Methods: Systematic search of internal tobacco industry documents available on the internet and at the British American Tobacco Guildford Depository.
Results: Despite legal loss, the litigation contributed to subsequent tobacco control legislation in Finland. The proceedings revealed that the industry had concealed the health hazards of its products and, despite indisputable evidence, continued to deny them. The positions taken by the industry rocked its reliability as a social actor and thus weakened its chances of influencing tobacco policy. Despite fierce opposition from the tobacco industry, tobacco products were included in the product liability legislation, tobacco was entered on the Finnish list of carcinogens, and an extensive Tobacco Act was passed in Parliament.
Conclusions: Tobacco litigation might not stand alone as a tool for public health policymaking but it may well stimulate national debate over the role of smoking in society and influence the policy agenda.
相似文献Background and objective
British American Tobacco (BAT) has historically enjoyed a monopoly position in Kenya. Analysis of recent tobacco control debates and a case study of BAT''s response to the emergence of competition in Kenya are used to explore the company''s ability to shape public policy and its treatment of tobacco farmers.Design
Analysis of internal industry documents from BAT''s Guildford depository, other relevant data and interviews with key informants.Results
BAT enjoys extensive high‐level political connections in Kenya, including close relationships with successive Kenyan presidents. Such links seems to have been used to influence public policy. Health legislation has been diluted and delayed, and when a competitor emerged in the market, BAT used its contacts to have the government pass legislation drafted by BAT that compelled farmers to sell tobacco to BAT rather than to its competitor. BAT was already paying farmers less than any other African leaf‐growing company, and the legislation entrenched poor pay and a quasi‐feudal relationship. BAT''s public relation''s response to the threat of competition and the ministers'' public statements extolling the economic importance of tobacco growing suggest that BAT has manipulated tobacco farming as a political issue.Conclusions
The extent of BAT''s influence over public policy is consistent with the observations that, despite ratifying the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, progress in implementing tobacco control measures in Kenya has been limited. The benefits of tobacco farming seem to be deliberately exaggerated, and an analysis of its true cost benefits is urgently needed. Tobacco farmers must be protected against BAT''s predatory practices and fully informed about its activities to help them have an informed role in policy debates. As image, particularly around the importance of tobacco farming, seems key to BAT''s ability to influence policy, the truth about its treatment of farmers must be publicised.Driven by the recent expansion of transnational tobacco corporations (TTCs) across many low‐ and middle‐income countries, the burden of tobacco''s health effect is shifting. It is predicted that, by 2030, 70% of the estimated 10 million global deaths from tobacco will occur in developing countries.1 In this context, sub‐Saharan Africa (SSA) offers an opportunity for global health, being the only region in the world where primary prevention of the tobacco epidemic remains possible.2 However, with TTCs investing heavily in the region during the last decade and with evidence of rapidly rising consumption, particularly among youth,3 this window of opportunity is closing rapidly.Implementation of comprehensive regulatory measures is required to prevent further escalation of the epidemic in SSA, and the World Health Organisation''s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) provides excellent opportunities in this regard. The African nations recognised this in pressing unanimously for a comprehensive treaty while simultaneously acknowledging the need to find an alternative income for countries dependent on tobacco farming, notably Zimbabwe and Malawi.2,3 Tobacco farming represents a unique dimension to the tobacco control debate in SSA, and previous analyses of tobacco industry documents suggest that the tobacco industry has attempted to hijack such debates by presenting tobacco control as a “first world” concern that would lead to economic destabilisation and exacerbate poverty and malnutrition among tobacco‐growing countries.4 By contrast, a growing body of evidence suggests that tobacco farmers face considerable financial and health risks from growing tobacco.5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12As African nations seek to implement the provisions of the FCTC, tobacco control legislation will have to be developed and enacted, providing opportunities for the tobacco industry to influence policy. The fact that Kenya has signed and ratified the FCTC13 while (as detailed below) efforts to implement legislation consistent with the treaty have been unsuccessful amid persistent reports of BAT influence14 highlights the possible barriers. Hence, there is an urgent need to understand the tobacco control policy environment in Africa, including the relationships between tobacco farmers and TTCs, which are clearly integral to this. However, there remains a dearth of research in this area. This paper seeks to address this gap by examining British American Tobacco''s (BAT) policy influence in Kenya.BAT merits particular attention as it is the dominant player in SSA, with a market share of over 90% in 11 countries.3 The selection of Kenya reflects its significance to BAT''s operations in Africa, the role it seems to have in BAT''s efforts to influence policy regionally15 and the nature of Kenyan tobacco politics.After an introduction to the origins and character of BAT''s political influence in Kenya and an overview of recent tobacco control debates in the country, this paper uses a case study of the company''s response to an emergent competitor, Mastermind Tobacco Kenya (referred to in the documents as MTK or MTCo), to examine BAT''s influence on policymaking. The paper therefore aims to shed important light on issues critical to the development of tobacco control across SSA. 相似文献Design: Population based, cross sectional survey.
