho
As announced earlier this month, CVS has decided to stop selling tobacco products in stores starting October 2014 because it is not in line with its goal of promoting health. Since this announcement, there have been countless articles and editorials on whether this was a good move by CVS or not. Those who have said that this is a good (or great) decision generally emphasize that it makes a powerful statement about the harmful health effects of smoking, while others have noted that CVS’s decision is an unwise financial move and is unlikely to actually decrease the rate of smoking in the country.
It was interesting that CVS chose October 1st as the official start date of its new initiative, as if it were signaling that it were a health entity coming into full compliance with the ACA and ready to herd in its customer-patients. CVS has attempted to adopt the identity as a health provider, with its president hoping it evolves into an alternative to the doctor’s office. As such, CVS must shed itself of anything that does not mesh properly with its new image. This, however, inevitably leads to the question of why tobacco products were singled out as “unhealthy” when so many other products that are sold at drugstores like CVS provide just as little health benefit to the American population.
In response to this critique, the owner of a mid-size grocery chain who had also chosen to stop selling cigarettes has explained that, unlike other harmful items such as alcohol or junk food, cigarettes do “no good at all.” However, this claim is easily refuted by recounting the subjective benefits of smoking tobacco — “calming” your nerves, aiding in socializing, and gaining face time with your boss, to name a few. I once even knew someone who started smoking just so he could test his willpower through quitting. Don’t get me wrong, I think that tobacco smoking is one of the worst habits for your health and that quitting smoking is the best thing you can do for your body, but to say that it provides “no good” to customers is absolutely false and probably something with which CVS would disagree. Additionally, health professionals are concerned about much more than what is “healthy” in determining what is good for your well-being. For example, think about the huge changes that are happening around medical marijuana right now.
In short, I don’t think the “right thing” is what CVS is trying to do at all. Since the big announcement, I’ve been eagerly awaiting a more detailed analysis of how this will impact the company’s overall revenue and I fully expect to see that this move will result in increased profits. Unlike the mid-size grocery chain owner who suffered financially because of his moral decision to stop selling tobacco, CVS is not a grocery store and famously contains MinuteClinics. The bottom line is that this was a financial decision. CVS, particularly in the wake of the ACA, is promoting health because it will probably be more profitable if it looks like it is promoting health, not because it cares that people are healthy. In fact, I would venture so far as to say that CVS will be more concerned about future customers purchasing their cigarettes at Walgreens because of the potential for that customer to purchase other items at Walgreens, not because of the potential for that customer to develop a deadly lung disease.
Despite all of this, I’m going to jump on the bandwagon and praise CVS because the “right thing” (i.e. lower tobacco use) will hopefully result as a byproduct of its bold decision. I frankly am not too concerned if it was primarily motivated by profits and I hope that CVS is financially rewarded for the risky move so that other drugstores follow suit.
In conclusion, I’m reminded of something I learned in medical school that seems analogous to this situation. Often, warning patients about cancer or heart disease is completely useless in counseling for smoking cessation. Instead, a better approach is to remind patients that smoking causes skin discoloration, teeth yellowing, and that it even affects sexual performance. In other words, speak to the other person’s values, not your own, and you’ll get results.
Sometimes, it’s not the thought that counts.
Thank you for your interesting viewpoint.
Further underlining your analysis is that CVS Caremark is a publicly traded company and therefore owes a fiduciary duty to its shareholders. Given that $2 billion in revenues are at risk, it’s a certainty that directors/officers have a strong financial rationale (as you outlined) for the decision beyond corporate social responsibility.
That being said, this is not a zero-sum game. It’s also likely that some proponents within the organization did have anti-smoking values which influenced the ultimate decision. Either way, it’s a bold corporate move that should be tracked for medium- to long-term effects.