DOCSLIB.ORG

Tobacco Control Laws: Implementation and Enforcement / Peter D

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Tobacco Control Laws: Implementation and Enforcement / Peter D Supported by The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation The research described in this report was supported by The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Jacobson, Peter D. Tobacco control laws: implementation and enforcement / Peter D. Jacobson, Jeffrey Wasserman. p. cm. “Supported by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.” “MR-841-RWJ.” Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 0-8330-2486-8 (alk. paper) 1. Smoking—Law and legislation—United States. 2. Tobacco—Law and legislation—United States. I. Wasserman, Jeffrey. II. Title. KF3812.3.J33 1997 363.4—dc21 97-5328 CIP RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve public policy through research and analysis. RAND’s publications do not neces- sarily reflect the opinions or policies of its research sponsors. © Copyright 1997 RAND All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopy- ing, recording, or information storage and retrieval) without permis- sion in writing from RAND. Published 1997 by RAND 1700 Main Street, P.O. Box 2138, Santa Monica, CA 90407-2138 1333 H St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005-4792 RAND URL: http://www.rand.org/ To order RAND documents or to obtain additional information, contact Distribution Services: Telephone: (310) 451-7002; Fax: (310) 451-6915; Internet: [email protected] PREFACE This report was developed under a grant from The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation’s Substance Abuse Policy Research Program. In this project, RAND assessed the implementation and enforcement of tobacco control laws in seven states. For tobacco control legislation to be an effective public policy approach, the implementation and enforcement of the laws must be diffused to the public, to business establishments, and to tobacco vendors. Understanding the process of diffusion, and especially barriers to enforcement or implementa- tion, will assist policymakers, legislators, and interested stakeholders in designing an effective anti-tobacco strategy. This document should therefore be of interest to federal, state, and local legislators and health policymakers; tobacco control advocates and other health care stakeholders; and health policy researchers. iii CONTENTS Preface ......................................... iii Tables.......................................... ix Summary ....................................... xi Acknowledgments................................. xxiii Chapter One INTRODUCTION .............................. 1 Background .................................. 2 The History of Regulation ...................... 2 The Political Evolution of Anti-Tobacco Legislation and Regulation ............................ 6 Research Questions............................. 18 The Policy Context............................ 18 Research Questions ........................... 19 Conceptual Approach and Hypotheses .............. 20 Organization of the Report ....................... 22 Chapter Two OVERVIEW OF THE CASE STUDIES................. 23 Case Study Methods ............................ 23 Site Selection................................ 23 Data Collection .............................. 25 Study Limitations ............................ 27 Synopses of Case Studies......................... 27 Texas...................................... 28 Arizona .................................... 30 Minnesota .................................. 33 v vi Tobacco Control Laws: Implementation and Enforcement California .................................. 36 New York State .............................. 38 Illinois..................................... 42 Florida..................................... 44 Chapter Three RESULTS .................................... 49 How Are Tobacco Control Laws Implemented and Enforced? ............................. 49 Implementation Versus Enforcement .............. 49 Clean Indoor Air Laws ......................... 49 Laws Restricting Youth Access to Tobacco .......... 53 Fragmented Enforcement Authority ............... 57 Penalizing Teens for Smoking ................... 58 Relationship Between Statewide Legislation and Local Ordinances........................... 59 Statewide Legislation and Local Ordinances: A Two-Way Street .......................... 60 Enforcement Considerations .................... 61 Synar Amendment............................ 