Difference between revisions of "Globalisation:Democracy Institue:Tobacco"
Laura Wilson (talk | contribs) |
Laura Wilson (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
However, public health advocates insist that advertising does increase smoking. | However, public health advocates insist that advertising does increase smoking. | ||
| + | ===John Luik=== | ||
| + | |||
| + | Another key player in the democracy institute on tobacco, is senior fellow John Luik. Luik is a tobacco industry consultant and has produced several papers on what he believes is an exaggeration of the health effects of passive smoking. In is paper... Luik says…His views, however, have been contested based on Luik’s somewhat biased position as a consultant and advisory to tobacco companies. One such company is Phillip Morris USA. | ||
| + | Philip Morris USA- the largest tobabcco company in the US - provide a link on their website for help to quite smoking as well as a section on health issues assocated with smoking which states that they: "agree with the overwhelming consensus that cigarette smokinbg causes lung cancer, heart disease, emphysema and other serious diseases" <ref> "[http://www.pmusa.com/en/cms/Products/Cigarettes/Health_Issues/Cigarette_Smoking_and_Disease/default.aspx, Smoking and Health Issues]" accessed 23/03/10</ref>. | ||
| + | Phillip Morris created “project whitecoat”…john luik active player in this. | ||
===Tobacco Archives=== | ===Tobacco Archives=== | ||
| Line 31: | Line 36: | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
==Notes== | ==Notes== | ||
<references/> | <references/> | ||
Revision as of 11:41, 10 April 2010
Contents
The Democracy Institute on Tobacco
Public Smoking Bans
A ban on smoking in all public spaces was implemented in the UK in 2007. Dr Patrick Basham - founding director of the Democracy Institute - and Dr Juliet Roberts examine the rationale behind the public smoking ban in their paper 'Are Public Smoking Bans Necessary?' in attempt to argue that the ban is not necessary.
The claim that the health of all non-smokers is at risk through environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) or passive smoke is the most significant justification for the smoking ban and is criticized by Basham and Roberts on the grounds that the methodology of studies carried out to measure the effects of passive smoking is problematic. Dr Gio Bata Gori has identified the ‘measurement problem’ which refers to how these studies are not based on actual measurements of exposure but on recall studies, which are unreliable.
Basham and Roberts also identify a second problem with this claim: “these studies are plagued by sampling errors, confounders, biases and misclassification of smoking status” [1] and that there are numerous other possible causes for heart disease and lung cancer. The claim is also made that several governmental and public health agencies undermine the notion that passive smoke is a serious health risk to non-smokers as studies such as the 1992 Environmental Protection Agency report have been rejected and nullified by the US District Court and other reports have failed to find a statically significant link between ETS and lung cancer based on exposure during childhood.
Basham and Roberts identify that the number of cigarettes consumed by males amongst the lowest socio-economic groups - which account for some of the highest smoking rates - actually increased since the smoking ban and that 30% of smokers said the ban had only encouraged them to stay at home and smoke where they were free to do so [2]. In the state of Ohio, smoking prevalence increased by 3% since similar legislation was introduced in 2006. In France, there was no change in tobacco consumption in spite of the implementation of a ban and, in Spain, tobacco consumption has in fact increased since their public smoking ban [3]. Basham and Roberts argue that smoking bans are “built on a foundation of ignorance rather than knowledge” [4] and also that these bans don’t necessarily motivate people to give up smoking.
Cigarette Pricing and Advertising
The appearance of cigarette brands in advertising and in public entertainment media continues to be a topic of much concern based on the common belief that this contributes to youth smoking. Patrick Basham, in his paper 'An Absense of Tobacco Evidence' (2009)[5], argues that the claim that cigarette pricing and advertising affects young people is not viable due to extremely weak evidence. He proposes that the government should base smoking related policies on evidence rather than speculation and inaccurate views.
Based on the notion that tobacco advertisng and promotions encourage young people to take up smoking and that tobacco pricing will have a significant influence on young peoples' purchasing decisions, tobacco policy has placed a ban on tobacco advertising and tobacco has been heavily taxed in attempt to reduce the number of under-age smokers. To them, the evidence lies in the fact that tobacco advertising bans in countries for the past twenty five years has not resulted in a decline in smoking patterns in young people. Also, based on the assertion that smoking is an addictive habit, the incline in tobacco prices, they argue, will have no effect.
However, public health advocates insist that advertising does increase smoking.
John Luik
Another key player in the democracy institute on tobacco, is senior fellow John Luik. Luik is a tobacco industry consultant and has produced several papers on what he believes is an exaggeration of the health effects of passive smoking. In is paper... Luik says…His views, however, have been contested based on Luik’s somewhat biased position as a consultant and advisory to tobacco companies. One such company is Phillip Morris USA. Philip Morris USA- the largest tobabcco company in the US - provide a link on their website for help to quite smoking as well as a section on health issues assocated with smoking which states that they: "agree with the overwhelming consensus that cigarette smokinbg causes lung cancer, heart disease, emphysema and other serious diseases" [6].
Phillip Morris created “project whitecoat”…john luik active player in this.
Tobacco Archives
The Tobacco Archives were established to make information available to the public online and provide access to millions of tobacco company documents produced in US litigation concerning public smoking and health. The archives include links to Philip Morris USA inc. Document Site, RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company Doument site and The Tobacco Institute Document Site [7].
Notes
- ↑ Patrick Basham and Juliet Roberts “Are Public Smoking Bans Necessary?”, Democracy Institute: Social Risk Series Paper, 17 December 2009, page 7, accessed 11 February 2010
- ↑ Patrick Basham and Juliet Roberts,“Are Public Smoking Bans Necessary?”, Democracy Institute: Social Risk Series Paper, 17 December 2009, page 13, accessed 20 February 2010
- ↑ Patrick Basham and Juliet Roberts,“Are Public Smoking Bans Necessary?”, Democracy Institute: Social Risk Series Paper, 17 December 2009, page 13, accessed 20 February 2010
- ↑ Patrick Basham and Juliet Roberts,“Are Public Smoking Bans Necessary?”, Democracy Institute: Social Risk Series Paper, 17 December 2009, page 13, accessed 16 February 2010
- ↑ Patrick Basham, “An absence of Tobacco Evidence”, The Democracy Inbstitute 11 September 2009, accessed 11 February 2010
- ↑ "Smoking and Health Issues" accessed 23/03/10
- ↑ "TobaccoArchives.com" accessed 23/03/10
