Clear The Air News Tobacco Blog Rotating Header Image

Papers

CIGARETTE FILTERS MAY INCREASE LUNG CANCER RISK

A study’s authors argue that tiny ventilation holes in virtually all cigarettes sold today are creating a new health risk.

http://ewn.co.za/2017/05/23/cigarette-filters-may-increase-lung-cancer-risk

Cigarette filters, introduced decades ago to reduce the amount of tar smokers inhale, also alter other properties of smoke and smoking in a way that raises the risk of lung cancer, researchers say.

In a review of research on changes in lung cancer rates, and changes in the types of lung cancer that are most common, the study authors argue that tiny ventilation holes in virtually all cigarettes sold today are creating a new health risk.

“The design of cigarette filters that have ventilation can make the cigarettes even more dangerous, because those holes can change how the tobacco burns, allow smokers to inhale more smoke and to think that the smoke is safer because it is smoother,” senior author Dr. Peter D. Shields from The Ohio State University’s Wexner Medical Center in Columbus told Reuters Health by email.

“This applies to all cigarettes, because almost all the cigarettes on the market have the holes, not just the ones that used to be called lights and ultra-lights,” he noted.

Although rates of lung cancer in the population have fallen with declines in smoking overall, rates of lung cancer among smokers have risen significantly, the researchers point out. And the type of lung cancer associated with smoking has also shifted since the 1950s.

Rates of adenocarcinoma of the lung, the lung cancer most associated with smoking, have more than quadrupled in men and increased eight-fold in women along with changes in the design and composition of cigarettes since the 1950s, the researchers write.

Shields and his team review the evidence linking cigarette filter ventilation to these increased rates of lung cancer in a report online 22 May in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

Filter ventilation reduces the amount of tar in the cigarette smoke when tested on smoking machines, but the increased ventilation and slower tobacco burn result in more puffs per cigarette and more toxic cancer-causing chemicals being inhaled by smokers, they write.

“The use of the ventilation holes yields lower tar only on a machine,” Shields said. “Machines have nothing to do with actual exposures in humans. The holes let them actually inhale more smoke with more cancer-causing agents.”

Because of the claims of lower tar content, though, smokers develop the false belief that a lower tar cigarette is a healthier cigarette, Shields’ team writes.

Increased filter ventilation also results in smaller particle size, allowing more smoke to reach vulnerable parts of the lung.

Moreover, even though machine-measured tar and nicotine levels have decreased over time, there has been no appreciable change in daily nicotine intake among smokers over the past 25 years, they write.

“The evidence shows that more modern cigarettes are more risky for lung cancer,” Shields said. “There are reasons in addition to the holes that also can contribute to the increasing risk, but one does not preclude the other.”

Cigarette designs could and should be regulated to address all the possible reasons, Shields said.

“The holes have no health benefits; they serve no health purpose,” he explained. “They do not lower tar delivery to people. So, if they have the potential harm, the FDA can act, even if the science is not perfect. The FDA can require cigarette manufacturers to make filters without the holes. This is easy and they are doing it for some brands already.”

Having filters may indeed be safer, Shields clarified. “This study is about the holes on the filters. We are not saying to remove filters, only to change their designs by removing the holes on the filters.”

“The FDA now has the authority to require the elimination of filter ventilation, as ventilation does not serve any public health purpose and instead provides a false promise of reduced risk,” the study team concludes.

“This single action for banning filter ventilation by the FDA is scientifically justified, and within its mandate to improve the public health,” they write.

There is some precedent for the ban Shields and colleagues propose, Jonathan M. Samet and Lilit Aladadyan, both from the Tobacco Center of Regulatory Science at the Keck School of Medicine of USC and the USC Institute for Global Health in Los Angeles, write in an accompanying editorial.

The evidence gathered by Shields’ team seems strong enough to support FDA action, and “given a lack of evidence for countervailing harms, ending filter ventilation could be a ‘no regrets’ action that would benefit public health,” they write.

