Why universities and scientific world should stay away from the tobacco industry. Journey in Big Tobacco deception

Universities are institutions dedicated to improving life through the research and dissemination of knowledge. They facilitates the "peer to peer" communication among young people; the acquisition of knowledge and skills to improve personal and community health; the propagation of healthy lifestyles through the emulation of behavior. Tobacco industry, through commercial policies, enlist young people and transform them, through dependence, into "loyal customers" for many years. The recent introduction of the "reduced risk" products, (the so-called "cold smoke" for example), are a threat for young people who might underestimate the dangers, not even completely known by the experts. Universities and Scientific world that turn a blind eye to tobacco market, accepting the advantages offered by grants and donations from tobacco industry, become accomplices in spreading the "tobacco epidemic" because the funding comes directly from the sale of tobacco products. This "dirty" money causes illness, suffering and death. Universities are invested with an important ethical responsibility to help the world reduce and eliminate the tobacco epidemic, with research, training and information. Universities should have a policy statement that specifically prohibits academic bodies from accepting tobacco industry funding including grant funding. In the U.S.A. several scientific journals no longer publish tobacco industry- supported researches

Incentives for preventing smoking in children and adolescents (Review)

BackgroundAdult smoking usually has its roots in adolescence. If individuals do not take up smoking during this period it is unlikely that they ever will. Further, once smoking becomes established, cessation is challenging; the probability of subsequently quitting is inversely proportional to the age of initiation. One novel approach to reducing the prevalence of youth smoking is the use of incentives.ObjectivesTo determine whether incentives prevent children and adolescents from starting to smoke. We also attempted to assess the dose-response of incentives, the costs of incentive programmes, whether incentives are more or less effective in combination with other interventions to prevent smoking initiation and any unintended consequences arising from the use of incentives.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register, with additional searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CSA databases and PsycINFO for terms relating to incentives, in combination with terms for smoking and tobacco use, and children and adolescents. The most recent searches were in May 2012.Selection criteriaWe considered randomized controlled trials allocating children and adolescents (aged 5 to 18 years) as individuals, groups or communities to intervention or control conditions, where the intervention included an incentive aimed at preventing smoking uptake. We also considered controlled trials with baseline measures and post-intervention outcomes.Data collection and analysisData were extracted by two authors and assessed independently. The primary outcome was the smoking status of children or adolescents at follow-up who reported no smoking at baseline. We required a minimum follow-up of six months from baseline and assessed each included study for risk of bias. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence in each trial; we did not require biochemical validation of self-reported tobacco use for study inclusion. Where possible we combined eligible studies to calculate pooled estimates at the longest follow-up using the Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect method, grouping studies by study design.Main resultsWe identified seven controlled studies that met our inclusion criteria, including participants with an age range of 11 to 14 years. Of the seven trials identified, only five had analysable data relevant for this review and contributed to the meta-analysis (6362 participants in total who were non-smokers at baseline; 3466 in intervention and 2896 in control). All bar one of the studies was a trial of the so-called Smokefree Class Competition (SFC), which has been widely implemented throughout Europe. In this competition, classes with youth generally between the ages of 11 to 14 years commit to being smoke free for a six month period. They report regularly on their smoking status; if 90% or more of the class is non-smoking at the end of the six months, the class goes into a competition to win prizes. The one study that was not a trial of the SFC was a controlled trial in which schools in two communities were assigned to the intervention, with schools in a third community acting as controls. Students in the intervention community with lower smoking rates at the end of the project (one school year) received rewards.Only one study of the SFC competition, a non-randomized controlled trial, reported a significant effect of the competition on the prevention of smoking at the longest follow-up. However, this study had a risk of multiple biases, and when we calculated the adjusted RR we no longer detected a statistically significant difference. The pooled RR for the more robust RCTs (3 studies, n = 3056 participants) suggests that, from the available data, there is no statistically significant effect of incentives to prevent smoking initiation among children and adolescents in the long term (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.19). Pooled results from non-randomized trials also did not detect a significant effect, and we were unable to extract data on our outcome of interest for the one trial that did not study the SFC. There is little robust evidence to suggest that unintended consequences (such as youth making false claims about their smoking status and bullying of smoking students) are consistently associated with such interventions, although this has not been the focus of much research. There was insufficient information to assess the dose-response relationship or to report costs.Authors\u27 conclusionsTo date, incentive programmes have not been shown to prevent smoking initiation among youth, although there are relatively few published studies and these are of variable quality. Trials included in this meta-analysis were all studies of the SFC competition, which distributed small to moderately sized prizes to whole classes, usually through a lottery system.Future studies might investigate the efficacy of incentives given to individual participants to prevent smoking uptake. Future research should consider the efficacy of incentives on smoking initiation, as well as progression of smoking, evaluate these in varying populations from different socioeconomic and ethnic backgrounds, and describe the intervention components in detail

