Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Ample funding, strong policies, and "unsticky" cigarettes are key
Next week over 4000 people from about 120 countries
will attend the 11th world conference on tobacco or health in Chicago. To mark the occasion, the BMJ, JAMA, and the
Bulletin of the World Health Organization are publishing
theme issues. At a time of steadily increasing death and disease caused
by tobacco and alarming trends in smoking in both developed and
developing regions, conference delegates will discuss how to wipe out
the "brown plague."
Malcolm Gladwell, author of the best selling book The Tipping
Point,1 believes he has the answer. He argues that
ideas, messages, products, and behaviours spread like viruses. Fashion trends, crime waves, Pokémon, and many other phenomena that
characterise everyday life are examples of "epidemics in action."
New ideas, products, or behaviours will cross the threshold into
epidemic transmission Gladwell fits teenage smoking into his model, as evidenced by
"tipping people" (such as parents and peers) who initiate teens into smoking and a sticky drug (nicotine). He offers two solutions: treating smokers with bupropion, to address the link between smoking and depression; and reducing nicotine in cigarettes to
"non-addicting" levels, to prevent progression from experimentation
to dependence. Both strategies are aimed at reducing the stickiness of cigarettes.
Bupropion is indeed an effective smoking cessation medication for
people with and without a history of depression.2 Reducing nicotine in cigarettes to non-addicting levels was first proposed by
Henningfield and Benowitz,3 and the concept was then
incorporated into a comprehensive strategy developed by the American
Medical Association4 and endorsed by the British and
Australian medical associations.
5 6
Gladwell's
proposals are therefore on target, but they won't move tobacco control
beyond the tipping point unless a few essential ingredients are added
to the mix.
Firstly, money is needed, and a lot of it. Because governments
typically don't provide enough of it for tobacco control, it must come
from those involved in the manufacture, sale, promotion, and use of
tobacco. Tobacco taxes are the usual source, and these are what fund
the comprehensive tobacco control programme in Massachusetts, evaluated
in this issue by Biener et al (p 351).7 Litigation can
produce substantial funding, such as the $246bn made available through
the "master settlement agreement" between 46 state attorneys general and US tobacco companies. Unfortunately, only eight states have
allocated enough settlement money to fund a comprehensive tobacco
control programme.8 Retailers should be licensed for the
privilege of selling tobacco, and revenues from licence fees should be
used to fund enforcement of the minimum age of purchase. In 1990 the
Bush administration recommended that tobacco retailers should be
required to pay a $300 annual licence fee.9
Secondly, the money should be used to fund comprehensive tobacco
control programmes like those in Massachusetts, California, Arizona,
and a few other "model" states.10 The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommend that $6-20 per head be allocated annually to fund comprehensive tobacco control programmes, depending on the size of the population.11 The funding and
programmes must be sustained over the long term. Massachusetts has
spent $6.50 per person per year on its successful campaign since
1993.7 Bupropion, nicotine replacement therapy, and other
tobacco dependence treatments will not tip the balance unless funding
is provided to develop the infrastructure needed to deliver those
treatments.12
Thirdly, a strong policy structure needs to be in place to support and
complement programmes. In this issue Jha and Chaloupka review the
policies that are effective in reducing tobacco use, including tobacco
tax increases, bans on advertising, bans on smoking in public places
and worksites, and prominent warnings on packages
(p 358).13 Tobacco control policies can be adopted at
local, state, national, regional, and global levels. Regional and
global approaches A final essential ingredient is the recruitment and supporting of more
"tipping people." Leaders such as WHO director general Gro Harlem
Brundtland, President Bill Clinton, former US surgeon general C Everett
Koop, and tobacco litigator Stanley Rosenblatt (see page 322) have
blazed the trails. But more funding must be made available to the
activists who work in the trenches. Perhaps at the 12th world
conference on tobacco or health delegates will grow in number to
12 000, to match the legions that attended last month's global
conference on HIV and AIDS.
BMJ(rdavis1{at}hfhs.org)
that is, move beyond "the tipping point"
if
three rules are met. Firstly, people with a "rare set of social
gifts," who are capable of starting epidemics, are involved.
Secondly, the "contagion" has the quality of "stickiness," so
that it becomes irresistible and entrenched after exposure occurs.
Thirdly, environmental factors
the times and places in which social
epidemics occur
are favourable.
in particular, European Union directives on
smoking14 and the World Health Organization's framework
convention on tobacco control15
offer the greatest
opportunity for widespread progress but also present the most
challenging political obstacles. The US, ironically, has been a leader
in many areas of tobacco control but has been weak on the framework
convention.16
| 1. | Gladwell M. The tipping point: how little things can make a big difference. New York: Little, Brown and Company, 2000. |
| 2. |
Britton J, Jarvis MJ.
Bupropion: a new treatment for smokers.
BMJ
2000;
321:
65-66 |
| 3. |
Benowitz NL, Henningfield JE.
Establishing a nicotine threshold for addiction.
N Engl J Med
1994;
331:
123-125 |
| 4. |
Henningfield JE, Benowitz NL, Slade J, Houston TP, Davis RM, Deitchman SD, for the Council on Scientfic Affairs, American Medical Association.
Reducing the addictiveness of cigarettes.
Tobacco Control
1998;
7:
281-293 |
| 5. |
Beecham L.
Doctors call for nicotine in cigarettes to be reduced.
BMJ
1998;
317:
1271 |
| 6. | Robotham J. Nicotine-free cigarette hope for young smokers. Sydney Morning Herald 1998 30 Oct. www.smh.com.au/news/9810/30/text/national7.html |
| 7. |
Biener L, Harris JE, Hamilton W.
Impact of the Massachusetts tobacco control programme: population based trend analysis.
BMJ
2000;
321:
351-354 |
| 8. | Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. State tobacco settlement. www.tobaccofreekids.org/reports/settlements/ (accessed 30 July 2000). |
| 9. | US Public Health Service. Model sale of tobacco products to minors control act. A model law recommended for adoption by states and localities to prevent the sale of tobacco products to minors. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services, 1990. |
| 10. |
Wakefield M, Chaloupka F.
Effectiveness of comprehensive tobacco control programmes in reducing teenage smoking in the USA.
Tobacco Control
2000;
9:
177-186 |
| 11. | US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Best practices for comprehensive tobacco control programs. Atlanta: CDC, 1999. www.cdc.gov/tobacco/bestprac.htm |
| 12. |
Thun M, Glynn TJ.
Improving the treatment of tobacco dependence.
BMJ
2000;
321:
311 |
| 13. |
Jha P, Chaloupka FJ.
The economics of global tobacco control.
BMJ
2000;
321:
358-361 |
| 14. | Action on Smoking and Health. Tobacco policy in the European Union: Fact sheet No. 20. London: ASH, April, 1999. www.ash.org.uk/html/factsheets/html/fact20.html (accessed 30 July 2000). |
| 15. | World Health Organization. Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. http://tobacco.who.int/en/fctc/ (accessed 30 July 2000). |
| 16. | Joossens L. The big disappointment: USA weak on convention. Tobacco Control 2000; 9: 134-135[Medline]. |
Read all Rapid Responses
What can you learn from this BMJ paper? Read Leanne Tite's Paper+