62 The Effects of Preemption ...................... 63 Diffusion of Tobacco Control Laws Across Communities.............................. 64 Stakeholder Roles in Enforcement and Implementation .. 66 Anti-Tobacco Coalitions ....................... 66 The Tobacco Industry ......................... 70 Retail Merchants ............................. 71 Barriers to Effective Implementation and Enforcement........................... 73 Salience of the Smoking Issue ................... 73 Resource Constraints .......................... 75 Fragmented Enforcement Authority ............... 76 Ambiguous Legal Authority ..................... 76 Preemption ................................. 76 Potential Backlash ............................ 77 Chapter Four DISCUSSION ................................. 79 Relationship Between Legislative Enactment, Implementation, and Enforcement ............. 81 Contents vii Effective Enforcement Mechanisms ................. 82 Clean Indoor Air ............................. 82 Youth Access ................................ 83 Abdication of a State Strategy by Anti-Tobacco Advocates ................................ 84 Symbolic Statements and Cultural Change............ 85 Differences in Enforcing and Implementing Clean Indoor Air Regulations and Youth Access Restrictions ............................... 85 Scale and Commitment ........................ 87 Lessons Regarding Coalition Activity ................ 88 Enforcement and Implementation ............... 88 Anticipating the Industry Response ............... 91 Developing a Regional Strategy .................. 91 Policy Implications ............................. 92 Appendix A. TEXAS CASE STUDY ............................ 97 B. ARIZONA CASE STUDY .......................... 109 C. MINNESOTA CASE STUDY ....................... 121 D. CALIFORNIA CASE STUDY ....................... 133 E. NEW YORK CASE STUDY ........................ 145 F. ILLINOIS CASE STUDY .......................... 163 G. FLORIDA CASE STUDY .......................... 177 H. INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR ASSESSING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF TOBACCO CONTROL LAWS .... 189 Bibliography ..................................... 195 TABLES 1.1. Summary of State Laws by State and by Type of Restriction ................................ 11 2.1. Legal Environment of Proposed Sites ............. 24 2.2. State and Local Sites Included in Analysis ......... 25 2.3. Rate of Illegal Sales of Tobacco to Minors in Arizona Cities .................................... 31 2.4. Smoking Prevalence Rates Among 10th Graders in Arizona Cities .............................. 31 B.1. Rate of Illegal Sales of Tobacco to Minors in Arizona Cities .................................... 111 B.2. Smoking Prevalence Rates Among 10th Graders in Arizona Cities .............................. 111 ix SUMMARY INTRODUCTION In recent years, many states and localities have enacted laws restrict- ing smoking in public places. Despite the large number of such laws, little empirical research has assessed the manner in which these laws are implemented and enforced. The dearth of research in this area is especially troublesome in view of several recent studies indicating that laws and ordinances restricting smoking in public places can be an effective tobacco control strategy (Wasserman et al., 1991; Chaloupka, 1988; Keeler et al., 1991), and that rigorous enforcement of youth access laws can reduce teenagers’ access to cigarettes (Feighery, Altman, and Shaffer, 1991; Jason et al., 1991). The purpose of this study is to examine, through a series of detailed case studies, the process by which tobacco control laws and ordi- nances are implemented and enforced by state and local authorities. For legislation to be an effective public policy approach, the imple- mentation and enforcement of the laws must be diffused to the pub- lic, to business establishments, and to tobacco vendors. Understand- ing the process of diffusion, and especially barriers to enforcement or implementation, will assist policymakers, legislators, and interested stakeholders in designing an effective anti-tobacco strategy. This study was designed to address the following research questions: • How are anti-tobacco laws—both those related to clean indoor air and teen access—implemented and enforced at the state and local levels? xi xii Tobacco Control Laws: Implementation and Enforcement • What is the effect of strong statewide anti-tobacco legislation on the development and implementation of local anti-tobacco ordi- nances? • What role does an anti-tobacco coalition play once statewide legislation is enacted? • What strategy has the tobacco industry adopted in response to the implementation and enforcement of anti-tobacco laws? • What are the most effective legislative/regulatory/policy strate- gies given the results of this study? We also address the following specific issues: the process by which anti-tobacco laws and ordinances are diffused throughout the com- munity; the effects of such laws in the absence of a strong enforce- ment mechanism; the relationship between statewide laws and local ordinances; the relative effectiveness of various legislative provisions, especially those limiting