Setting: Ontario, Canada.
Subjects: Adult population (n = 1607).
Main outcome measures: Eight different facets of tobacco industry denormalisation were assessed. A denormalisation scale was developed to examine predictors of attitudes supportive of tobacco industry denormalisation, using bivariate and multivariate analyses.
Results: Attitudes to the eight facets of tobacco industry denormalisation varied widely. More than half of the respondents supported regulating tobacco as a hazardous product, fining the tobacco industry for earnings from underage smoking, and suing tobacco companies for health care costs caused by tobacco. Majorities also thought that the tobacco industry is dishonest and that cigarettes are too dangerous to be sold at all. Fewer than half of the respondents thought that the tobacco industry is mostly or completely responsible for the health problems smokers have because of smoking and that tobacco companies should be sued for taxes lost from smuggling. In particular, less than a quarter thought that the tobacco industry is most responsible for young people starting to smoke. Non-smoking, knowledge about health effects caused by tobacco, and support for the role of government in health promotion were independent predictors of support for tobacco industry denormalisation.
Conclusions: Although Ontarians are ambivalent toward tobacco industry denormalisation, they are supportive of some measures. Mass media programmes aimed at increasing support for tobacco industry denormalisation and continued monitoring of public attitudes toward this strategy are needed.
相似文献Design: Information was collected from internal tobacco industry documents, court documents, newspapers, and interviews with health advocates and elected officials.
Results: The creation of MPAAT as an independent foundation did not insulate it from attacks by tobacco industry allies. During 2001–2002, MPAAT was repeatedly attacked by Attorney General Mike Hatch and major media, using standard tobacco industry rhetoric. This strategy of attack and demands for information were reminiscent of previous attacks on Minnesota's Plan for Nonsmoking and Health and the American Stop Smoking Intervention Study (ASSIST). MPAAT was ultimately forced to restructure its programme to abandon effective community norm change interventions around smoke-free policies and replace them with less effective individual cessation interventions. Neither MPAAT nor other health advocates mounted an effective public response to these attacks, instead relying on the insider strategy of responding in court.
Conclusion: It is not possible to avoid attacks by the tobacco industry or its political allies. Like programmes administered by government agencies, tobacco control foundations must be prepared for these attacks, including a proactive plan to educate the public about the principles of community based tobacco control. Public health advocates also need to be willing to take prompt action to defend these programmes and hold public officials who attack tobacco control programmes accountable for their actions.
相似文献Objectives
To understand the evolution of 20 years of tobacco industry strategies to undermine federal restrictions of smoking on aircraft in the United States.Design
We searched and analysed internal tobacco industry records, public documents, and other related research.Results
The industry viewed these restrictions as a serious threat to the social acceptability of smoking. Its initial efforts included covert letter‐writing campaigns and lobbying of the airline industry, but with the emergence of proposals to ban smoking, the tobacco companies engaged in ever increasing efforts to forestall further restrictions. Tactics to dominate the public record became especially rigorous. The industry launched an aggressive public relations campaign that began with the promotion of industry sponsored petition drives and public opinion surveys. Results from polling research that produced findings contrary to the industry''s position were suppressed. In order to demonstrate smoker outrage against a ban, later efforts included the sponsorship of smokers'' rights and other front groups. Congressional allies and industry consultants sought to discredit the science underlying proposals to ban smoking and individual tobacco companies conducted their own cabin air quality research. Faced with the potential of a ban on all domestic flights, the industry sought to intimidate an air carrier and a prominent policymaker. Despite the intensification of tactics over time, including mobilisation of an army of lobbyists and Congressional allies, the tobacco industry was ultimately defeated.Conclusions
Our longitudinal analysis provides insights into how and when the industry changed its plans and provides public health advocates with potential counterstrategies. 相似文献Methods: Tobacco industry documents, which have been publicly available on the internet as a result of litigation in the USA, were analysed. Documents were sought by Finland and by names of organisations and tobacco control activists. Documents were accessed and assessed between September 2000 and November 2002. Tactics of the tobacco industry activities were categorised as presented by Saloojee and Dagli.
