National

State smoke-free laws for worksites, restaurants, and bars - United States, 2000-2010
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have released a Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) summarizing changes during the past decade in state smoking restrictions for worksites, restaurants, and bars. Data on state smoking restrictions were obtained from CDC's State Tobacco Activities Tracking and Evaluation (STATE) System database. Data analysis showed that from December 31, 2000 to December 31, 2010, 26 states enacted comprehensive smoke-free laws covering workplaces, restaurants, and bars; ten states enacted laws prohibiting smoking in one or two of the venue types; and eight states passed less restrictive laws that allow smoking in designated areas, for example. As of December 2010, seven states have no restrictions regarding smoking in workplaces, bars, or restaurants. The findings indicate that the U.S. has made significant progress in protecting residents from secondhand smoke. This policy trend suggests that the CDC’s Healthy People 2020 objective of enacting smoke-free indoor air laws in all 50 states and DC is attainable, provided that the laws continue to be enacted at the same rate and efforts are increased in certain areas, such as the South. Click here to read more.

Studies confirm cigarettes' toxic impact on the environment
Several new studies highlight the negative impact that cigarette filters and discarded cigarette butts have on the environment. The publications are included in a special supplement in the journal Tobacco Control. Click here for more information, or click here to view the journal supplement, “The Environmental Burden of Cigarette Butts.” Related: Webcast and resources on the environmental impact of cigarettes The national public health foundation Legacy held a webcast on April 19, 2011 to showcase the new research and describe how public health experts, policy leaders, environmental activists and even the tobacco industry can help prevent and eliminate cigarette litter. Legacy's website provides a recording of the webinar, facts on the environmental impact of cigarettes, and a toolkit to help tobacco control and environmental organizations raise awareness about how cigarette litter harms the environment. Click here to access these resources from Legacy.

Toll of Tobacco on Women and Girls fact sheets: State-specific data for Mother's Day
With Mother’s Day approaching, the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids has updated its fact sheets on the toll of tobacco on women and girls. The state-specific tobacco data could be used for special Mother's Day press releases, newspaper columns, op-ed pieces, and Letters to the Editor, or to publicize state or local tobacco control measures.  Advocates can also share this information with legislators, women's groups, and community organizations interested in women's health issues.  Click here to access the fact sheets.

Annual health check-up highlights healthiest and least healthy counties in every state
The University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation have released the second annual County Health Rankings report. The report ranks over 3,000 counties and the District of Columbia based on health indicators such as morbidity and mortality, high school graduation rates, healthy food access, air pollution, income, and rates of smoking, obesity, and teenage pregnancy. The rankings allow county leaders to compare their overall health to other counties in their state as well as top-ranking counties in the nation. The rankings will also help county residents, policymakers, health departments, and businesses identify specific actions to target areas where improvement is needed. Click here to read more, or visit the County Health Rankings website.

Mass media campaigns designed to support new pictorial health warnings on cigarette packets: Evidence of a complementary relationship
New research from Australia indicates that television ads and graphic health warnings on cigarette packages may work in a complementary way to influence smokers’ awareness of the health hazards of smoking. Researchers used data from two studies to examine the effects of pictorial package and television ad health warnings on awareness, emotional response, and intention to quit. The results showed that after the introduction of graphic package warnings in Australia, the proportion of smokers aware of the links between smoking and gangrene and mouth cancer increased by 11.2% and 6.6% respectively; awareness of the link to throat cancer, which was not featured in television ads, decreased by 4.3% over the same time period. Additionally, smokers who were exposed to the package warnings were more likely to respond positively to the television ads and have stronger intentions to quit after viewing them. The authors suggest that anti-tobacco groups consider using television or other mass media campaigns to supplement graphic warnings on cigarette packages and increase their effectiveness. Click here to read the abstract of the study, scheduled to be published in an upcoming issue of Tobacco Control.

Smokers believe 'silver', 'gold' and 'slim' cigarettes are less harmful
A new study shows that despite countries’ bans on the use of words like “light” and “mild,” many smokers still hold misperceptions that certain cigarette brands are less harmful than others. A total of 8,243 current and former smokers were surveyed about the relative risks of cigarettes as part of the 2006 International Tobacco Control Four Country Survey, representing Canada, Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The results show that about one-fifth of smokers thought that some cigarettes were less harmful than others, with these false beliefs being higher among American and Canadian participants. Smokers of ‘light/mild’, or ‘slim’ cigarettes were more 1.29 times more likely to believe that some cigarettes could be less harmful and were 2.61 times more likely to believe that their own brand might be less harmful. Smokers of ‘gold’, ‘silver’, ‘blue’ or ‘purple’ brands were 12.48 times more likely to believe that their own brand might be less harmful compared to smokers of ‘red’ or ‘black’ brands. These results indicate that further regulation of descriptive information and branding, such as the use of the words “slim” or use of color, may be needed to eliminate these false perceptions. Click here to read more, or click here to read the abstract of the study, published in the journal Addiction.

top

Back to Table of Contents