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Section 5: Smoking Regulations for Food Service Establishments
    Section 5: Smoking Regulations Statement of Purpose Whereas there exists conclusive evidence that tobacco smoke causes cancer, respiratory and cardiac diseases, negative birth outcomes, irritations to the eyes, nose and throat; and whereas more than eighty percent of all smokers begin smoking before the age of eighteen years (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, "Youth Surveillance - United States 2000," 50 MMWR 1(Nov. 2000); and whereas nationally in 2000, sixty nine percent of middle school age children who smoke at least once a month were not asked to show proof of age when purchasing cigarettes (Id.); and whereas the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has concluded that nicotine is as addictive as cocaine or heroin; and whereas the Institute of Medicine (IOM) concludes that raising the minimum age of legal access to tobacco products to 21 will reduce tobacco initiation, particularly among adolescents 15 – 17, and will improve health across the lifespan and save lives; and whereas sales of flavored little cigars increased by 23% between 2008 and 2010 and many non-cigarette tobacco products, such as cigars and cigarillos, can be sold in a single “dose;” enjoy a relatively low tax as compared to cigarettes; are available in fruit, candy and alcohol flavors; and are popular among youth; and whereas the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Surgeon General have stated that flavored tobacco products are considered to be “starter” products that help establish smoking habits that can lead to long-term addiction; and whereas despite state laws prohibiting the sale of tobacco products to minors, access by minors to tobacco products is a major problem; and whereas the sale of tobacco products is incompatible with the mission of health care institutions because it is detrimental to the public health and undermines efforts to educate patients on the safe and effective use of medication; now, therefore it is the intention of the Wareham Board of Health to regulate the access of tobacco products.
    [Show full text]
  • Other Tobacco Products (OTP) Are Products Including Smokeless and “Non-Cigarette” Materials
    Other tobacco products (OTP) are products including smokeless and “non-cigarette” materials. For more information on smoking and how to quit using tobacco products, check out our page on tobacco. A tobacco user may actually absorb more nicotine from chewing tobacco or snuff than they do from a cigarette (Mayo Clinic). The health consequences of smokeless tobacco use include oral, throat and pancreatic cancer, tooth loss, gum disease and increased risk of heart disease, heart attack and stroke. (American Cancer Society, “Smokeless Tobacco” 2010) Smokeless tobacco products contain at least 28 cancer-causing agents. The risk of certain types of cancer increases with smokeless tobacco: Esophageal cancer, oral cancer (cancer of the mouth, throat, cheek, gums, lips, tongue). Other Tobacco Products (OTP) Include: Chewing/Spit Tobacco A smokeless tobacco product consumed by placing a portion of the tobacco between the cheek and gum or upper lip teeth and chewing. Must be manually crushed with the teeth to release flavor and nicotine. Spitting is required to get rid of the unwanted juices. Loose Tobacco Loose (pipe) tobacco is made of cured and dried leaves; often a mix of various types of leaves (including spiced leaves), with sweeteners and flavorings added to create an "aromatic" flavor. The tobacco used resembles cigarette tobacco, but is more moist and cut more coarsely. Pipe smoke is usually held in the mouth and then exhaled without inhaling into the lungs. Blunt Wraps Blunt wraps are hollowed out tobacco leaf to be filled by the consumer with tobacco (or other drugs) and comes in different flavors. Flavors are added to create aromas and flavors.
