Search

BACKGROUND: Improving social circumstances (eg, an increase in income, finding a job or moving into a good neighbourhood) may reduce tobacco use, but robust evidence on the effects of such improvements is scarce. Accordingly we investigated the link between changing social circumstances and changing tobacco smoking using repeated measures data. METHODS: 15 000 adults with at least two observations over three waves (each 2 years apart) of a panel study had data on smoking status, family, labour force, income and deprivation (both neighbourhood and individual). Fixed effects regression modelling was used. FINDINGS: The odds of smoking increased 1.42-fold (95% CI 1.16 to 1.74) for a one log-unit increase in personal income among 15-24-year-olds, but there was no association of increased smoking with an increase in income among 25+ year olds. Moving out of a family nucleus, increasing neighbourhood deprivation (eg, 1.83-fold (95% CI 1.18 to 2.83) increased odds of smoking for moving from least to most deprived quintile of neighbourhoods), increasing personal deprivation and moving into employment were all associated with increased odds of smoking. The number of cigarettes smoked a day changed little with changing social circumstances. INTERPRETATION: Worsening social circumstances over the short run are generally associated with higher smoking risk. However, there were counter examples: for instance, decreasing personal income among young people was associated with decreased odds of smoking, a finding consistent with income elasticity of demand (the less one's income, the less one can consume). This paper suggests that improving social circumstances is not always pro-health over the short run; a more nuanced approach to the social determinants of health is required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and aims Adolescents represent the next generation and have the greatest amount to gain from the tobacco endgame. They will provide the future momentum to achieve the tobacco endgame, thus it is important that their views on interventions are monitored. We examined support among 14-15-year-old New Zealanders for tobacco endgame goals and measures, and trends in this support from 2009 to 2012. Methods This study used data from an annual survey of over 25 000 Year 10 students (14-15 year olds) undertaken by Action on Smoking and Health New Zealand. We assessed support for five tobacco control goals and measures: living in a smoke-free country; having fewer tobacco retail outlets; not selling tobacco in 10 years' time; implementing outdoor smoking bans; and raising the price of tobacco. Results Support for living in a smoke-free country was 59%, while support for a ban on all tobacco sales in 10 years' time was 57% in the most recent survey year. Most respondents supported each of the tobacco control measures and gave strongest support to having fewer places where tobacco could be sold (71% in 2012). Support for the other two tobacco control measures in the most recent year ranged from 59% to 64% and had increased over time, in most cases significantly. Support was strongest among non-smokers and declined as participants' smoking frequency increased. Conclusions Young people support New Zealand's smoke-free goal and interventions that could help achieve it; this evidence should galvanise policy action, which remains out of step with public opinion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Evidence that exposure to tobacco 'powerwalls' increases young people's susceptibility to smoking has led many countries to require the removal of these displays. Despite this important step, tobacco remains widely available and policy action appears to have stalled. Methods We conducted an online survey of 364 smokers and 402 non-smokers aged 18 years and above, who were sampled from a commercial internet panel in January 2013. Results Six months after the removal of all tobacco products from open display in New Zealand retail outlets, strong support for the new law exists. Although daily smokers were less supportive than other groups, smokers intending to quit within the next 6 months were more likely than not to believe the law would facilitate quitting. Irrespective of their smoking status, respondents supported not selling tobacco products within 500 m of a school, and requiring tobacco retailers to sell nicotine replacement therapy products. Conclusions Public support for more progressive 'endgame' retail measures could catalyse policy action which, in turn, could offer greater protection to young people and accelerate declines in smoking prevalence. Mandatory tobacco-free retail zones around schools, and requiring stores selling tobacco to stock cessation products received strong support, even among daily smokers; both measures would reduce youth exposure to tobacco while providing smokers with better access to cessation aids. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The objectives of the present work were to (a) develop a relatively simple single-observer method for data collection on cigarette butt discarding; and (b) quantify cigarette butt discarding behaviour in city streets. Methods: A method was developed, piloted and refined (with interobserver assessment). Cigarette butt discarding was systematically observed by a single data collector while walking a continuous circuit of busy downtown streets in a capital city (Wellington, New Zealand). Results: The final method appeared feasible in this setting and seemed efficient (at 5.5 discarding events observed per hour). A clear majority (76.7%; 95% CI 70.8 to 82.0%) of the 219 smokers observed littered their cigarette butts. Butt littering was more common for those who did not extinguish their cigarette (94.4% vs 4.5%, p=0.003). Butt littering was more common in the evening versus lunchtime periods of observation (85.8% vs 68.1%, p=0.002, logistic regression analysis). Overall, most smokers (73.5%) did not extinguish their butts and some placed lit butts in bins (constituting a risk of bin fires). The context for this littering was a high density of rubbish bins on this circuit with a mean of 3.5 bins being in view and with a bin every 24 m on average. Conclusions: Butt littering behaviour appears to be the norm among smokers in this urban setting, even though rubbish bins were ubiquitous. One solution is stronger enforcement of littering laws. Nevertheless, in a society with a national smokefree goal (by year 2025 for New Zealand), it would probably be more logical and cost effective to move to smokefree policies for major city streets, which are used in a number of jurisdictions internationally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]