Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

State Programs Can Reduce Tobacco Use
Pages 1-14

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 1...
... Public health advocates, tobacco firms, tobacco growers, retailers, and the general 1 public have all been drawn into the debate. This report does not address the merit of tobacco control compared to alternative uses of state funds or attempt to balance the interests of contending stakeholders; instead, it focuses on the narrower question of whether state tobacco control programs can reduce smoking and save lives.
From page 2...
... SOURCES: American Cancer Sociely, "1999 Facts and Figures: Selected Cancers," available at w1MN.cancer.org/statistics/cff99/selected_toc.him!
From page 3...
... What Is the Evidence that State Programs Make a Difference? The best evidence for the effectiveness of state tobacco control programs comes
From page 4...
... The underlying message is quite clear, however: Multifaceted state tobacco control programs are effective in reducing tobacco use. Counteracivertising and Eclucation Counteradvertising and public education campaigns have become standard elements of tobacco control, although their funding levels and aggressiveness vary considerably among the states.
From page 5...
... If the rate of decline in tobacco consumption among youths stalls in Florida, as it did in California after 1994, this would provide further evidence that the "dose" of tobacco control predicts its impact. School-based tobacco prevention programs are also part of state tobacco control programs.
From page 6...
... , based on levels needed to approach the health goals in Healthy People 2000 and to approach parity with other countries that have effective tobacco control programs. Wholesale prices have increased an average of $0.65 per pack nationwide since the Master Settlement Agreement was signed in 1998, the federal excise tax was raised to $0.24 per pack in the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, and six states now have excise taxes over $0.75 per pack.
From page 7...
... Tax increases are actually less regressive than simple projections suggest, however, because the poor are more sensitive to price and their consumption falls more sharply when prices rise. The World Bank supports increasing tobacco excise taxes for its public health impact and notes that judgments about regressiveness "should be over the distributional impact of the entire tax and expenditure system, and less on particular taxes in isolation."34 Governors and legislators have raised concerns about increasing prices on tobacco because revenues from excise taxes might drop, along with payments expected under the Master Settlement Agreement (because payments to states are tied to sales)
From page 8...
... More than 70% of smokers visit a primary health care provider at least once a year. Systematic reviews conclude that routine, repeated advice and support can increase smoking cessation rates by 2- to 3-fold.4° Physicians, nurses, psychologists, dentists, and other health professionals are more likely to give such advice and support if they practice in a system that encourages such behavior through practice-based systems for tracking smoking status, office-based written materials for smokers to take home, training of health professionals in screening and advising patients, coverage of cessation programs by health plans, and reimbursement for treatments by payers (including Medicaid)
From page 9...
... This does not imply that results will be quick; significant reductions in tobacco use take years even in states where tobacco control has clearly been effective. Performance monitoring of public health programs is receiving increased attention.5~ Measures to monitor the performance of tobacco control programs are in place, and efforts are under way to improve them.52 Without specified goals and ways of measuring progress, the effectiveness of public monies spent on such pro grams is hard to judge, so state tobacco control programs should include resources for evaluation and research as part of a comprehensive tobacco control program.
From page 10...
... Best Practices for Comprehensive Tobacco Control Programs. Atlanta: CDC, 1999 (www.
From page 11...
... 10. Data presented at a National Cancer Policy Board workshop by Marc Manley, National Cancer Institute; Dileep Bal, California Department of Health Services; and Carolyn Celebucki, Massachusetts DeparDnent of Public Health; July 15, 1997 (www.national-academies.
From page 12...
... and Fleischle B., Smoking regulations at the workplace and smoking behavior: A study from southern Germany, Preventive Medicine 23 :230234, 1994; Jeffery R.W., Kelder S.H., Forster J.L., French S.A., Lando H.A., and Baxter J.E., Restrictive smoking policies in the workplace: Effects on smoking prevalence and cigarette consumption, Preventive Medicine 23 :78-82, 1994; Farrelly M.C., Evans W.N., and Sfekas E.S., The impact of workplace smoking bans: Results from a national survey, Tobacco
From page 13...
... Newhouse, eds., The Handbook of Health Economics, New York: Elsevier Science, in press, or contact Kenneth Warner, University of Michigan School of Public Health; Institute of Medicine, Growing Up Tobacco Free, op. cit., chapter 6.
From page 14...
... :3159-3161, 1 99 1; DiFranza J.R., CarIson R.R., and Caisse R.E., Reducing youth access to tobacco, Tobacco Control 1:92, 1992; Forster J.L., Murray D.M., Woltson M., Blaine T.M., Wagenaar A.C., and Hennrikus D.J., The effects of community policies to reduce youth access to tobacco, American Journal of Public Health 88: 1193-1198, 1998; for a review, see Institute of Medicine, Growing Up Tobacco Free, op. cit., chapter 7.


This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.