Rise in Lung Adenocarcinoma Linked to ‘Light’ Cigarette Use

A new study shows that so-called “light” cigarettes have no health benefits to smokers and have likely contributed to the rise of a certain form of lung cancer that occurs deep in the lungs.

http://journals.lww.com/oncology-times/blog/onlinefirst/pages/post.aspx?PostID=1618

For this new study, researchers at The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center–Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute (OSUCCC–James) and five other universities/cancer centers examined why the most common type of lung cancer, called adenocarcinoma, has increased over the past 50 years, rather than decreasing as smokers have been able to quit. Other types of lung cancer have been decreasing in relationship to fewer people smoking, but not lung adenocarcinoma. Because of this, lung adenocarcinoma is now the most common type of lung cancer.

Results confirm what tobacco-control researchers have suspected for years: There is no health benefit to high-ventilation (light) cigarettes–long marketed by the tobacco industry as a “healthier” option–and these cigarettes have actually caused more harm. Holes in cigarette filters were introduced 50 years ago and were critical to claims for low-tar cigarettes.

“This was done to fool smokers and the public health community into thinking that they actually were safer,” said Peter Shields, MD, Deputy Director of the OSUCCC–James and a lung medical oncologist. “Our data suggests a clear relationship between the addition of ventilation holes to cigarettes and increasing rates of lung adenocarcinoma seen over the past 20 years. What is especially concerning is that these holes are still added to virtually all cigarettes that are smoked today.”

The FDA was given the authority to regulate the manufacture, distribution, and marketing of tobacco products through the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act in 2009. Current regulations ban tobacco companies from labeling and marketing cigarettes as “low tar” or “light.” Study authors, however, say that given this new data, the FDA should take immediate action to regulate the use of the ventilation holes, up to and including a complete ban of the holes.

“The FDA has a public health obligation to take immediate regulatory action to eliminate the use of ventilation holes on cigarettes,” added Shields. “It is a somewhat complicated process to enact such regulations, but there is more than enough data to start the process. We believe that such an action would drive down the use and toxicity of conventional cigarettes, and drive smokers to either quit or use less harmful products. There are some open questions about unintended consequences for enacting a ban, which provides for an important research agenda.”

A team made up of lung oncology, public health, and tobacco regulation researchers conducted a comprehensive, multi-faceted analysis of existing literature that included chemistry and toxicology studies, human clinical trials and epidemiological studies of both smoking behavior and cancer risk. They studied scientific publications in the peer-reviewed literature and internal tobacco company documents.

Researchers hypothesized that the higher incidence rates of lung adenocarcinoma were attributable to the filter ventilation holes, which allow smokers to inhale more smoke that also has higher levels of carcinogens, mutagens and other toxins.

“The filter ventilation holes change how the tobacco is burned, producing more carcinogens, which then also allows the smoke to reach the deeper parts of the lung where adenocarcinomas more frequently occur,” explained Shields.

To date, all the scientific evidence involves the adverse impact of adding ventilation, but not removing it. Additional research is needed to confirm that the addictiveness of the cigarette or toxic exposures from cigarettes would not increase with elimination of the ventilation holes. The OSUCCC–James and researchers at the University of Minnesota, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Virginia Tech, Harvard University and Medical University of South Carolina are conducting additional research to reconcile human biomarkers studies and smoke distribution/exposure in the lung.

The Hole Story: Ventilated Filters Make Smoking More Deadly

The ventilation systems built into cigarette filters in the mid-1960s to reduce tar and make smoking ‘smoother’ and ‘safer’ were responsible for the paradoxical rise in rates of lung adenocarcinoma — even as rates of other lung cancer subtypes dropped along with the number of smokers. These conclusions were in the 2014 US Surgeon General’s report on the health consequences of smoking.

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/880383

Now, two new weight-of-evidence reviews have pinpointed 25 “causation analysis evidence blocks” that could support an outright ban of filter ventilation, according to lead author, Peter G. Shields, MD, deputy director of the Comprehensive Cancer Center, the Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, in Columbus, and colleagues.