Cross-border purchasing of cigarettes among smokers in Six Countries of the EUREST-PLUS ITC Europe Surveys

Introduction: The availability of lower-cost cigarettes in neighboring countries provides price-sensitive smokers with incentives to purchase cheaper out-of-country cigarettes. This study estimates the prevalence of and factors associated with cross-border purchasing of cheaper cigarettes among smokers from Germany, Greece, Hungary, Poland, Romania, and Spain. The prevalence of cross-border purchasing was estimated by residential location, defined as living in regions bordering a lower-price country (where prices were at least €1/pack lower), regions bordering a similar- or higher-price country, and internal non-border regions. Methods: Data were from a survey of nationally representative samples of adult smokers (n=6011) from Germany, Greece, Hungary, Poland, Romania, and Spain. The primary outcome was purchasing cheaper out-of-country cigarettes in the previous six months. Residential location was defined using The Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics (NUTS2 in Germany and NUTS3 in the other countries). Multivariable logistic regression tested differences in purchasing cheaper out-of-country cigarettes by country and residential location. Results: Residential location was associated with purchasing cheaper out-of-country cigarettes in Germany and Poland (p<0.05): 31% of German and 11% of Polish smokers living in regions bordering lower-price countries reported purchasing cheaper out-of-country cigarettes in the previous six months. Smokers living in regions bordering lower-price countries had 4.21 times greater odds of purchasing cheaper out-of-country cigarettes compared to smokers living in non-border regions. Conclusions: Overall, only a minority of smokers in the six countries purchased cheaper cigarettes outside their country. However, smokers living in regions bordering countries where cigarettes were at least €1/pack lower than their home country had significantly higher odds of purchasing cheaper out-of-country cigarettes. This effect was especially prominent among German smokers. Tax harmonization policies designed to minimize cross-border price differentials can eliminate lower-priced alternatives for price-sensitive smokers

Social norms for e-cigarettes and smoking: associations with initiation of e-cigarette use, intentions to quit smoking and quit attempts: findings from the EUREST-PLUS ITC Europe Surveys

Background: Social norms have received little attention in relation to electronic cigarettes (EC). The current study examine social norms for EC use and smoking tobacco, and their associations with (i) initiation of EC use, (ii) intention to quit smoking and (iii) attempts to quit smoking. Methods: Cross-sectional and longitudinal data analysis from Waves 1 and 2 of the ITC 6 European Country Survey and corresponding waves from England (the ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey). Current smokers at baseline, who heard of ECs and provided data at both waves were included (n = 3702). Complex samples logistic regression examined associations between the outcomes and descriptive (seeing EC use in public, close friends using ECs/smoking) and injunctive (public approves of ECs/smoking) norms, adjusting for country, demographics, EC use and heaviness of smoking. Results: In longitudinal analyses, seeing EC use in public at least some days was the only social norm that predicted initiation of EC use between waves (OR = 1.66, 95%CI = 1.08–2.56). In the cross-sectional analysis, having an intention to quit was associated with seeing EC use in public (OR = 1.37, 95%CI = 1.04–1.81) and reporting fewer than three close friends smoke (OR = 0.59, 95%CI = 0.44–0.80). There was no association between any social norm and making a quit attempt between waves. Conclusions: Initiation of EC use is predicted by seeing EC use in public, which was also associated with greater intention to quit smoking. Friends’ smoking was associated with lower intention to quit. These findings may allay concerns that increased visibility of ECs is renormalizing smoking amongst current smokers

Extent and correlates of self-reported exposure to tobacco advertising, promotion, and sponsorship in smokers:Findings from the EUREST-PLUS ITC Europe Surveys Tobacco marketing exposure – findings from ITC Europe

Introduction: Tobacco advertising, promotion, and sponsorship (TAPS) are known to promote tobacco consumption and to discourage smoking cessation. Consequently, comprehensive TAPS bans are effective measures to reduce smoking. The objective of this study was to investigate to what extent smokers are exposed to TAPS in general, and in various media and localities, in different European countries.Methods: A Cross-sectional analysis of national representative samples of adult smokers in 2016 from Germany, Greece, Hungary, Poland, Romania, and Spain (EUREST-PLUS Project, n=6,011), as well as England (n=3,503) and the Netherlands (n=1,213) (ITC Europe Surveys) was conducted. Prevalence of self-reported TAPS exposure is reported by country, and socio-economic correlates were investigated using logistic regression models.Results: Self-reported exposure to TAPS varied widely among the countries, from 15.4 % in Hungary to 69.2 % in the Netherlands. In most countries, tobacco advertising was most commonly seen at the point of sale, and rarely noticed in mass media. The multivariate analysis revealed some variation in exposure to TAPS by sociodemographic factors. Age showed the greatest consistency across countries with younger smokers (18–24-year-olds) being more likely to notice TAPS than older smokers.Conclusions: TAPS exposure tended to be higher in countries with less restrictive regulation but was also reported in countries with more comprehensive bans, although at lower levels. The findings indicate the need for a comprehensive ban on TAPS to avoid a shift of marketing efforts to less regulated channels, and for stronger enforcement of existing bans.<br/

