Posts

WebMD News from HealthDay: FDA Launches Ad Campaign Against Chewing Tobacco

By Dennis Thompson

HealthDay Reporter

TUESDAY, April 19, 2016 (HealthDay News) — U.S. health officials said Tuesday that they are targeting rural teenagers with a new $36 million ad campaign that highlights the health risks associated with chewing tobacco.

The campaign’s message — “smokeless doesn’t mean harmless” — will challenge a habit that has become a tradition in the rural United States, said Mitch Zeller, director of the Center for Tobacco Products at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

“It is culturally ingrained in many rural communities, and can be seen as a rite of passage and an acceptable societal norm,” Zeller said during a Tuesday morning news conference. He noted that smokeless tobacco use is more than twice as common in rural areas as it is in urban settings.

Chewing tobacco, snuff and other smokeless tobacco products have been linked to multiple kinds of cancer, gum disease, tooth loss and nicotine addiction, Zeller said.

Nevertheless, smokeless tobacco use has become increasingly popular among rural male teenagers, according to FDA research.

Every day in the United States, nearly 1,000 males younger than 18 try smokeless tobacco for the first time, outpacing those who take their first puff on a cigarette, Zeller said. About one-third of rural white males aged 12 to 17 have tried or are at risk of trying smokeless tobacco, totaling approximately 629,000 male youth nationwide.

Rural teens are used to seeing role models use smokeless tobacco, including fathers, grandfathers, older brothers and community leaders, Zeller explained.

“When people who these teens most trust and admire openly use and share smokeless tobacco, the product is seen as acceptable, and even as an expected part of growing up and belonging,” Zeller said.

This is the first time the FDA has focused on smokeless tobacco in an ad campaign, said Kathy Crosby, director of the FDA’s Office of Health Communication and Education.

Crosby said the campaign will focus on 35 rural markets across the United States, including: Albany, Ga.; Billings, Mont.; Flint, Mich.; Medford, Ore.; Monroe, La.; Sioux Falls, S.D.; Little Rock, Ark.; and Tri-Cities, Tenn.

Ads linked to the campaign show young men with ugly lip sores and horrific facial scars caused by mouth cancer, and a football player being tossed around by a nicotine addiction “monster.” The ads will run on local television and in print, while others appear on local radio and through social media.

The new campaign will also collaborate with select Minor League Baseball teams to help combat the link between baseball and smokeless tobacco use among the campaign’s target audience, Crosby said.

This summer, stadiums across the country will display campaign advertising and provide opportunities for fans to meet players who support the campaign’s public health message, she said.

The FDA also is in ongoing talks with Major League Baseball about joining the campaign, and Zeller said he is “optimistic” that a partnership will be announced sometime this season.

Major cities such as Boston, Los Angeles, New York City and San Francisco have banned smokeless tobacco products at ballparks and other sports venues. Major League Baseball has warned that players caught violating the ban in these cities will be subject to discipline from the commissioner.

The smokeless tobacco campaign is an offshoot of the FDA’s award-winning “The Real Cost” campaign, which since 2014 has been warning teenagers about the health effects of smoking.

http://www.webmd.com/smoking-cessation/news/20160419/fda-launches-ad-campaign-against-chewing-tobacco

USA Today Column: Past time for MLB to ban smokeless tobacco

Use among teen athletes is rising and won’t fall until their MLB role models give it up.

By: Frank Pallone

The first pitches of the new Major League Baseball season in Boston, Los Angeles and San Francisco mark the moment players there must abide by local laws that ban chewing tobacco use in ballparks. Similar restrictions in Chicago and New York will go into effect later this season. This is a first in the major leagues, and a welcome change, but it’s long past time to get chewing tobacco out of America’s pastime.

Chewing tobacco has been pervasive in the game since the rules of modern baseball were first written in 1845.

What’s different today is that the dangers are well known. The use of chewing tobacco has devastating health effects, including oral, pancreatic, and esophageal cancer. It also leads to heart and gum disease, tooth decay, and the loss of jaws, chins, cheeks and noses.

After years of suffering through a difficult and painful battle with cancer, former San Diego Padres Hall of Famer Tony Gwynn died in June 2014 of salivary gland cancer. While there’s no definitive way to pin down cause and effect, Gwynn said the cancer was located exactly where he placed his chew.

Six years ago, at a congressional hearing in Washington, I demanded that chewing tobacco be banned from baseball. That hearing was followed by multiple letters to MLB and to individual teams asking them to take action to get chewing tobacco out of the game. MLB responded to that request by proposing a ban during the last contract negotiations with the players, but the final agreement fell short.  That’s why on Monday, in letters to MLB and the MLB Players Association, I’ll once again demand that they finally ban chewing tobacco completely from the game.