The review found that between the 1960s and the 1980s, the health risks associated with smoking jumped almost 2-fold in men and increased 10-fold in female smokers. At the same time, the relative risks for adenocarcinomas rocketed from 4.6 to 19.0 in men and from 1.5 to 8.1 in women — even though the risks for other lung cancer subtypes didn’t increase. “Thus, there was a paradoxical increase for lung adenocarcinomas while squamous cell cancers decreased with decreased smoking rates,” the review authors write.

“The analysis strongly suggests that filter ventilation has contributed to the rise in lung adenocarcinomas among smokers,” they say in a report published online May 22 in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

“Based on these weight-of-evidence reviews, the FDA [Food and Drug Administration] should embark on a regulatory process of data evaluation and consider regulation(s) for the use of ventilation in filters, up to and including a ban on their use,” the authors conclude.

“The prime point is to rally the troops to get the FDA to focus on this,” Dr Shields told Medscape Medical News. “To me, this is a policy paper. Physicians can’t be silent.”

This is a policy paper. Physicians can’t be silent. Peter D. Shields

Ventilation holes in filters are now found in nearly every brand of cigarettes, and they make smoking even more deadly, Dr Shields elaborated in an interview.

The tiny filter holes slow down tobacco combustion, giving smokers more puffs per cigarette but also allowing more toxic constituents to form, increasing the mutagenicity of the smoke, the review authors explain. To get the requisite nicotine hit from a cigarette with a ventilated filter, a smoker must also inhale more deeply, drawing smoke farther into the lungs and exposing cells vulnerable to adenocarcinoma.

Increasing amounts of tobacco-specific nitrosamines can also be found in new blended tobaccos that provide a “smoother” smoking experience, albeit with more carcinogens, Dr Shields commented. This makes smoking more dangerous than ever before, and patients need to know this, he emphasized.

“As part of your risk counseling, tell patients who smoke that the cigarettes today are more deadly than the cigarettes from 30 or 40 years ago. We need to take away smokers’ perception that any cigarette is safe. It’s like putting your head in a chimney,” Dr Shields said.

Increased Risk for Adenocarcinoma

In an accompanying editorial, Jonathan M. Samet, MD, and Lilit Aladadyan, MS, MPH, say that ending filter ventilation “could be a ‘no regrets’ action that would benefit public health.”

Dr Samet is professor and Flora L. Thornton Chair for the Department of Preventive Medicine at the Keck School of Medicine at the University of Southern California (USC) in Los Angeles, and Aladadyan is center director for the USC Tobacco Center of Regulatory Science.

The editorialists note the review looked at a “large and somewhat poorly circumscribed body of literature” and that the evidentiary threshold required for the FDA to take action is not supported by any record of precedents.

However, they also say that the review’s conclusion about the contribution of filter ventilation to rising rates of lung adenocarcinoma in smokers “is well justified” and supports “the indictment of filter ventilation as increasing risk for adenocarcinoma.”

Filter ventilation was originally designed to lower smoking machine tar yields in so-called light cigarettes marketed primarily to women as a “healthier” alternative to regular cigarettes. “This was done to fool smokers and the public health community into thinking that they actually were safer,” Dr Shields said in a statement.

In 2009, the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act gave the FDA authority to ban tobacco companies from labeling and marketing cigarettes as “low tar” or “light.”

Dr Shields has served as an expert in class action suits against tobacco companies marketing light cigarettes as a healthier alternative. He’s also heard lawyers for Big Tobacco say peer-reviewed evidence was needed. “From our perspective, there is more than enough data to start the process and it’s time for regulation,” he said. “We believe that such an action would drive down the use and toxicity of conventional cigarettes and drive smokers to either quit or use less harmful products. There are some open questions about unintended consequences for enacting a ban, which provides for an important research agenda.”