    [Show full text]
  • Boosting the Tobacco Control Vaccine: Recognizing the Role of the Retail Environment in Addressing Tobacco Use Anddisparities
    Special communication Tob Control: first published as 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2020-055722 on 23 September 2020. Downloaded from Boosting the Tobacco Control Vaccine: recognizing the role of the retail environment in addressing tobacco use and disparities Amanda Y. Kong ,1 Brian A. King2 1Department of Health Behavior, ABSTRACT the sales of combustible tobacco products.8 To date, Gillings School of Global Public Much of the progress in reducing cigarette smoking several countries have instituted varying smoking Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel and tobacco- related morbidity and mortality among prevalence endgame targets, including New Zealand Hill, North Carolina, USA youth and adults is attributable to population- level (5% smoking prevalence by 2025), Scotland (<5% 2Office on Smoking and Health, strategies previously described in the context of the by 2034) and Hong Kong (5% by 2022).7 Centers for Disease Control and Tobacco Control Vaccine. The retail environment is The USA has not set an endgame target, but Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, used heavily by the tobacco industry to promote and two of the primary strategies discussed in recent USA advertise its products, and variations in exposure to and Surgeon General Reports include POS- related strat- characteristics of the retail environment exist across egies, including bans on the sales of some catego- Correspondence to 9 10 Amanda Y. Kong, Department demographic groups. It is therefore also an essential ries of tobacco products. As the tobacco control of Health Behavior, Gillings environment for further reducing smoking, as well as landscape has evolved in recent decades, the retail School of Global Public Health, ameliorating racial, ethnic and socioeconomic tobacco- sector has become an increasingly prominent place University of North Carolina at related disparities.
    [Show full text]
  • Best Practices User Guides-Health Equity in Tobacco Prevention and Control
    User Guides Health Equity in Tobacco Prevention and Control Acknowledgements This guide was produced by the Center for Public Health Systems Science (CPHSS) at the Brown School at Washington University in St. Louis. Primary contributors: Laura Brossart, Sarah Moreland-Russell, Stephanie Andersen, Anne Shea, Heidi Walsh, Sarah Schell, Laura Bach, Jennifer Cameron, Anneke Mohr, Laura Edison, Megan Multack, Susan Vorkoper Valued input was provided by: Stephen Babb, Diane Beistle, Rebecca Bunnell, Gloria Bryan, Kevin Collins, Shanna Cox, Monica Eischen, John Francis, Bridgette Garrett, Carissa Holmes, Brian King, Brick Lancaster, Rod Lew, Tim McAfee, Jane Mitchko, Jeannette Noltenius, Janet Porter, Gabbi Promoff, Coletta Reid, Brenda Richards, William Robinson, Robert Rodes, Anna Schecter, Scout, Karla Sneegas, Anne Sowell Valued input for the case studies was provided by: Bob Gordon, California LGBT Tobacco Education Partnership Janae Duncan, Utah Tobacco Prevention and Control Program Other contributions: Photograph on page 12 from the collection of Stanford University (tobacco.stanford.edu) Photograph on page 14 courtesy of Jóvenes de Salud Photograph on page 15 courtesy of Counter Tobacco Photograph on page 22 courtesy of Oklahoma State Department of Health Photograph on page 32 courtesy of the Jefferson County Department of Health and the Health Action Partnership Photograph on page 34 courtesy of the LGBT Tobacco Education Partnership, California Table of Contents Guide to the Reader .........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • American Indian Views of Smoking: Risk and Protective Factors
    Volume 1, Issue 2 (December 2010) http://www.hawaii.edu/sswork/jivsw http://hdl.handle.net/10125/12527 E-ISSN 2151-349X pp. 1-18 ‘This Tobacco Has Always Been Here for Us,’ American Indian Views of Smoking: Risk and Protective Factors Sandra L. Momper Beth Glover Reed University of Michigan University of Michigan Mary Kate Dennis University of Michigan Abstract We utilized eight talking circles to elicit American Indian views of smoking on a U.S. reservation. We report on (1) the historical context of tobacco use among Ojibwe Indians; (2) risk factors that facilitate use: peer/parental smoking, acceptability/ availability of cigarettes; (3) cessation efforts/ inhibiting factors for cessation: smoking while pregnant, smoking to reduce stress , beliefs that cessation leads to debilitating withdrawals; and (4) protective factors that inhibit smoking initiation/ use: negative health effects of smoking, parental and familial smoking behaviors, encouragement from youth to quit smoking, positive health benefits, “cold turkey” quitting, prohibition of smoking in tribal buildings/homes. Smoking is prevalent, but protective behaviors are evident and can assist in designing culturally sensitive prevention, intervention and cessation programs. Key Words American Indians • Native Americans • Indigenous • tobacco • smoking • community based research Acknowledgments We would like to say thank you (Miigwetch) to all tribal members for their willingness to share their stories and work with us, and in particular, the Research Associate and Observer (Chi-Miigwetch). This investigation was supported by the National Institutes of Health under Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award T32 DA007267 via the University of Michigan Substance Abuse Research Center (UMSARC). Its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH or UMSARC.
