Smoking Among Farmers and Agricultural Workers in Canada

Data from the 1994/95 National Population Health Survey revealed significant occupational disparities in smoking rates. While 28% of full-time workers smoked daily, the prevalence was highest among male-dominated, outdoor, blue-collar occupations — including construction, transportation, mining, and farming — at 43%. This was more than double the rate for white-collar workers (18%) and nearly triple the rate for scientific professionals (16%). [citation:1]

• 📉 Farmers smoke less than other blue-collar workers: A study of Alberta farmers found that farmers tend to smoke less than people in other occupational groups. More farmers were nonsmokers. However, for those who did smoke, the amount smoked in pack-years was similar to smokers in other occupations. [citation:3]
• 📈 The quit rate gap: The quit rate — former smokers as a percentage of current plus former smokers — was highest (60%) for workers in scientific, managerial, or professional occupations and lowest (40%) in construction, transportation, and mining occupations. [citation:1]
• 🔄 Irregular hours matter: Workers with irregular schedules or weekend shifts had higher smoking rates (29%) than those with regular weekday schedules (24%). [citation:1]
• ⚠️ Workplace restrictions: Only 40% of outdoor blue-collar workers (including farmers) faced workplace smoking restrictions, compared to almost 80% of clerical workers. [citation:1]

Agricultural workers are exposed to a wide range of respiratory irritants and toxins that, when combined with smoking, create a “double whammy” effect. A study of Alberta farmers documented the prevalence of these exposures: 85% were exposed to grain dust, 57% to diesel fuel, 55% to fertilizer, 53% to herbicides, and 29% to insecticides. [citation:3]

• 🫁 Respiratory health risks: A study of Saskatchewan farmers found that occupational exposures to organic dusts, gases, welding fumes, and agricultural chemicals increase farmers’ risk of respiratory health problems compared to other workers. [citation:5]
• 📉 Lung function decline: A 2020 Saskatchewan study found that annual decline in lung function (FEV1 and FVC) was highest among old heavy smokers (-57.79 mL/year for FEV1, -33.88 mL/year for FVC). Living on a farm was associated with decreased lung function, though not statistically significant by sex and age. [citation:9][citation:10]
• 🧬 Carcinogen exposure: A Quebec study of agricultural jobs found that 92% of agricultural jobs involved exposure to ultraviolet radiation, 39% to environmental tobacco smoke, 23% to diesel engine exhaust, 20% to wood dust, and 20% to lubricating oils. Fifty-four percent of jobs entailed exposure to two or more recognized carcinogens. [citation:7]
• 🔄 The synergy effect: When smoking is combined with occupational dust exposure, the risk of respiratory disease is synergistic — greater than the sum of the individual risks. [citation:5]

The Ontario tobacco belt — centered in Norfolk County — has a rich and complex history that intersects with tobacco consumption and labour migration. The industry was extremely popular with workers for much of the 20th century, with high wages attracting a diverse workforce and enabling thousands to establish themselves as small farm owners. [citation:4][citation:6]

• 👥 Changing demographics: In the early 20th century, Ontario tobacco farms attracted white American southerners, European immigrants (including many Communist labor organizers), and Canadian families. By the 1960s, the federal government established the Seasonal Agricultural Workers Program (SAWP), bringing in Jamaican, Trinidadian, and Tobagonian laborers. [citation:8]
• 📉 The decline: By the end of the 20th century, the sector had transformed into a handful of mega-farms relying on foreign guest workers. The decline was driven by falling commodity prices, changing weather patterns, increased expenses, and growing negative social attitudes toward smoking. [citation:8]
• 🔄 The myth of labor shortage: Historian Edward Dunsworth argues that the traditional account of Canadian farmers being forced to rely on foreign workers due to a labor shortage is false. The tobacco sector was historically popular with Canadian workers — the shift to foreign labour was a function of capitalist restructuring, not necessity. [citation:4][citation:8]
• 🌍 Global connections: The Ontario tobacco belt drew workers from Jamaica, Barbados, North Carolina, and elsewhere — creating a transnational labour history that connects Canada to the Global South. [citation:6]

A study of Alberta farmers found that farmers had a favorable lung cancer experience — primarily because they smoked less than other occupational groups. When smoking was controlled for, farmers’ risk of lung cancer was not significantly different from non-farmers. [citation:3]

• 🦷 Lip cancer risk: When smoking was controlled for, farmers’ odds ratio for lip cancer increased to more than three times the risk in non-farmers — suggesting that occupational exposures (likely UV radiation) are a major factor. [citation:3]
• 🚽 Bladder cancer risk: Bladder cancer showed a clear dose-response relationship with amount smoked, increasing from 1.59 in nonsmokers (95% CI 1.05-2.41) to 1.97 (95% CI 1.32-2.94) with pack-years smoked. [citation:3]
• 🫁 Lung cancer: Farmers’ favorable lung cancer experience is primarily due to less cigarette smoking. Compared with nonsmokers, farmers who had ever smoked cigarettes were at excess risk for cancers of the lung and bladder. [citation:3]
• 🧬 Melanoma: Farmers had a lower risk of malignant melanoma — about half the risk of non-farming occupations — even after controlling for smoking. [citation:3]

Rural residents face unique challenges when it comes to smoking cessation. The 1994/95 National Population Health Survey found that only 40% of outdoor blue-collar workers — including farmers — faced workplace smoking restrictions, compared to almost 80% of clerical workers. [citation:1]

• 🚭 Fewer restrictions: The absence of workplace restrictions means farmers and agricultural workers are more likely to smoke on the job, normalizing the habit.
• 🏥 Limited healthcare access: Rural communities often have fewer healthcare resources, including smoking cessation programs and nicotine replacement therapy. The Respiratory Health Program for Saskatchewan farmers was developed precisely to address the difficulties of delivering an occupational health program to a sparsely distributed population on the Prairies. [citation:5]
• 📉 Lower quit rates: The combination of fewer restrictions, limited access to cessation support, and the normalization of smoking in rural culture contributes to lower quit rates.
• 👩‍🌾 The foreign worker factor: Temporary foreign workers in agriculture face additional barriers, including language barriers, limited access to healthcare, and fear of job loss if they seek help. [citation:4][citation:6]

For farmers and agricultural workers who continue to smoke, native cigarettes (Playfare, Canadian, DuMont, Nexus, Rolled Gold) offer an affordable alternative to overpriced commercial brands. A carton costs $29-50 — compared to $140-180 for commercial brands — a savings of 70-80%. However, they contain the same nicotine, tar, and carcinogens. Switching to native cigarettes does not reduce the health risks associated with smoking.

• 💰 Cost savings: A pack-a-day smoker saves $5,000-7,000 per year by switching to native cigarettes.
• 🚫 Not “healthier”: Native cigarettes contain the same health risks. They do not protect against the synergistic effects of smoking and occupational dust exposure.
• 📦 Online delivery: Cigstore.ca ships to every province and territory, including rural and remote addresses, with $29 flat shipping (free over $290).
• 🚜 Rural convenience: For farmers who live far from stores, online delivery is particularly convenient.