Future clinical trials could assess smokers switching to filtered cigarettes without ventilation, using a panel of biomarkers to measure exposure to carcinogens and lung toxicants, markers of oxidative damage and inflammation in lung, blood, or/and urine, the review authors suggest. At present, human exposure biomarker studies do not appear to support a causal relationship, they didn’t measure exposure in the lung or “utilize known biomarkers of harm,” they note.

Smokers’ perceptions, and transition to alternate products, should also be assessed, looking at differences by race and ethnicity, sex, age, and vulnerable populations. The effect of filter ventilation on the risk for other diseases, such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, could also be studied, they say.

This study was supported by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health and the FDA Center for Tobacco Products. Dr Shields and coauthors Neal L. Benowitz, MD, and Theodore M. Brasky, PhD, disclose they have served as consultants and expert witnesses in litigation against tobacco companies. Coauthor K. Michael Cummings, PhD, MPH, declares a relationship with Pfizer Inc. The study authors and editorialists have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

Cigarette Filter Ventilation and its Relationship to Increasing Rates of Lung Adenocarcinoma

https://academic.oup.com/jnci/article-abstract/109/12/djx075/3836090/Cigarette-Filter-Ventilation-and-its-Relationship?redirectedFrom=fulltext

The 2014 Surgeon General’s Report on smoking and health concluded that changing cigarette designs have caused an increase in lung adenocarcinomas, implicating cigarette filter ventilation that lowers smoking machine tar yields. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) now has the authority to regulate cigarette design if doing so would improve public health. To support a potential regulatory action, two weight-of-evidence reviews were applied for causally relating filter ventilation to lung adenocarcinoma. Published scientific literature (3284 citations) and internal tobacco company documents contributed to causation analysis evidence blocks and the identification of research gaps. Filter ventilation was adopted in the mid-1960s and was initially equated with making a cigarette safer. Since then, lung adenocarcinoma rates paradoxically increased relative to other lung cancer subtypes. Filter ventilation 1) alters tobacco combustion, increasing smoke toxicants; 2) allows for elasticity of use so that smokers inhale more smoke to maintain their nicotine intake; and 3) causes a false perception of lower health risk from “lighter” smoke. Seemingly not supportive of a causal relationship is that human exposure biomarker studies indicate no reduction in exposure, but these do not measure exposure in the lung or utilize known biomarkers of harm. Altered puffing and inhalation may make smoke available to lung cells prone to adenocarcinomas. The analysis strongly suggests that filter ventilation has contributed to the rise in lung adenocarcinomas among smokers. Thus, the FDA should consider regulating its use, up to and including a ban. Herein, we propose a research agenda to support such an effort.

How e-cigarette ads might sway teens to try tobacco products

When non-smoking teens see ads for e-cigarettes, and are curious about the products advertised, perhaps even identifying with a favorite brand, they might also be more susceptible to taking up cigarettes, a new study finds.

http://www.businessinsider.com/r-how-e-cigarette-ads-might-sway-teens-to-try-tobacco-products-2017-5?IR=T

For the study, researchers showed a nationally representative sample of 10,751 U.S. teens advertisements for a wide variety of tobacco products including traditional cigarettes, cigars, chewing tobacco and e-cigarettes. Overall, the teens were more receptive to ads for e-cigarettes than other products and television ads were most likely to prompt brand recall.

“The imagery used by tobacco companies focuses on the aspirations of young people including having fun, being independent, sophisticated, socially accepted, popular, etc.,” said lead study author John Pierce of the University of California, San Diego.

“Those who have an emotive response to these aspirational images are more likely to see use of the product as a way to achieve their aspirations,” Pierce said by email. “It is hypothesized that in adolescents who are committed never smokers, recall of tobacco product advertising will be associated with first movement toward product use within a one-year time frame.”

Big U.S. tobacco companies are all developing e-cigarettes, battery-powered gadgets with a heating element that turns liquid nicotine and flavorings into a cloud of vapor that users inhale.

For the past decade, public health experts have debated whether the devices might help with smoking cessation or at least be a safer alternative to smoking traditional combustible cigarettes, or whether they might lure a new generation into nicotine addiction.