Results: The international tobacco companies utilised similar strategies in Finland as in other industrial markets to fight tobacco control and legislation, the health advocacy movement, and litigation. These activities slowed down the development and implementation of the Tobacco Act in Finland. However, despite the extensive pressure, the industry was not able to prevent the most progressive tobacco legislation in Europe from being passed and coming into force in Finland in 1977 and in 1995.
Conclusion: Denying the health hazards caused by tobacco—despite indisputable scientific evidence—decreased the credibility of the tobacco industry. Strategy of denial was falsely chosen, as health advocacy groups were active both in society and the parliamentary system. The strong influence of the tobacco industry may have in fact increased the visibility of tobacco control in Finland as the litigation process was also drawing attention to negative health effects of tobacco. Therefore the tobacco industry did not manage to convince public opinion. However, the tobacco industry did obtain experience in Finland in how to object to tobacco control measures.
相似文献Data sources: Internal Philip Morris documents released as part of the Master Settlement Agreement.
Methods: Searches of the Legacy Tobacco Documents Library (http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu) beginning with such terms as "FDA" and "regulatory strategy" and expanding to include relevant new terms.
Results: Philip Morris's support for government regulation of tobacco is part of a broader effort to address its negative public image, which has a damaging impact on the company's stock price, political influence, and employee morale. Through regulation, the company seeks to enhance its legitimacy, redefine itself as socially responsible, and alter the litigation environment. Whereas health advocates frame tobacco use as a public health policy issue, Philip Morris's regulatory efforts focus on framing tobacco use as an individual choice by informed adults to use a risky product. This framing allows Philip Morris to portray itself as a reasonable and responsible manufacturer and marketer of risky products.
Conclusions: Philip Morris's ability to improve its image through support of FDA regulation may undermine tobacco control efforts aimed at delegitimising the tobacco industry. It may also create the impression that Philip Morris's products are being made safer and ultimately protect the company from litigation. While strong regulation of tobacco products and promotion remain critical public health goals, previous experiences with tobacco regulation show that caution may be warranted.
相似文献Data sources: Publicly available tobacco industry documents housed in Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA; Guilford, UK; on-line document websites; and telephone interviews with informed parties.
Study selection: Those documents determined to be relevant to the companies' campaigns against the 8th World Conference on Tobacco or Health.
Data extraction: Revision of chapter VIII of the July 2000 WHO report by a committee of experts, entitled: Tobacco company strategies to undermine tobacco control activities at the World Health Organization: report of the committee of experts on tobacco industry documents.
Data synthesis: Internal documents describe proposed media and science orientated campaigns developed by BAT, Philip Morris, and their consultants to divert attention away from the conference.
Results and conclusion: This work shows that the tobacco industry has the resources and vested interest to combat perceived threats in its regional operating markets, in this case its Latin American market. It is important for the worldwide public heath community to become aware of the numerous ways in which the tobacco industry and its front groups can work against international tobacco control meetings, even including the manipulation of or working with other public health groups to oppose tobacco control efforts. Future world conference planners and participants should be aware that the tobacco industry is likely to continue to employ such methodology. There is no reason to think that the industry is paying less attention to such conferences in the present or future. Rather, it is likely the industry will adopt and expand strategies that were successful while abandoning those that were not effective. Required disclosure of financial support by all participants at all tobacco scientific conferences is recommended. For the tobacco control community, we also recommend careful coalition building and networking with other public health groups on the ways tobacco is implicated in other public health issues.
相似文献Design: A qualitative analysis of all tobacco industry documents regarding coumarin since the 1950s from the 1998 US Master Settlement Agreement and subsequent legal settlements. Additional data were collected from newspaper reports, general internet search engines, journal articles, scholarly reports, court cases, statutes, regulations, and informal correspondence with tobacco control experts in Norway.
Main outcome measure: An overview, summary, and analysis of all documents related to coumarin.
Results: In the USA from 1954 until 1985 when coumarin was reportedly removed from domestic cigarettes, but not from pipe tobacco until 1996, and not at all from imported Indian bidi cigarettes, regulatory efforts were stymied. In Norway, from 1973 to the present, the tobacco industry has never disclosed whether its tobacco products contain coumarin. In both the USA and Norway, the extreme delay and lack of vigorous evidence gathering and significant remedies were caused by tobacco industry assertions that revealing tobacco additives was a violation of trade secrets, and by weak regulatory authority and efforts to regulate coumarin.
Conclusion: Vigorous and expeditious regulatory investigations and remedies for harmful additives in tobacco, such as coumarin, can protect the public health. Astute insider and outsider political advocacy by health advocates is required to hold elected officials and civil servants publicly accountable for failing to enact disclosure laws and to engage in effective regulatory efforts.
相似文献