Some argue that professional players are adults and chewing tobacco is a personal choice. But these players are role models and their behavior and habits are often copied by young players and fans alike.

At the 2010 congressional hearing, Dr. Gregory Connolly of the Harvard School of Public Health testified that “there can be no doubt that public use by MLB players directly contributes to youth smokeless tobacco use in the United States.”

Today, millions of teenagers and young adults in the U.S. use smokeless tobacco.  According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the use of smokeless tobacco by youth athletes increased from 2001 to 2013. Young athletes are almost 80 percent more likely to use smokeless tobacco products than non-athletes.

These trends will not stop until MLB players stop using chewing tobacco. It’s encouraging to see city governments in Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles and San Francisco banning the use of chewing tobacco at ballparks in those cities. Letters posted in every clubhouse during spring training from both MLB and the MLB Players Association explained that players are expected to comply with the new laws.  It’s also encouraging that a number of players have voluntarily stopped chewing.

But it’s not enough.  We need to change the culture of baseball at all levels, and that starts at the major league level.  As Los Angeles Dodgers manager Dave Roberts recently said, “like it or not, players are role models, and we have a platform as coaches and players.”

It’s been more than 30 years since players were first banned from smoking cigarettes in uniform and in view of the public. MLB banned chewing tobacco in the minor leagues in the early 1990s, as did the NCAA. Baseball legend Joe Garagiola, who died last month, testified at our 2010 hearing as the longtime chair of the National Spit Tobacco Education Program. He told the committee, “I would like to see the Major League players agree to the terms of the Minor League Tobacco Policy, which bans Club personnel from using and possessing tobacco products in ballparks and during team travel.”

MLB and the MLB Players Association must finally ban the use of smokeless tobacco. It’s time to get chewing tobacco out of baseball for good. That would be a home run for the health of our nation.

Rep. Frank Pallone represents New Jersey’s 6th Congressional District and is the senior Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

In addition to its own editorials, USA TODAY publishes diverse opinions from outside writers, including our Board of Contributors. To read more columns like this, go to the Opinion front page.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/04/03/past-time-mlb-ban-smokeless-tobacco-column/82477512/

Drug Store News: CDC's latest anti-smoking campaign inspired 104,000 smokers to quit

BY MICHAEL JOHNSEN

ATLANTA – The latest outcomes measuring the impact of CDC’s national tobacco education campaign are as strong as those achieved in its first year, and suggest that three years into the campaign, the ads were still having a significant impact.

More than 1.8 million smokers attempted to quit smoking because of the nine-week-long 2014 Tips From Former Smokers ( Tips ) campaign. An estimated 104,000 Americans quit smoking for good as a result of the 2014 campaign.

The survey results are published in the March 24 release of the journal Preventing Chronic Disease.

Unlike the 2012 campaign, which aired for 12 consecutive weeks, the 2014 campaign aired in two phases, from Feb. 3 to April 6 and from July 7 to Sept. 7. Phase 1 of the 2014 campaign ran ads primarily from the 2012 and 2013 campaigns; Phase 2 contained new ads. Those new ads featured people and their struggles with smoking-related health issues, including cancer, gum disease, premature birth and stroke caused by smoking combined with HIV. About 80% of U.S. adult cigarette smokers who were surveyed reported seeing at least one television ad from Phase 2 of the 2014 campaign.

“CDC’s Tips campaign has helped at least 400,000 smokers quit smoking for good since 2012,” stated CDC Director Tom Frieden.  “Tips is also extremely cost-effective and a best buy, saving both lives and money. With a year-round campaign we could save even more lives and money.”

Tips, the first federally funded anti-smoking paid media campaign, features former smokers talking about their smoking-related illnesses. Smoking-related diseases cost the United States more than $300 billion a year, including nearly $170 billion in direct health care costs and more than $156 billion in lost productivity.

“The Tips campaign is an important counter measure to the $1 million that the tobacco industry spends each hour on cigarette advertising and promotion,” said Corinne Graffunder, director of CDC’s Office on Smoking and Health. “The money spent in one year on Tips is less than the amount the tobacco industry spends on advertising and promotion in just 3 days.”

The most recent Surgeon General’s Report, The Health Consequences of Smoking—50 Years of Progress, called for airing effective messages such as the Tips ads with high frequency and exposure for 12 months a year for a decade or more. Cigarette smoking is the leading preventable cause of disease and death in the United States, killing about 480,000 Americans each year.