Fewer teens smoke today than a generation ago, but declines in traditional cigarette use have stalled and e-cigarettes have become increasingly popular in recent years. As of 2015, an estimated 16 percent of U.S. high school students used e-cigarettes, compared with about 9 percent for traditional cigarettes, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

While television ads for traditional cigarettes have been illegal in the U.S. for decades, e-cigarette ads are currently allowed on TV, researchers note in Pediatrics.

In the study, Pierce and his colleagues examined how receptive or curious non-smoking teens were about different tobacco products and whether they had a favorite image or advertisement. They also looked at how susceptible the adolescents might be to trying tobacco products based on their ability to recall specific brands they saw in the ads.

The researchers showed each study participant a random selection of five ads each for cigarettes, e-cigarettes smokeless tobacco and cigars based on 959 different promotions that had recently been used to advertise these products.

Overall, 41 percent of the younger teens in the study and half of older adolescents were receptive to at least one tobacco advertisement, the study found.

Across each age group, teens were most receptive to ads for e-cigarettes, followed by traditional cigarettes and smokeless tobacco.

E-cigarette ads shown on television had the highest recall.

Compared to teens in the study who were not at all receptive to the ads, youth who had the highest level of engagement with the promotions were more than six times more likely to be susceptible to trying tobacco products, the study found.

The study isn’t a controlled experiment designed to prove whether or how ads may directly influence tobacco use.

Another limitation is that researchers didn’t have data to show whether or not teens actually used tobacco products after viewing these ads, the authors note.

Even so, the findings suggest that non-cigarette ads for tobacco-related products may be damaging for adolescent health, Rebecca Collins of Rand Corporation in Santa Monica, California, writes in an accompanying editorial.

“This study provides some very provocative data suggesting that the marketing of e-cigarettes, which is not regulated, might be leading to cigarette smoking among teens,” Collins said by email.

Smoking causes one in ten deaths globally, major new study reveals

Efforts to control tobacco have paid off, says study, but warns tobacco epidemic is far from over, with 6.4m deaths attributed to smoking in 2015 alone

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/apr/05/smoking-causes-one-in-ten-deaths-globally-major-new-study-reveals

One in 10 deaths around the world is caused by smoking, according to a major new study that shows the tobacco epidemic is far from over and that the threat to lives is spreading across the globe.

There were nearly one billion smokers in 2015, in spite of tobacco control policies having been adopted by many countries. That number is expected to rise as the world’s population expands. One in every four men is a smoker and one in 20 women. Their lives are likely to be cut short – smoking is the second biggest risk factor for early death and disability after high blood pressure.

The researchers found there were 6.4m deaths attributed to smoking in 2015, of which half were in just four populous countries – China, India, USA, and Russia.

Major efforts to control tobacco have paid off, according to the study published by the Lancet medical journal. A World Health Organisation treaty in 2005 ratified by 180 countries recommends measures including smoking bans in public places, high taxes in cigarettes and curbs on advertising and marketing.

Between 1990 and 2015, smoking prevalence dropped from 35% to 25% among men and 8% to 5% among women. High income countries and Latin America – especially Brazil which brought in tough curbs on tobacco – achieved the biggest drops in numbers of smokers.

But many countries have made marginal progress since the treaty was agreed, say the authors of the study from the Institute of Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington in the US. And although far more men smoke than women, there have been bigger reductions in the proportions of men smoking also, with minimal changes among women.

Senior author Dr Emmanuela Gakidou said there were 933m daily smokers in 2015, which she called “a very shocking number”. The paper focused only on those who smoke every day. “The toll of tobacco is likely to be much larger if we include occasional smokers and former smokers and people who use other tobacco products like smokeless tobacco. This is on the low end of how important tobacco is,” she told the Guardian.

