BMJ  2004;328:110 (10 January), doi:10.1136/bmj.328.7431.110-b

Letter

Five Ps in mix of public health advocacy

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

EDITOR—The over 140 truly rapid responses to Enstrom and Kabat's smoking study demonstrate the use and abuse of the mix of public health advocacy.¹ Contrary to a muted response to another article on the same theme,² responses to this article were characterised by Smith as "more remarkable for [their] passion than [their] precision."³ My formulation of the mix in public health advocacy includes three additional Ps—promptitude, perseverance, and personality.⁴

The antismoking passion of most respondents was palpable, but only 3% showed commensurate precision by detailing the article's scientific flaws. The promptitude of response should be viewed in the context of recent advances in knowledge about tobacco's effects, which make the study seem anachronistic. However, without adequate precision, much of the passion and promptitude seem misdirected.

Perseverance is most effective when advocates are able to show continually the reliability and validity of their perspectives. In this context, two controversial . . . [Full text of this article]

School of Public Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia niyiawofeso@hotmail.com

Related Articles

Passive smoking: Study was flawed from outset

Jayant Sharad Vaidya
BMJ 2003 327: 501. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality in a prospective study of Californians, 1960-98

James E Enstrom and Geoffrey C Kabat
BMJ 2003 326: 1057. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]