Extent and correlates of self-reported exposure to tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship in smokers: Findings from the EUREST-PLUS ITC Europe Surveys

Introduction: Tobacco advertising, promotion, and sponsorship (TAPS) are known to promote tobacco consumption and to discourage smoking cessation. Consequently, comprehensive TAPS bans are effective measures to reduce smoking. The objective of this study was to investigate to what extent smokers are exposed to TAPS in general, and in various media and localities, in different European countries. Methods: A Cross-sectional analysis of national representative samples of adult smokers in 2016 from Germany, Greece, Hungary, Poland, Romania, and Spain (EUREST-PLUS Project, n=6,011), as well as England (n=3,503) and the Netherlands (n=1,213) (ITC Europe Surveys) was conducted. Prevalence of self-reported TAPS exposure is reported by country, and socio-economic correlates were investigated using logistic regression models. Results: Self-reported exposure to TAPS varied widely among the countries, from 15.4 % in Hungary to 69.2 % in the Netherlands. In most countries, tobacco advertising was most commonly seen at the point of sale, and rarely noticed in mass media. The multivariate analysis revealed some variation in exposure to TAPS by sociodemographic factors. Age showed the greatest consistency across countries with younger smokers (18-24-year-olds) being more likely to notice TAPS than older smokers. Conclusions: TAPS exposure tended to be higher in countries with less restrictive regulation but was also reported in countries with more comprehensive bans, although at lower levels. The findings indicate the need for a comprehensive ban on TAPS to avoid a shift of marketing efforts to less regulated channels, and for stronger enforcement of existing bans

Social norms towards smoking and electronic cigarettes among adult smokers in seven European Countries:Findings from the EUREST-PLUS ITC Europe Surveys

Introduction: This study explores whether current smokers’ social norms towards smoking and electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) vary across seven European countries alongside smoking and e-cigarette prevalence rates. At the time of surveying, England had the lowest current smoking prevalence; Greece the highest. Hungary, Romania and Spain had the lowest prevalence of any e-cigarette use; England the highest.Methods: Respondents were adult (18+) current smokers from the 2016 EUREST-PLUS ITC (Romania, Spain, Hungary, Poland, Greece, Germany) and ITC 4CV England Surveys (N=7,779). Using logistic regression, associations between country and (a) smoking norms and (b) e-cigarette norms were assessed, adjusting for age, sex, income, education, smoking status, heaviness of smoking, and e-cigarette status.Results: Compared with England, smoking norms were higher in all countries: reporting at least three of five closest friends smoke (19% vs. 65%-84% [AOR=6.9-24.0; Hungary-Greece]), perceiving people important to you approve of smoking (8% vs. 14%-57% [1.9-51.1; Spain-Hungary]), perceiving the public approves of smoking (5% vs. 6%-37% [1.7-15.8; Spain-Hungary]), disagreeing that smokers are marginalised (9% vs. 16%-50% [2.3-12.3; Poland-Greece]) except Hungary. Compared with England: reporting at least one of five closest friends use e-cigarettes was higher in Poland (28% vs. 36% [2.7]) but lower in Spain and Romania (28% vs. 6%-14% [0.3-0.6]), perceiving the public approves of e-cigarettes was higher in Poland, Hungary and Greece (32% vs. 36%-40% [1.5-1.6]) but lower in Spain and Romania in unadjusted analyses only (32% vs. 24-26%), reporting seeing e-cigarette use in public at least some days was lower in all countries (81% vs. 12%-55% [0.1-0.4]; Spain-Greece).Conclusions: Smokers from England had the least pro-smoking norms. Smokers from Spain had the least pro-e-cigarette norms. Friend smoking and disagreeing that smokers are marginalised broadly aligned with country-level current smoking rates. Seeing e-cigarette use in public broadly aligned with country-level any e-cigarette use. Generally, no other norms aligned with product prevalence.<br/

Characteristics and correlates of electronic cigarette product attributes and undesirable events during e-cigarette use in six countries of the EUREST-PLUS ITC Europe Surveys