There is much more that needs to be done, she said. “There is a widespread notion that the war on tobacco has been won but I think our evidence shows that we need renewed and sustained efforts because the toll of smoking in 2015 is much larger than most people would think, so we absolutely have a lot more to do. We need new and improved strategies to do it and a lot of effort and political will.”

Traditionally there have been far fewer women smoking around the world than men, but it was a huge problem for both, she said.

“There are some really worrisome findings – for example in Russia female smoking has increased in the last 25 years significantly. There are also some western European countries where about one in three women are smoking. So it is true globally that a lot fewer women smoke than men but there are some countries where it is a big problem for women,” she said.

Dr Kelly Henning of Bloomberg Philanthropies, which is committed to tobacco control and co-funded the study with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, said: “I think the study highlights the fact that the work is not finished on tobacco. The good news is the decline in daily smoking among men and women … however there are still many smokers in the world and there is still a lot of work to do. I think we have to keep our eye on the issue and really do more.”

Countries with some of the highest death tolls such as China and Indonesia “really don’t need those health problems – they have so many other issues they are trying to address. But tobacco control is critically important in those places,” she said.

“China has more than a million deaths a year from smoking related diseases and China is only beginning to see the effects of their high male smoking rate. That is only one instance of what is expected to become an extremely major epidemic,” she said.

Writing in a linked comment, Professor John Britton from the University of Nottingham said: “Responsibility for this global health disaster lies mainly with the transnational tobacco companies, which clearly hold the value of human life in very different regard to most of the rest of humanity.” British American Tobacco, for instance, sold 665bn cigarettes in 2015 and made a £5.2bn profit.

“Today, the smoking epidemic is being exported from the rich world to low-income and middle-income countries, slipping under the radar while apparently more immediate priorities occupy and absorb scarce available human and financial resources,” he writes. “The epidemic of tobacco deaths will progress inexorably throughout the world until and unless tobacco control is recognised as an immediate priority for development, investment, and research.”

Smoking prevalence and attributable disease burden in 195 countries and territories, 1990–2015

Smoking prevalence and attributable disease burden in 195 countries and territories, 1990–2015: a systematic analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015

http://thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(17)30819-X/fulltext?elsca1=tlpr

Summary

Background

The scale-up of tobacco control, especially after the adoption of the Framework Convention for Tobacco Control, is a major public health success story. Nonetheless, smoking remains a leading risk for early death and disability worldwide, and therefore continues to require sustained political commitment. The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) offers a robust platform through which global, regional, and national progress toward achieving smoking-related targets can be assessed.

Methods

We synthesised 2818 data sources with spatiotemporal Gaussian process regression and produced estimates of daily smoking prevalence by sex, age group, and year for 195 countries and territories from 1990 to 2015. We analysed 38 risk-outcome pairs to generate estimates of smoking-attributable mortality and disease burden, as measured by disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs). We then performed a cohort analysis of smoking prevalence by birth-year cohort to better understand temporal age patterns in smoking. We also did a decomposition analysis, in which we parsed out changes in all-cause smoking-attributable DALYs due to changes in population growth, population ageing, smoking prevalence, and risk-deleted DALY rates. Finally, we explored results by level of development using the Socio-demographic Index (SDI).

Findings

Worldwide, the age-standardised prevalence of daily smoking was 25·0% (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 24·2–25·7) for men and 5·4% (5·1–5·7) for women, representing 28·4% (25·8–31·1) and 34·4% (29·4–38·6) reductions, respectively, since 1990. A greater percentage of countries and territories achieved significant annualised rates of decline in smoking prevalence from 1990 to 2005 than in between 2005 and 2015; however, only four countries had significant annualised increases in smoking prevalence between 2005 and 2015 (Congo [Brazzaville] and Azerbaijan for men and Kuwait and Timor-Leste for women). In 2015, 11·5% of global deaths (6·4 million [95% UI 5·7–7·0 million]) were attributable to smoking worldwide, of which 52·2% took place in four countries (China, India, the USA, and Russia). Smoking was ranked among the five leading risk factors by DALYs in 109 countries and territories in 2015, rising from 88 geographies in 1990. In terms of birth cohorts, male smoking prevalence followed similar age patterns across levels of SDI, whereas much more heterogeneity was found in age patterns for female smokers by level of development. While smoking prevalence and risk-deleted DALY rates mostly decreased by sex and SDI quintile, population growth, population ageing, or a combination of both, drove rises in overall smoking-attributable DALYs in low-SDI to middle-SDI geographies between 2005 and 2015.