For every American who dies from a smoking-related disease, about 30 more suffer at least one serious illness from smoking. And while the percentage of American adults who smoke is at the lowest level since the CDC began tracking such data, there are still an estimated 40 million adult smokers in the U.S.  Surveys show about 70% of all smokers want to quit, and research shows quitting completely at any age has significant health benefits.

http://www.drugstorenews.com/article/cdcs-latest-anti-smoking-campaign-inspired-10000-smokers-quit

Drug Store News: CDC's latest anti-smoking campaign inspired 104,000 smokers to quit

BY MICHAEL JOHNSEN

ATLANTA – The latest outcomes measuring the impact of CDC’s national tobacco education campaign are as strong as those achieved in its first year, and suggest that three years into the campaign, the ads were still having a significant impact.

More than 1.8 million smokers attempted to quit smoking because of the nine-week-long 2014 Tips From Former Smokers ( Tips ) campaign. An estimated 104,000 Americans quit smoking for good as a result of the 2014 campaign.

The survey results are published in the March 24 release of the journal Preventing Chronic Disease.

Unlike the 2012 campaign, which aired for 12 consecutive weeks, the 2014 campaign aired in two phases, from Feb. 3 to April 6 and from July 7 to Sept. 7. Phase 1 of the 2014 campaign ran ads primarily from the 2012 and 2013 campaigns; Phase 2 contained new ads. Those new ads featured people and their struggles with smoking-related health issues, including cancer, gum disease, premature birth and stroke caused by smoking combined with HIV. About 80% of U.S. adult cigarette smokers who were surveyed reported seeing at least one television ad from Phase 2 of the 2014 campaign.

“CDC’s Tips campaign has helped at least 400,000 smokers quit smoking for good since 2012,” stated CDC Director Tom Frieden.  “Tips is also extremely cost-effective and a best buy, saving both lives and money. With a year-round campaign we could save even more lives and money.”

Tips, the first federally funded anti-smoking paid media campaign, features former smokers talking about their smoking-related illnesses. Smoking-related diseases cost the United States more than $300 billion a year, including nearly $170 billion in direct health care costs and more than $156 billion in lost productivity.

“The Tips campaign is an important counter measure to the $1 million that the tobacco industry spends each hour on cigarette advertising and promotion,” said Corinne Graffunder, director of CDC’s Office on Smoking and Health. “The money spent in one year on Tips is less than the amount the tobacco industry spends on advertising and promotion in just 3 days.”

The most recent Surgeon General’s Report, The Health Consequences of Smoking—50 Years of Progress, called for airing effective messages such as the Tips ads with high frequency and exposure for 12 months a year for a decade or more. Cigarette smoking is the leading preventable cause of disease and death in the United States, killing about 480,000 Americans each year.

For every American who dies from a smoking-related disease, about 30 more suffer at least one serious illness from smoking. And while the percentage of American adults who smoke is at the lowest level since the CDC began tracking such data, there are still an estimated 40 million adult smokers in the U.S.  Surveys show about 70% of all smokers want to quit, and research shows quitting completely at any age has significant health benefits.

http://www.drugstorenews.com/article/cdcs-latest-anti-smoking-campaign-inspired-10000-smokers-quit

Duluth Budgeteer News: Bus in Minnesota advertises tobacco… for a purpose

By Duluth Budgeteer News

If you are downtown or near a Duluth Transit Authority Bus route, you might see a colorful bus advertising a soda drink. Or you may see a bus with larger-than-life television news personalities plastered on its side.

And now you might see a DTA bus advertising tobacco. But it’s not pushing everyday use of tobacco for smoking or chewing.

0131.F.DBN_.Mural2__0

The colorful bus wrap was inspired by the work of Native American artist Jonathan Thunder. Duluth Budgeteer readers may remember the recent story on Thunder.

The wrap will adorn a Duluth bus for nine months. Each day the bus will be used on a different route.

The wrap was adapted from a mural that Thunder painted at the Lincoln Park Children and Families Collaborative (LPCFC), 2424 W. Fifth St., entitled “Keep Tobacco Sacred” and photographed by Ivy Vainio.

“We did the bus wrap because we want to start conversations about the difference between commercial and sacred tobacco,” said Jodi Broadwell, executive director of LPCFC.

The smoking rates among the American Indian population in Minnesota is 59 percent, compared to 14.4 percent for the general population. Commercial tobacco-related diseases are the top killers within American Indian communities, including the Lincoln Park neighborhood.

“Traditionally, tobacco was viewed as a sacred medicine central to the culture of some American Indian populations, but for generations the commercial tobacco industry has corrupted sacred tobacco practices,” Broadwell said. “They have also marketed directly to American Indian people by exploiting their images in advertisements.”

The LPCFC’s commercial tobacco prevention work is funded in part by the Center for Prevention at Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota.