    [Show full text]
  • Tax, Price and Cigarette Smoking
    i62 Tob Control: first published as 10.1136/tc.11.suppl_1.i62 on 1 March 2002. Downloaded from Tax, price and cigarette smoking: evidence from the tobacco documents and implications for tobacco company marketing strategies F J Chaloupka, K M Cummings, CP Morley, JK Horan ............................................................................................................................. Tobacco Control 2002;11(Suppl I):i62–i72 Objective: To examine tobacco company documents to determine what the companies knew about the impact of cigarette prices on smoking among youth, young adults, and adults, and to evaluate how this understanding affected their pricing and price related marketing strategies. Methods: Data for this study come from tobacco industry documents contained in the Youth and Marketing database created by the Roswell Park Cancer Institute and available through http:// roswell.tobaccodocuments.org, supplemented with documents obtained from http://www. See end of article for tobaccodocuments.org. authors’ affiliations Results: Tobacco company documents provide clear evidence on the impact of cigarette prices on ....................... cigarette smoking, describing how tax related and other price increases lead to significant reductions in smoking, particularly among young persons. This information was very important in developing the Correspondence to: F J Chaloupka, Department industry’s pricing strategies, including the development of lower price branded generics and the pass of Economics (m/c 144), through of cigarette excise tax increases, and in developing a variety of price related marketing efforts, University of Illinois at including multi-pack discounts, couponing, and others. Chicago, 601 South Conclusions: Pricing and price related promotions are among the most important marketing tools Morgan Street, Chicago, IL 60607-7121, USA; employed by tobacco companies.
    [Show full text]
  • FLAVORED TOBACCO PRODUCTS Flavored Tobacco Products Are Tempting to Youth
    2008 YTS REPORT: FLAVORED TOBACCO PRODUCTS Flavored Tobacco Products are Tempting to Youth Fighting to protect youth Under the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of 2009, the The 2008 Indiana Youth Tobacco Survey provides the latest information on U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) banned candy and fruit-fl avored the use of fl avored tobacco products by Indiana youth. cigarettes. However, the ban does not include other types of fl avored tobacco products such as smokeless tobacco or cigars. It is widely known 1 Carpenter, C.M., G.F. Wayne, J.L. Pauly, H.K.Koh, and G.N. Connolly. 2005. “New Cigarette that fl avored tobacco products are tempting to youth and tobacco industry Brands With Flavors That Appeal to Youth: Tobacco Marketing Strategies.” Health Affairs 24(6): 1601-1610. documents have revealed strategies to add fl avors to tobacco products that 2 1 Manning, K.C., Kelly, K.J., and Comello, M.L. 2009. “Flavoured cigarettes, sensation seeking are appealing to young people . With the changes in regulations, many and adolescents’ perceptions of cigarette brands.” Tobacco Control, 18: 459-465. experts believe tobacco companies have already taken a different marketing tactic to now market their fl avored smokeless and cigar products. Flavor additives, including chocolate, lime, orange and mint as well as menthol, can mask the harsh unpleasant taste and odor of tobacco; this could ultimately entice and make it easier for youth to use tobacco products. Despite the mild presentation, these fl avored products offer the same health risks and consequences as unfl avored tobacco products.