Interpretation

The pace of progress in reducing smoking prevalence has been heterogeneous across geographies, development status, and sex, and as highlighted by more recent trends, maintaining past rates of decline should not be taken for granted, especially in women and in low-SDI to middle-SDI countries. Beyond the effect of the tobacco industry and societal mores, a crucial challenge facing tobacco control initiatives is that demographic forces are poised to heighten smoking’s global toll, unless progress in preventing initiation and promoting cessation can be substantially accelerated. Greater success in tobacco control is possible but requires effective, comprehensive, and adequately implemented and enforced policies, which might in turn require global and national levels of political commitment beyond what has been achieved during the past 25 years.

Funding

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and Bloomberg Philanthropies.

Smoking prevalence and attributable disease burden in 195 countries and territories, 1990–2015

Smoking prevalence and attributable disease burden in 195 countries and territories, 1990–2015: a systematic analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015

http://thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(17)30819-X/abstract

Summary

Background

The scale-up of tobacco control, especially after the adoption of the Framework Convention for Tobacco Control, is a major public health success story. Nonetheless, smoking remains a leading risk for early death and disability worldwide, and therefore continues to require sustained political commitment. The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) offers a robust platform through which global, regional, and national progress toward achieving smoking-related targets can be assessed.

Methods

We synthesised 2818 data sources with spatiotemporal Gaussian process regression and produced estimates of daily smoking prevalence by sex, age group, and year for 195 countries and territories from 1990 to 2015. We analysed 38 risk-outcome pairs to generate estimates of smoking-attributable mortality and disease burden, as measured by disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs). We then performed a cohort analysis of smoking prevalence by birth-year cohort to better understand temporal age patterns in smoking. We also did a decomposition analysis, in which we parsed out changes in all-cause smoking-attributable DALYs due to changes in population growth, population ageing, smoking prevalence, and risk-deleted DALY rates. Finally, we explored results by level of development using the Socio-demographic Index (SDI).

Findings

Worldwide, the age-standardised prevalence of daily smoking was 25·0% (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 24·2–25·7) for men and 5·4% (5·1–5·7) for women, representing 28·4% (25·8–31·1) and 34·4% (29·4–38·6) reductions, respectively, since 1990. A greater percentage of countries and territories achieved significant annualised rates of decline in smoking prevalence from 1990 to 2005 than in between 2005 and 2015; however, only four countries had significant annualised increases in smoking prevalence between 2005 and 2015 (Congo [Brazzaville] and Azerbaijan for men and Kuwait and Timor-Leste for women). In 2015, 11·5% of global deaths (6·4 million [95% UI 5·7–7·0 million]) were attributable to smoking worldwide, of which 52·2% took place in four countries (China, India, the USA, and Russia). Smoking was ranked among the five leading risk factors by DALYs in 109 countries and territories in 2015, rising from 88 geographies in 1990. In terms of birth cohorts, male smoking prevalence followed similar age patterns across levels of SDI, whereas much more heterogeneity was found in age patterns for female smokers by level of development. While smoking prevalence and risk-deleted DALY rates mostly decreased by sex and SDI quintile, population growth, population ageing, or a combination of both, drove rises in overall smoking-attributable DALYs in low-SDI to middle-SDI geographies between 2005 and 2015.