LPCFC was founded in 2011 by a group of education, child development, health and social service professionals. The mission of the organization is to strengthen the Lincoln Park Community by connecting families who care about young children. LPCFC offers Anishinaabe Cultural Programming during its Monday Night Family Gatherings, which includes education on sacred tobacco and its traditional uses.

http://www.grandforksherald.com/news/region/3941247-bus-minnesota-advertises-tobacco-purpose

Grand Forks Herald: Report: North Dakota only state spending enough on tobacco prevention

By John Hageman, Grand Forks Herald
A report released this week argues almost every state in the country is not spending enough money on tobacco prevention and cessation programs—every state, that is, except for North Dakota.
The report, released by the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, focuses in part on the billions of dollars states have received since they settled lawsuits against major tobacco companies in 1998. With $10 million set aside for fiscal year 2016, North Dakota is the only state to spend at levels recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and was one of five states to spend at least 50 percent of what the CDC recommends.
 
“It’s so frustrating because it’s such a critical investment, and we’re talking about such a small amount of money,” said John Schachter, director of state communications for the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. “When there’s a pot from which to draw from logically—tobacco taxes and the settlement—as we say, it’s a no-brainer.”
States spent as much as $717.2 million on tobacco prevention programs in fiscal year 2008, but that dropped during the recession and bottomed out at $459.5 million in 2013, according to the campaign’s report. Spending will reach $468 million in fiscal year 2016, a fraction of the estimated $25.8 billion they will collect in settlement funds and tobacco taxes, though the budgets for two states were not yet available.
Tobacco companies spend about $9.6 billion a year on marketing, according to the campaign’s report.
“We believe states should use (settlement) payments to fund tobacco cessation and underage tobacco prevention programs at levels recommended by the Centers for Disease Control,” Brian May, a spokesman for tobacco giant Philip Morris, wrote in an email to the Herald.
While tobacco companies cannot advertise on television or the radio, Schacter said “it’s pretty clear the industry is out there in force.” He said the industry spends most of its marketing dollars at “point of sale,” such as displays at convenience stores and gas stations.
“The states still know it’s an issue, but for whatever reason, they’re deciding to spend the money elsewhere,” Schachter said.

N.D. in the lead

The campaign’s report highlights North Dakota as an example for the rest of the states to follow, citing a drop in high school student smoking rates in recent years.
But North Dakota hasn’t always been a leader in tobacco prevention spending. In fiscal year 2009, it spent just $3.1 million on those programs, or one-third of CDC-recommended funding. That changed with the passing of a measure in 2008 requiring a portion of the settlement dollars be used to reduce tobacco use.
“The settlement did not dictate how the money from the settlement was spent, but it did point out that the settlement was entered into because of the unacceptable behavior of the tobacco industry,” said Jeanne Prom, executive director of the North Dakota Center for Tobacco Prevention and Control Policy.
North Dakota’s tobacco tax revenue is not used for prevention efforts, she said.
Minnesota will receive $791.7 million in total tobacco revenue in fiscal year 2016 but will spend only $21.5 million on prevention programs, less than half of what the CDC recommends, according to the campaign’s report.
Laura Oliven, the tobacco control manager at the Minnesota Department of Health, called the CDC recommendations “aspirational.” She also pointed out the campaign’s figures don’t capture Blue Cross Blue Shield’s Center for Prevention in Minnesota.
Minnesota’s adult smoking rate has dropped to 14.4 percent, the lowest it has ever recorded, the health department announced in January.
“We do a lot to maximize the funds we have,” Oliven said. “I guess the theme here really is that while we’ve made a lot of great strides, there’s still considerable work to be done.”

Local outcomes

Haley Thorson, a tobacco prevention coordinator at the Grand Forks Public Health Department, said tobacco settlement dollars helped fund a study asking residents about second-hand smoke. She called that a “pivotal piece of information” in Grand Forks passing a law in 2010 that outlawed smoking in bars, casinos and truck stops.
“That policy was passed by the City Council because we really did have the pulse of how the community supported that policy,” she said.
North Dakota passed a similar statewide law in 2012.
The health department receives about $300,000 annually from the Center for Tobacco Prevention and Control Policy, or BreatheND. Thorson said it focuses much of its efforts on tobacco-related policies.
“We used to go into schools and educate kids on the harms of tobacco use, but the better bang for our buck is to establish a comprehensive tobacco-free school policy that allows them to be educated in an environment where they’re not exposed to tobacco use,” she said.
Those efforts appear to be working.
The percentage of North Dakota high school students who smoked at least once in the past month plunged to 11.7 percent this year after hovering around 20 percent for the eight previous years, according to survey results provided by Thorson.
“For the states that aren’t spending anything or next to nothing, they need to see results like these,” Thorson said.
http://www.grandforksherald.com/news/region/3900310-report-north-dakota-only-state-spending-enough-tobacco-prevention

