Joe Camel may have been banished a decade ago, but that hasn’t stopped Big Tobacco from finding new outlets to hook teens and young women on cigarettes.

Thumb through any of today’s leading women’s fashion magazines and, among the articles and ads hyping health, fitness and beauty, you’ll find ads for cigarettes such as Pall Mall, Newport and Camel No. 9, complete with promotional giveaways.

Camel No. 9, for one, is named to sound like a fragrance, even though cigarette smoke stinks. The fast-selling cigarettes are packaged in hot pink and teal green, the ads festooned with flowers and the slogan, “light and luscious.”

Unfortunately, although tobacco advertising has been banned from radio and TV in the U.S. since 1971, colorful, eye-catching print cigarette ads — such as those in Vogue, Harper’s Bazaar, Glamour and Lucky, to name just a few — are effectively recruiting more smokers.

Not surprisingly, these slick tobacco ads have elicited thousands of angry letters and e-mails from readers and anti-smoking groups. Rightfully so.

There is nothing glamorous, sexy or feminine about lighting up. Smoking increases the risk of cancer, heart disease, stroke and respiratory illnesses, not to mention a hacking cough. In fact, lung cancer has now replaced breast cancer as the leading cause of cancer deaths among U.S. women.

The tobacco ads have also caught the attention of Congress.

Led by Rep. Lois Capps, D-Santa Barbara, 41 lawmakers recently signed and sent a letter to 11 fashion magazines, urging them to stop taking tobacco ads, saying cigarettes threaten the health of America’s young women.

In a separate statement, Rep. Capps said: “As a nurse, a mother and a grandmother, I am very concerned about popular women’s magazines accepting the advertising dollars of cigarette manufacturers and turning a blind eye toward the deadly effects these cigarettes have on women.”

For their part, the magazines have yet to respond to lawmakers. Cigarette makers claim they are only targeting established adult smokers, not trying to attract new customers.

The packaging and advertising venues don’t back up that claim.

Before legislators enact stricter regulations on print tobacco advertising, magazine publishers should have a chance to voluntarily pull the most egregious ads or at least consider accepting only ads that portray smoking accurately.

For starters, let’s see ads that emphasize how smoking actually detracts from one’s appearance. After all, what’s so glamorous about a burning cigarette hanging from a young woman’s lips or a mouthful of yellowed teeth? How about placing a couple burn holes in those expensive, trendy clothes the models are wearing or including health statistics in the ads?

Clearly, convincing impressionable young people to try cigarettes, especially when they are packaged in a way that makes smokers look cool and glamorous, is what cigarette makers do best.

That’s why it’s so important for fashion- magazine publishers to see these cigarette ad campaigns for what they really are and do the right thing.