    [Show full text]
  • Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC) Is the First Treaty Negotiated Under the Auspices of the World Health Organization
    World Health Organization Geneva, Switzerland WHO FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON TOBACCO CONTROL World Health Organization WHO Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. 1.Tobacco - supply and distribution 2.Tobacco industry - legislation 3.Tobacco smoke pollution - prevention and control 4.Tobacco use cessation 5.Treaties I.World Health Organization. ISBN 92 4 159101 3 (LC/NLM classification: HD 9130.6) © World Health Organization 2003, updated reprint 2004, 2005 All rights reserved. Publications of the World Health Organization can be obtained from WHO Press, World Health Organization, 20 Avenue Appia, 1211 Geneva 27, Switzerland (tel: +41 22 791 2476; fax: +41 22 791 4857; email: [email protected]). Requests for permission to reproduce or translate WHO publications – whether for sale or for noncommercial distribution – should be addressed to WHO Press, at the above address (fax: +41 22 791 4806; email: [email protected]). The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the World Health Organization concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Dotted lines on maps represent approximate border lines for which there may not yet be full agreement. The mention of specific companies or of certain manufacturers’ products does not imply that they are endorsed or recommended by the World Health Organization in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. Errors and omissions excepted, the names of proprietary products are distinguished by initial capital letters.
    [Show full text]
  • Blunts and Blowt Jes: Cannabis Use Practices in Two Cultural Settings
    Free Inquiry In Creative Sociology Volume 31 No. 1 May 2003 3 BLUNTS AND BLOWTJES: CANNABIS USE PRACTICES IN TWO CULTURAL SETTINGS AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS FOR SECONDARY PREVENTION Stephen J. Sifaneck, Institute for Special Populations Research, National Development & Research Institutes, Inc. Charles D. Kaplan, Limburg University, Maastricht, The Netherlands. Eloise Dunlap, Institute for Special Populations Research, NDRI. and Bruce D. Johnson, Institute for Special Populations Research, NDRI. ABSTRACT Thi s paper explores two modes of cannabis preparati on and smoking whic h have manifested within the dru g subcultures of th e United States and the Netherlan ds. Smoking "blunts," or hollowed out cigar wrappers fill ed wi th marijuana, is a phenomenon whi ch fi rst emerged in New York Ci ty in the mid 1980s, and has since spread throughout th e United States. A "bl owtj e," (pronounced "blowt-cha") a modern Dutch style j oint whi ch is mixed with tobacco and in cludes a card-board fi lte r and a longer rolling paper, has become th e standard mode of cannabis smoking in the Netherl ands as well as much of Europe. Both are consid ered newer than the more traditi onal practi ces of preparin g and smoking cannabis, including the traditional fi lter-less style joint, the pot pipe, an d the bong or water pipe. These newer styles of preparati on and smoking have implications for secondary preventi on efforts wi th ac tive youn g cannabis users. On a social and ritualistic level th ese practices serve as a means of self-regulating cannabi s use.