FDA issues warning letters to 3 tobacco companies over "additive-free" claims

Associated Press
NEW YORK (AP) — The Food and Drug Administration issued warning letters to the makers of Winston, Natural Spirit and Nat Sherman cigarettes over their “additive-free” and “natural” label claims.
The agency issued the warnings to ITG Brands LLC, Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Company Inc. and Sherman’s 1400 Broadway N.Y.C. Ltd. The issue over the claims is that they may lead consumers to believe the products pose a lower risk. That claim has to be scientifically proven.
In a statement, the FDA said it has determined that the products under the warning letter need what is called a “modified risk tobacco product order” before they can be marketed in that way. It has not issued any orders for modified-risk products to the market and this is the first time it is using its authority to take action against “natural” or “additive-free” claims.
The companies have 15 days to respond with a plan or dispute the warnings.
There was no immediate response from the companies.
Imperial Tobacco Group Plc. owns ITG Brands, which also makes Kool cigarettes and USA Gold. Reynolds American Inc. owns Santa Fe Natural Tobacco.
The warning comes several days after a large group of anti-tobacco organizations sent the FDA a letter urging the agency to enforce regulations against Santa Fe Natural Tobacco over marketing claims. That letter, sent on Monday, was signed by 29 groups including the American Heart Association, American Legacy Foundation and Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids.
The anti-tobacco group’s letter alleged that Natural American Spirit’s advertising in magazines such as Sports Illustrated and Vanity Fair violated the Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act.
“The potential for irreparable damage to public health from the marketing of tobacco products with modified risk claims is well illustrated by the industry’s years of deceptive advertising of ‘light’ and ‘low-tar’ cigarettes,” the letter stated.
http://www.usnews.com/news/business/articles/2015/08/27/fda-issues-warning-letters-to-natural-tobacco-makers