Introduction: This study assessed characteristics and correlates associated with e-cigarette product attributes and identified correlates of experiencing undesirable events during e-cigarette use among adult smokers across six European Union (EU) Members States (MS) prior to the implementation of the Tobacco Products Directive (TPD) in 2016. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey with a nationally representative sample of adult cigarette smokers from six EU MS (Germany, Greece, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Spain) reporting e-cigarette use; randomly selected through a multistage cluster sampling design from June to September 2016. Stepwise logistic regressions were used to identify factors associated with use of flavors, noticing health warnings, mixing e-liquids, experiencing 'dry puff', e-liquid leaking during use and e-liquid spilling during refill. Results: Current daily or weekly prevalence of e-cigarette use among this sample of adult smokers was 7.5%. The most common attributes of e-cigarettes used included those that are flavored, contain nicotine, and are of tank style. Noticing health warnings on e-cigarette packaging and leaflets, respectively, was low (10.2% and 28%, respectively). Use of e-liquid refill nozzle caps, described as easy for a child to open, was associated with spilling during refill (OR=6.73; 95% CI: 2.02-22.37). Participants who adjusted occasionally or regularly the power (voltage) or temperature of their e-cigarette had greater odds of ever experiencing a 'dry puff' (OR=6.01; 95% CI: 2.68-13.46). Mixing different e-liquids was associated with leaking during use (OR=7.78; 95% CI: 2.45-24.73) and spilling during refill (OR=8.54; 95% CI: 2.29-31.88). Conclusions: Ongoing evaluation of factors associated with e-cigarette attributes and of the correlates of experiencing e-cigarette undesirable events during use, related to product design, is crucial to monitoring the impact of the implementing Acts of the EU TPD

Social norms towards smoking and electronic cigarettes among adult smokers in seven European Countries: Findings from the EUREST-PLUS ITC Europe Surveys

Introduction: This study explores whether current smokers' social norms towards smoking and electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) vary across seven European countries alongside smoking and e-cigarette prevalence rates. At the time of surveying, England had the lowest current smoking prevalence and Greece the highest. Hungary, Romania and Spain had the lowest prevalence of any e-cigarette use and England the highest. Methods: Respondents were adult (≥18 years) current smokers from the 2016 EUREST-PLUS ITC (Romania, Spain, Hungary, Poland, Greece, Germany) and ITC 4CV England Surveys (N=7779). Using logistic regression, associations between country and (a) smoking norms and (b) e-cigarette norms were assessed, adjusting for age, sex, income, education, smoking status, heaviness of smoking, and e-cigarette status. Results: Compared with England, smoking norms were higher in all countries: reporting that at least three of five closest friends smoke (19% vs 65-84% [AOR=6.9-24.0; Hungary-Greece]), perceiving that people important to them approve of smoking (8% vs 14-57% [1.9-51.1; Spain-Hungary]), perceiving that the public approves of smoking (5% vs 6-37% [1.7-15.8; Spain-Hungary]), disagreeing that smokers are marginalised (9% vs 16-50% [2.3-12.3; Poland-Greece]) except in Hungary. Compared with England: reporting that at least one of five closest friends uses e-cigarettes was higher in Poland (28% vs 36% [2.7]) but lower in Spain and Romania (28% vs 6-14% [0.3-0.6]), perceiving that the public approves of e-cigarettes was higher in Poland, Hungary and Greece (32% vs 36-40% [1.5-1.6]) but lower in Spain and Romania in unadjusted analyses only (32% vs 24-26%), reporting seeing e-cigarette use in public at least some days was lower in all countries (81% vs 12-55% [0.1-0.4]; Spain-Greece). Conclusions: Smokers from England had the least pro-smoking norms. Smokers from Spain had the least pro-e-cigarette norms. Friend smoking and disagreeing that smokers are marginalised broadly aligned with country-level current smoking rates. Seeing e-cigarette use in public broadly aligned with country-level any e-cigarette use. Generally, no other norms aligned with product prevalence

Evaluating the European Union (EU) Tobacco Products Directive: Findings from the EUREST-PLUS ITC cohort study among six EU Member States (MS)

Efforts to mitigate the devastation of tobacco-attributable morbidity and mortality in the European Union (EU) consist of its newly adopted Tobacco Products Directive (TPD) along with the first-ever health treaty, the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC). The aim of this Horizon 2020 project entitled European Regulatory Science on Tobacco: Policy Implementation to Reduce Lung Disease (EUREST-PLUS) is to monitor and evaluate the impact of the implementation of the TPD across the EU, within the context of WHO FCTC ratification. The EUREST-PLUS ITC cohort study of adult smokers in six EU MS (Germany, Greece, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Spain), uses a pre- vs. post-TPD implementation study design, evaluating the impact of several tobacco control policy provisions, including but not limited to health warning labels, smoke free areas and electronic cigarettes. The study is designed to generate strong inferences about the effectiveness of tobacco control policies, as well as to elucidate the mechanisms and factors by which policy implementation translates to population impact. Findings from EUREST-PLUS have potential global implications for implementation of innovative tobacco control policies and its impact on the prevention of lung diseases