Interpretation

The pace of progress in reducing smoking prevalence has been heterogeneous across geographies, development status, and sex, and as highlighted by more recent trends, maintaining past rates of decline should not be taken for granted, especially in women and in low-SDI to middle-SDI countries. Beyond the effect of the tobacco industry and societal mores, a crucial challenge facing tobacco control initiatives is that demographic forces are poised to heighten smoking’s global toll, unless progress in preventing initiation and promoting cessation can be substantially accelerated. Greater success in tobacco control is possible but requires effective, comprehensive, and adequately implemented and enforced policies, which might in turn require global and national levels of political commitment beyond what has been achieved during the past 25 years.

Funding

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and Bloomberg Philanthropies.

Graphical health warnings on cigarette packs found effective

A recently completed sample based study done in Bangladesh claims that the health warning labels describing the harmful effects of tobacco products using text and/or pictures are found to be effective.

Health warnings on cigarette packages are among the most prominent sources of information about the harms of smoking and tobacco use.

Indeed, even in high-income countries where millions of dollars are spent on anti-tobacco mass media campaigns, smokers still report getting information about the risks of smoking from cigarette packages almost as much as from television, and much more than from other sources such as print media.

Therefore, in a country such as Bangladesh, where very little information about the harms of tobacco use appears on television and other broadcast media, warning labels on tobacco packages represent an even more important opportunity for informing the public about the harms of tobacco. Given their tremendous reach and frequency of exposure, health warnings are an extremely cost-effective public health intervention compared to other tobacco prevention efforts such as paid mass media advertising – these came out of a sample-based survey.

Findings from the survey revealed, 98.1% of the respondents opined that they supported the current practice of bothside for pictorial/graphical health warnings (GHW) and 77.5% respondent informed that they thought that the current use of GHW of 50% of the cigarette pack for warnings was good enough to demotivate and reduce the use of tobacco products. Considering up to 50% of the cigarette pack, around 89% were supporting this.

The findings revealed – about 72.7% of the respondents reported that they felt very unpleasant to see the pictorial warning on the tobacco packets (74.1% in urban and 72.7% in rural areas). The survey also reported that the pictorial warning was very realistic to 65.6% of the respondents and extremely realistic to 17.0% respondent (18.8% in rural and 15.3% in urban areas).

The psychological impact of GHW on the respondents was also examined. 13.9% of the respondents were extremely worried and 61.7% were very worried to see the pictorial warning on the cigarette package.

In summary, the study found that the graphical health warnings (GHW) were realistic to provide health-related information and are very effective in creating an unpleasant feeling and sense of worriedness among the smokers to aware them regarding the harmful effects of smoking.

A good news that the study uncovered was 75.8% respondents tried to reduce or quit smoking after seeing the pictorial warning on the cigarette packet. The rate is 76.3% in rural and 75.3% in urban areas. 83.5% respondents reported that they tried to reduce or quit smoking habit to see the pictorial warning. 74.8% recommended to include
GHW in Biri, Gul and Jorda.

Moreover, 64.2% respondents recommended that government should take initiative for mass awareness and 85.5% recommended for more visual media (TV) coverage.

FCTC cut smoking 2.5 per cent over 10 years; study

A decade of tobacco control efforts by the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) has reduced the global smoking rate by 2.5 per cent, according to an evaluation by the International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Project.

http://www.tobaccojournal.com/FCTC_cut_smoking_2_5_per_cent_over_10_years_study.54157.0.html

Although the international treaty, an adjunct of the World Health Organisation, has made substantial progress in combatting use of tobacco products, implementation of FCTC measures has fallen short of its objectives, according to the study. “While the progress of WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control has been remarkable, there are still far too many countries where domestication of the treaty and its implementation has fallen short,” said Dr Geoffrey Fong, a study author from the University of Waterloo, Canada. “One important cause of this is the tobacco industry’s influence, particularly in low- and middle-income countries.”

Conducted with assistance from WHO, the study analysed data from 126 countries and determined the smoking rate in those countries declined on average from 24.7 per cent in 2005 to 22 per cent in 2015. FCTC obligates 180 signatory countries to raise tax on tobacco products, create smoke-free public spaces, implement warning labels on packaging, ban advertising and support stop-smoking services.