NDSU Study: "Tobacco Goes to College" Shows Battle for Youth Market Began Early

Source Newsroom: North Dakota State University
Newswise — While the character Don Draper in the television show Mad Men looked for a way to first save his cigarette advertising accounts, and then to distance himself from them, a new book—“Tobacco Goes to College”—shows the power of advertising impacted would-be-smokers long before the Mad Men era.
Elizabeth Crisp Crawford, associate professor in the Department of Communication at North Dakota State University, Fargo, studied how tobacco advertising from 1920 to 1980 targeted college students.
“The tobacco industry had a strong presence on campus and an influence on college media,” said Crawford. “Tobacco’s influence on college media included campus newspapers, radio, and sporting events. This influence affected students on campus the most—due to a high level of advertising exposure. However, the viewing audiences for college sports also were exposed to cigarette promotion facilitated by the NCAA.”
In her research for “Tobacco Goes to College: Cigarette Advertising in Student Media, 1920-1980,” Crawford found the advertising plans and creative tactics to be extremely strategic over the six decades studied. Social pressure and social appeals hit the mark with potential college consumers.
“The advertising campaigns were well organized and sophisticated,” said Crawford. “In this way, tobacco was ahead of its time. The ads are really an important piece of advertising history for these reasons.”
The successful advertising tactics, said Crawford, are still being used today for a variety of products.
“I see the industry using many of the same tactics it used 50 years ago with cigarettes—especially the filtered brands. When we discuss the promotion of e-cigarettes, I think that we need to look at the history of tobacco advertising,” said Crawford.
Key insights into the target market make these ads successful.
“The tobacco industry has an excellent understanding of the psychology of human need,” said Crawford. “People use substances to cope with their lives. Sometimes life can be stressful and people lack the needed human support. Tobacco has always positioned itself as a way to fill a social or emotional void.”
Crawford’s book contains an in-depth analysis of vintage cigarette ads.
“Jane Wyman – famous Barnard Alumna says: ‘Chesterfields always give me a lift. They’re wonderfully mild and taste so good. They’re my favorite cigarette,’” according to an ad which ran in NDSU’s student newspaper, The Spectrum, on April 7, 1950.
Similar ads ran in student newspapers across the country including Smith College, University of Portland, Elon University, and in football programs at colleges, including the University of Tennessee at Knoxville (Crawford’s alma mater), at Chattanooga, and Illinois vs. Stanford.
“Tobacco advertisers knew college students’ needs and positioned their product in a way that could help fulfill these needs,” said Crawford.
In 1963, the Tobacco Institute pulled tobacco advertising from college publications. Crawford points out that nearly 2,000 publications then looked for ways to recover what amounted to as much as 50 percent of lost revenue from the ads.
Crawford’s interest in this particular area of research also has a personal link. “Of my four grandparents, the two that attended college smoked. I found this connection to be interesting,” she said.
“Tobacco Goes to College” was named an Outstanding Academic Title by Choice Magazine in 2014. The list comprises about 10 percent of more than 7,000 titles reviewed by Choice each year. According to Choice reviewer N.E. Furlow, “In short, the book offers a detailed inside look at the tobacco industry’s calculating strategy to entice a young population to use its products.” The book is published by McFarland & Company, Inc.
In reviewing the book in American Journalism, Stephen Siff wrote: “It is on the final point, about the quality and inventiveness of cigarette advertising, that the book is most effective and, ultimately, makes its greatest contribution.”
In Journalism History, reviewer Kari Hollerbach wrote: “By examining the broader social and legal trends that buffeted the tobacco industry, the targeted effort to recruit and retain college-age smokers, and the actual advertisements and their thematic narratives, she offers a very compelling explanation as to how and why several generations of American youth were persuaded to smoke, smoke, smoke that cigarette.”
Figures show the continued compelling force of advertising. According to a CDC report, tobacco companies spent $9.6 billion marketing cigarettes and smokeless tobacco in the United States alone in 2012. That’s equivalent to more than $1 million every hour, based on $26 million daily. A Federal Trade Commission report shows $9.2 billion spent on cigarette advertising and promotion in 2012. The report notes the expenses include magazine ads, distribution of samples and coupons, retail ads, discounts, retailer payments, rebates and direct-mail advertising.
A Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index showed the national smoking rate at 19.7 percent in 2013, with North Dakota’s smoking rate dropping from 24.1 percent in 2008 to 18.5 percent in 2013. Kaiser Family Foundation data show the national smoking rate at 18.1 percent in 2013 and North Dakota at 21.2 percent.
Crawford’s research has been published in Journalism and Mass Communication Educator, Social Marketing Quarterly, and the Journal of Health and Mass Communication. Crawford joined NDSU in 2009. She received a doctorate degree in communication and information from the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, and a master’s degree in advertising and public relations from Marquette University, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
About NDSU
NDSU, Fargo, North Dakota, USA, is notably listed among the top 108 U.S. public and private universities in the Carnegie Commission on Higher Education’s category of “Research Universities/Very High Research Activity.” NDSU is listed in the top 100 research universities in the U.S. for R&D in agricultural sciences, chemistry, computer science, physical sciences, psychology, and social sciences, based on research expenditures reported to the National Science Foundation. As a student-focused, land grant, research institution, NDSU serves the state’s citizens. www.ndsu.edu/research
http://newswise.com/articles/tobacco-goes-to-college-shows-battle-for-youth-market-began-early

Today's Smokers Are Having a Harder Time Quitting — What Changed?

Dr. Daniel Seidman,  Smoking cessation expert | From HuffPost Healthy Living Blog

Over the last 25 years, cigarette consumption by smokers in the United States decreased by almost one-third. Over that same period, however, many tobacco companies reengineered cigarettes to more efficiently deliver the nicotine that keeps their customers coming back (1,2). This is called the “yield.” Increased yield means smokers, even if they smoke fewer cigarettes per day, still get plenty of nicotine. In other words, most of today’s cigarettes are not the same ones your mother or father smoked.

Not only are today’s cigarettes different — so are smokers. They are more likely to experience stress, worry, and depression regardless of their income (3). Recent research shows that it is quitting that brings stress relief rather than the other way around; cigarette addiction itself is a source of stress, anxiety, and depression (4,5) As the number of smoke-free environments increased, and because smokers smoke fewer cigarettes on average, today’s smokers generally wait longer between cigarettes. This delay increases the psychological and emotional reward value of each cigarette. At the same time, because they can’t smoke whenever they want, the timing is often uncertain, and the payoff — being able to light up — is irregular. Paradoxically, this sort of “intermittent” sporadic or random reinforcement is actually the strongest form of psychological reinforcement, thus making current patterns of smoking behavior harder to extinguish. Waiting to smoke is not quitting smoking!

Another factor making it harder to quit smoking today is that funding for tobacco prevention has been cut significantly. This illustrates the diminished importance society places on efforts to help smokers. Meanwhile, tobacco companies spend $18 to market their products for every dollar spent to support smokers and reduce smoking (6). Ostracized from private homes, work, cars, and public spaces, many smokers report high levels of shame when they leave social gatherings to get a nicotine fix. Our cultural norm of self-help places the burden of quitting, and blame of failure, squarely on smokers’ shoulders. Self-help, however, is clearly not working for many struggling to quit.

