|
|
|
|
A new report by Richard Sloggett, founder of the think tank Future Health and former special advisor to Matt Hancock, has warned that the Government must step up its efforts to combat smoking given that there will be a projected 600,000 extra smokers in 2022. The report puts the projected rise down to more people taking up smoking to cope with the stress of unemployment and mental ill health during the pandemic, particularly young people.
The report shows that the proportion of smokers in the population rose from 14.8% in 2020 to 15% in the year to March 2021, stalling the 40 year decline in smoking rates and representing the second year-on-year increase in the past 14 years. The increase was driven by a rise in smoking among 18-24 year olds.
The report argues that if the 600,000 additional smokers projection is correct, it will be "virtually impossible" for the Government to meet one of its key health targets of reducing smoking to 5% of the population by 2030 unless it takes "drastic and immediate action", especially among young people. Modelling by Sloggett projected that by 2030 the overall proportion of adults smoking is set to hit 7.1%, with the 5% target now not met until 2033. The report also found that tackling smoking will be crucial for levelling up – only one of the areas with the highest rates of smoking (Dartford) was in the South of England.
Source: The Telegraph, 17 May 2021
See also: The Times - Lower smoking rate is measure of government efforts to level up
|
|
The American Journal of Health Behaviour has come under fire from public health charities and academics for publishing a special issue sponsored by e-cigarette manufacturer Juul in which the tobacco company Altria, the parent company of Philip Morris USA, has a minority stake.
The papers included in the special issue focus on the implications of switching from cigarettes to Juul systems, and dual use of cigarettes and Juul products. The special issue was coordinated and edited by Saul Shiffman, a consultant at Pinney Associates, which has also provided consulting services to British American Tobacco and Reynolds American.
Elbert Glover, editor-in-chief of the American Journal of Health Behaviour, defended the publication of the special issue. “All the manuscripts were sent through the full review process and not treated any differently than any other paper. There was nothing special with the issue other than being funded by the tobacco industry’’. Matthew Myers, president of Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, however pointed out the “decades of tobacco companies paying [for] studies designed to reach a predetermined outcome’’, saying that “research funded by tobacco companies cannot be treated as a credible source of science or evidence’’.
Source: BMJ, 14 May 2021
|
|
The NZ Government has published a discussion document outlining an Action Plan for achieving the Smokefree Aotearoa 2025 goal and invited submissions. This blog from Otago university is one of a series examining key aspects of the plan to help inform the debate and submissions. This blog examines the ‘Tobacco-free generation’ policy (TFG), which provides a mechanism to protect future generations from tobacco harm and, over time, to phase out tobacco sales entirely.
What does the Tobacco Free Generation (TFG) propose?
Consumers have a right to be protected from products that may kill them, particularly where those products are addictive. Other products found to be harmful to health (e.g. asbestos, leaded petrol) have been phased out using ‘grandfathering’: to minimize disruption, existing buildings and vehicles have remained in use, but asbestos-free or lead-free products are enforced for new sales.
Because so many people are already addicted to smoking, it may be impractical to ban the sale of tobacco products overnight, so a workable compromise is to allow sales to adults who currently smoke but ban sales to new generations of customers.
TFG disallows the sale of tobacco to individuals born after a certain date. In the Smokefree 2025 discussion document, 31 December 2003 has been proposed as the watershed date. Thus, the minimum purchase age for tobacco would remain at 18 years until 2022, when TFG takes over. From then on, tobacco sales can only be made to people born in 2003 or earlier.
As with laws for other toxic substances, the emphasis for enforcement is on sales of the product and not criminalizing purchase or use.
What’s the likely impact of TFG?
NZ modelling shows that TFG would decrease smoking prevalence substantially, particularly in youthful Māori and Pacific populations (van der Deen et al, 2018). Assuming full compliance, it would halve smoking prevalence in the under-45 age group within 14 years.
Source: University of Otago Public Health Expert Blog, 14 May 2021
|
|
The Filipino law group ImagineLaw has warned that the donations made by tobacco companies to the Filipino Government’s COVID-19 efforts, including face masks, testing equipment, and ventilators, are a "wolf in sheep’s clothing’’ designed to interfere with the Government’s health policymaking. ImagineLaw said that tobacco companies were using the corporate social responsibility efforts to "steer attention from their harmful products".
In May 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) similarly said that the tobacco industry was "taking advantage" of countries' vulnerable situation during COVID-19 by offering donations "in an effort to make the industry look good." WHO says that the industry uses the support it gives to then lobby governments to weaken their tobacco control efforts.
In the Philippines, a joint memorandum from the Department of Health and Civil Service Commission bans government officials and employees from interacting with tobacco companies. Tobacco firms recently called for the memorandum to be scrapped amid the pandemic, saying that it is unconstitutional.
Source: Rappler, 17 May 2021
|
|
Have you been forwarded this email? Subscribe to ASH Daily News here.
For more information email [email protected] or visit www.ash.org.uk
@ASHorguk
ASH Daily News is a digest of published news on smoking-related topics. ASH is not responsible for the content of external websites. ASH does not necessarily endorse the material contained in this bulletin.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