    [Show full text]
  • Best Practices for Comprehensive Tobacco Control Programs: 2014
    Best Practices for Comprehensive Tobacco Control Programs 2014 Suggested Citation Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Best Practices for Comprehensive Tobacco Control Programs — 2014. Atlanta: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health, 2014. Ordering Information To download or order copies of this report, go to www.cdc.gov/tobacco or to order single copies, call toll-free 1 (800) CDC-INFO 1 (800) 232-4636 Best Practices for Comprehensive Tobacco Control Programs 2014 The following individuals from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health (OSH), were primary contributors to the preparation of this publication: Brian King, PhD, MPH Terry Pechacek, PhD Peter Mariolis, PhD The following OSH staff also contributed to the preparation of this publication: Judy Ahearn, BS; Stephen Babb, MPH; Diane Beistle, BA; Rebecca Bunnell, PhD; Ralph Caraballo, PhD; Shanta Dube, PhD, MPH; Monica Eischen, BS; Jami Fraze, PhD; Erika Fulmer, MHA; Bridgette Garrett, PhD, MS; Karen Gutierrez, BA; Carissa Holmes, MPH; David Homa, PhD, MPH; Brandon Kenemer, MPH; Rene Lavinghouze, MA; Allison MacNeil, MPH; Ann Malarcher, PhD, MSPH; Kristy Marynak, MPP; Timothy A. McAfee, MD, MPH; Sarah O’Leary, MPH, MA; Gabbi Promoff, MA; Robert Rodes, MS, MBA, MEd; Patti Seikus, MPH; Shawna Shields, MPH; Kisha Smith, MPH; Karla S. Sneegas, MPH; Xin Xu, PhD; and Lei Zhang, PhD. OSH also gratefully acknowledges the contributions provided by the following individuals: David Abrams, PhD, Legacy; Rob Adsit, MEd, University of Wisconsin; Linda Bailey, MHS, JD, North American Quitline Consortium; Cathy Callaway, BS, American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network; Jennifer Cantrell, DrPH, MPA, Legacy; Thomas Carr, BA, American Lung Association; Julia Cartwright, BA, Legacy; Frank Chaloupka, PhD, University of Illinois–Chicago; K.
    [Show full text]
  • Tobacco Control
    TOBACCO CONTROL Playbook World Health Organization ABSTRACT Tobacco control is difficult and complex and obstructed by the tactics of the tobacco industry and its allies to oppose effective tobacco control measures. This document was developed by the WHO Regional Office for Europe by collecting numerous evidence-based arguments from different thematic areas, reflecting the challenges that tobacco control leaders have faced while implementing various articles of the WHO FCTC and highlighting arguments they have developed in order to counter and succeed against the tobacco industry. KEY WORDS TOBACCO CONTROL WHO FCTC HEALTH EFFECTS TOBACCO INDUSTRY ARGUMENTS © World Health Organization 2019 All rights reserved. The Regional Office for Europe of the World Health Organization welcomes requests for permission to reproduce or translate its publications, in part or in full. The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the World Health Organization concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Dotted lines on maps represent approximate border lines for which there may not yet be full agreement. The mention of specific companies or of certain manufacturers’ products does not imply that they are endorsed or recommended by the World Health Organization in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. Errors and omissions excepted, the names of proprietary products are distinguished by initial capital letters. All reasonable precautions have been taken by the World Health Organization to verify the information contained in this publication.
    [Show full text]
  • How Other Countries Regulate Flavored Tobacco Products / 1
    How Other Countries Regulate Flavored Tobacco Products / 1 How Other Countries Regulate Flavored Tobacco Products In 2009, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, under authority granted by the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, prohibited the manufacturing, marketing, and sale of cigarettes containing “characterizing flavors,” such as vanilla, chocolate, cherry, and coffee. This prohibition extends to flavored cigarettes and flavored cigarette “component parts,” such as their tobacco, filter or paper. However, the prohibition exempts the flavors of menthol and tobacco and does not apply to non-cigarette tobacco products, such as electronic cigarettes, cigars, smokeless tobacco, hookah tobacco, and their flavored component parts. Other countries have enacted more robust regulations regarding flavored tobacco products. Below is a summary of select flavored tobacco restrictions from around the world.* European Union. In 2014, the European Union (representing 28 member states) passed a new Tobacco Products Directive that includes: • A ban on flavorings (other than menthol) in cigarettes and RYO tobacco as of May 20, 2016 • A ban on flavor capsules in tobacco products as of May 20, 2016 • A ban on menthol cigarettes and RYO tobacco as of May 20, 2020 Australia. A number of states and territories (including Australian Capital Territory, New South Wales, Victoria, and South Australia) have legislation that delegates authority to their Health Ministers to prohibit tobacco products or classes of tobacco products that have a distinctive fruity, sweet, or confectionery-like character and/or that might encourage a minor to smoke (or where the smoke may do so). Brazil. In 2012, Brazil became the first country to adopt a ban of all tobacco product flavors and additives, including menthol.
    [Show full text]