The United States has made remarkable progress against smoking, but most of that progress occurred in the 40 years before 2004, when the adult smoking rate was cut about in half to 20.9 percent. The most recent data, released by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on May 22, 2015 (7), is that the median prevalence of cigarette smoking in 2011 was 21.2 percent. Even adjusting for changes in the way smoking rates are being measured, this is higher, not lower, than the 20.9 percent reported 7 years earlier! For 2012, the smoking rate was 19.6, and for 2013 it was 19.0, barely budging from a decade earlier!

As we observed World No Tobacco Day 2015 this past Sunday, May 31, many smokers continued to find themselves in a trap set for them by cigarettes. Cigarettes are designed for addiction and not for recreational “take it or leave it” use. Many of today’s smokers therefore find themselves caught between a lack of constructive social and psychological support, and the destructive effects of highly nicotine-efficient cigarettes, creating a tobacco control stalemate.

What can be done?

We can start by requiring manufacturers to limit or taper permitted nicotine levels in cigarettes. All tobacco and nicotine products should be standardized and openly disclose their nicotine levels, and how much is absorbed into smokers’ bodies the same way people track calories or carbohydrates.

Here are five quick tips for smokers trying to quit:

  • Try to challenge beliefs that justify smoking. Beliefs such as “I smoke because I’m stressed,” “I’ll quit tomorrow,” “I’ll only smoke one,” and “I’m not strong enough to quit” are common and tend to cement smoking as a behavior.
  • Consider these three “triggers” to smoking, and be prepared with strategies to cope with them: 1) Other smokers: Avoid other smokers or ask them not to smoke around you, 2) Alcohol: Avoid alcohol or limit drinks as necessary, and 3) Emotional stress: Learn to adjust to situations without smoking.
  • With cigarettes delivering a stronger dose of nicotine, consider using two forms of NRT. The combined NRT approach not only delivers nicotine more aggressively to replace that from cigarettes, the U.S public Health Service 2008 update (8) found this to be the best of the medical options available for helping smokers quit.
  • Beware of cutting down as a strategy to quit unless you schedule your reduction of smoking in advance for a limited and specific amount of time prior to a target quit date. Stalling, delaying, or reducing smoking are tactics to avoid smoking, but are also ways to avoid quitting. Randomly reducing to quit is a common cessation strategy which recent research suggests is associated with lower cessation success rates. A 2013 Gallup poll (9) found smokers who succeed are more likely to quit abruptly (48 percent) vs. gradually (2 percent). A short-term technique for building confidence to prepare a successful quit day is smoking by the clock, otherwise known as “scheduled smoking” (10).
  • Download an app on your smartphone so you always have access to scientifically supported psychological and behavioral techniques. Such an app should help you prepare for and plan a successful quit day, as well as offer relapse prevention tools. It is critical that the app address not only the physical ties to your smoking addiction, but also the emotional side. Of course, I would like to highlight my own Up in Smoke app for iPhone, iPad Android, and the web!

Dr. Daniel Seidman, a clinical psychologist, is director of smoking cessation services at Columbia University Medical Center. He is author of the book Smoke-Free in 30 Days and of the “Up in Smoke” app from Mental Workout for iPhone, iPad, Android, Mac, and PC.

References:

  • Variation in nicotine intake in U.S. Cigarette smokers Over the Past 25 Years: evidence From nHanes surveys. Martin J. Jarvis, Gary A.Giovino, Richard J. O’Connor, Lynn T. Kozlowski, John T. Bernert.
  • SRNT Journal Research Advance Access published July 25, 2014
  • Recent increases in efficiency in cigarette nicotine delivery:implications for tobacco Control. Thomas Land, Lois Keithly, Kevin Kane, Lili Chen, Mark Paskowsky , Doris Cullen, Rashelle B. Hayes, Wenjun Li. SRNT Journal Advance Access published January 13, 2014
  • 2013 Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index.
  • Tanya R. Schlam, Megan E. Piper, Jessica W. Cook, Michael C. Fiore and Timothy B. Baker. “Life 1 Year After a Quit Attempt: Real-Time Reports of Quitters and Continuing Smokers.” Annals of Behavioral Medicine, Vol. 44, Issue 3, 309-319. December, 2012.
  • West R, Brown J (2015) How much improvement in mental health can be expected when people stop smoking? Findings from a national survey, Smoking in Britain, 3,6. http://www.smokinginbritain.co.uk/read
  • Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids. Broken Promises to Our Children: The 1998 State Tobacco Settlement Fourteen Years Later (Updated in 2014).
  • State-Specific Prevalence of Current Cigarette Smoking and Smokeless Tobacco Use Among Adults Aged ≥18 years -United States, 2011-2013. CDC, Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) May 22, 2015 / Vol. 64 / 19. See Table 1. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6419a6.htm?s_cid=mm6419a6
  • The 2008 update to Treating Tobacco Use and Dependence, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Public Health Service May 2008. See page 109 http://www.ahrq.gov/professionals/clinicians-providers/guidelines-recommendations/tobacco/clinicians/update/treating_tobacco_use08.pdf
  • http://www.gallup.com/poll/163763/smokers-quit-tried-multiple-times.aspxhttp://www.gallup.com/poll/163763/smokers-quit-tried-multiple-times.aspxThe effects of smoking schedules on cessation outcome: Can we improve on common methods of gradual and abrupt nicotine withdrawal? Cinciripini, Paul M.; Lapitsky, Lynn; Seay, Sheila; Wallfisch, Annette; Kitchens, Karen; Van Vunakis, Helen. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, Vol 63(3), Jun 1995, 388-399.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-seidman/todays-smokers-are-having_b_7471194.html

CSPI: Big Food: Sounds a Lot Like Big Tobacco

Michael F. Jacobson, Executive Director, Center for Science in the Public Interest

Food is not tobacco. From birth, we need food to sustain us. On the other hand, no one needs to smoke. But the public health community is concerned about both diet and tobacco use for a very good reason: Over a lifetime, poor diets and smoking both cause serious health problems, including diabetes, heart disease, and cancer.

1

The similarities between unhealthy food and tobacco go beyond the health effects. When it comes to corporate responsibility, executives at some of the nation’s largest food and beverage companies seem to have learned a lot from their counterparts at Big Tobacco in aggressively promoting consumption of unhealthy foods and, in the same breath, blaming the consumer.

Big Food and Big Tobacco share some common bloodlines. It wasn’t very long ago that some of these companies were one and the same. RJR Nabisco, for instance, once simultaneously contained the companies that made Camel cigarettes and Chips Ahoy! cookies. Until the mid-2000s, the companies that manufacture Marlboro and Virginia Slims cigarettes were part of the same conglomerate, Philip Morris (now Altria), which manufactured Kraft Macaroni & Cheese and Kool Aid. Those companies have since split their tobacco businesses from their food businesses, but heavy-handed product marketing may be ingrained in the companies’ DNA.

2

While we need food to live, we certainly don’t need many of the junk foods — many aimed at kids — served up by food processors and restaurants. Soda and other sugary drinks, in particular, are one category of food that does far more harm than good. Sugary drinks are the single biggest source of calories in the American diet and prime culprits when it comes to diabetes, heart disease, obesity, and other health problems.

Like Big Tobacco, Big Food goes to great lengths to muddy the waters and obscure the connections between soda and disease. “The products we make are not injurious to health,” is how the Tobacco Industry Research Committee put it in a 1954 advertisement. In 2012 the American Beverage Association opined, “Sugar-sweetened beverages are not driving obesity.” Coca-Cola executive Katie Bayne told this whopper to USA Today: “There is no scientific evidence that connects sugary beverages to obesity.”

3

Besides denying the connections between their products and disease, food and tobacco companies both use the same language to blame their customers for the harm caused by their products. “What people want to do is their own decision,” said American Tobacco CEO Robert Heimann in 1988. More recently, Don Thompson, then CEO of McDonald’s, said “All of us have to make personal choices.” Those statements may be literally true, but ignore the extent to which companies persuade, lure, and manipulate customers — including children — into making the very decisions that companies say should be up to them.

Though both food and tobacco companies have been notorious marketers to children, they both like to lecture parents: “It is the responsibility of every parent to encourage their children to make proper choices about lifestyle decisions,” is how RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company put it in the mid-1990s. It’s not the role of the federal government to discourage kids from smoking, it went on to say. In 2011, McDonald’s CEO Jim Skinner said “It is up to [kids] to choose and their parents to choose, and it is their responsibility to do so.”

4

Joe Camel, the cartoon animal used to attract children to cigarettes, was retired in 1997, under pressure from state attorneys general. A master settlement agreement between the AGs and the tobacco industry eliminated much of that industry’s advertising to children, and even disbanded the Tobacco Institute, an aggressive industry lobbying force. But the food industry still uses cartoon characters to market disease-causing products to children, and food industry trade groups still devote millions to block progress and defend the status quo.

Big Tobacco and Big Food are now separate industries, but the playbook is much the same. How the game ends is up to us.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-f-jacobson/big-food-big-tobacco_b_7486934.html
http://cspinet.org/bigtobaccoORbigfood.html