Search

While cigarette smoking is still a major source of morbidity and mortality, e-cigarette usage is skyrocketing, and the tobacco industry is finding new ways to market nicotine. With updated published research highlighting the dangers of cigarette smoking and now vaping, the industry has been developing new techniques and devices that circumvent this research to hook users on tobacco and nicotine. The FDA allowed Philip Morris International (PMI) to sell their heat not burn tobacco products known as iQOS in 2019. By 2019, 49 countries had permitted the sale of iQOS. This commentary summarizes the recent research on heat not burn cigarettes, also known as heated tobacco products and their effects on public policy. We urge policy makers to consider the research published regarding these new products and prevent the widespread use of these products that will harm public health.

Tobacco-related cancer incidence and mortality and commercial tobacco use have decreased steadily in recent decades, but improvements have not been equitably experienced across population subgroups. A complex interaction across socioecological domains of individual, interpersonal, community/organization, and societal/policy factors influence disparities in tobacco use, treatment, and related health outcomes. NCI's Cancer Center Cessation Initiative (C3I) provides an ideal platform to examine and intervene on multilevel influences across the cancer control continuum to reduce any disproportionate tobacco-related burden and eliminate tobacco-related disparities. The C3I Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) Working Group encourages cancer centers to develop, evaluate, and adopt evidence-based practices regarding DEI for prevention and treatment of commercial tobacco use across the cancer control continuum. This paper highlights how 3 C3I sites intervene to address socioecological influences on tobacco use among racially, ethnically, socioeconomically, and geographically diverse patient subgroups. It then outlines ways in which DEI considerations could be integrated into research with patients with cancer who use tobacco and practices related to standards of cancer care. Incorporating DEI considerations in the pursuit of optimal tobacco treatment could facilitate elimination of inequities in population-level cancer outcomes, spanning the full continuum of cancer care from prevention to survivorship.

The controversy of tobacco harm reduction in the United States persists despite evidence that an important audience of tobacco prevention and control, i.e., the people who use or are likely to use nicotine and tobacco products, are engaging in practices that may be considered harm reduction. Despite this, a significant proportion of the US tobacco control and prevention field continues to be guided by a precept that there is "no safe tobacco," therefore failing to acknowledge practices that may be used to reduce the harms associated with consuming combustible forms of nicotine and tobacco. In this commentary, we argue that ignoring the potential benefits of harm reduction strategies may unintentionally lead to an erosion of trust in tobacco control among some members of the public. Trust in tobacco control as an institution is crucial for the success of tobacco control efforts. To ensure trust, we must return to our basic principles of doing no harm, developing programs that are responsive to people's experiences, and providing resources in assisting people to reduce the harms that may be associated with practices, such as smoking, which adversely affect health. Only by respecting an individual's priorities can we cultivate trust and develop tobacco prevention efforts that are grounded in the realities of people's lives and responsive to their needs.

The use of antiretroviral therapy for people with HIV (PWH) has improved life expectancy. However, PWH now lose more life-years to tobacco use than to HIV infection. Unfortunately, PWH smoke at higher rates and have more difficulty maintaining abstinence than the general population, compounding their risk for chronic disease. In this Commentary, we describe a United States National Cancer Institute-led initiative to address the relative lack of research focused on developing, testing, and implementing smoking cessation interventions for PWH. This initiative supports seven clinical trials designed to systematically test and/or develop and test adaptations of evidence-based smoking cessation interventions for PWH (eg, combination of behavioral and pharmacological). We summarize each project, including setting/recruitment sites, inclusion/exclusion criteria, interventions being tested, and outcomes. This initiative provides critical opportunities for collaboration and data harmonization across projects. The knowledge gained will inform strategies to assist PWH to promote and maintain abstinence, and ensure that these efforts are adaptable and scalable, thereby addressing one of the major threats to the health of PWH. Reducing smoking behavior may be particularly important during the COVID-19 pandemic given that smokers who become infected with SARS-CoV-2 may be at risk for more severe disease.ImplicationsThis Commentary describes a National Cancer Institute-led initiative to advance the science and practice of treating tobacco use among PWH, which is now responsible for more life years lost than HIV. We describe the scope of the problem, the objectives of the initiative, and a summary of the seven funded studies. Harmonization of data across projects will provide information related to treatment mediators and moderators that was not previously possible. Stakeholders interested in tobacco cessation, including researchers, clinicians and public health officials, should be aware of this initiative and the evidence-base it will generate to advance tobacco treatment among this high-risk population.

The battle against tobacco usage is being fought on all fronts. On December 19, 2019, a measure to raise the minimum age to buy tobacco products to 21 from 18 was passed by the United States Congress and signed by President Donald Trump. This instated banning the sale of all tobacco products and electronic cigarettes to anyone in the US under the age of 21. This follows the raising of the age to buy tobacco in California to 21 in 2016. According to the California Tobacco Control Program: in 2016, roughly 10% of high-school students were smoking cigarettes, but by 2018, only 2%. The percentage of retailers selling tobacco to underaged youth dropped dramatically. These data show that the CA Tobacco 21 law was effective in decreasing the obtainability and usage of tobacco by youth. We expect that US Tobacco 21 will be similarly effective in reducing tobacco use by youth leading to less tobacco addiction in the US.

Background: Tobacco growing has been considered a mainstay of Mozambique's economy, but there is a dearth of analysis of the tobacco policy landscape in the country. Methods: Review of government and non-government documents and academic papers addressing Mozambique's tobacco-growing history, the changes in the political economy of tobacco, and health policies addressing tobacco use and prevention of noncommunicable diseases. Results: Despite its tobacco growing and exporting history, the contribution of tobacco to the economy has been in steady decline in the past two decades, including in the areas dedicated to growing. At the same time there has been an increase in multinational control of the tobacco economy. In parallel, Mozambique's commitment to addressing the growing burden of noncommunicable disease and accession to the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control indicate a potential for internal government tensions to balance immediate economic interests with long term health goals. Conclusions: With the decline in tobacco share of the overall economy, Mozambique may be well-positioned to explore alternative, sustainable livelihoods for farmers that grow tobacco, but it must overcome inter-sectoral barriers and advocate for a whole of government approach to address the health and economic impact of tobacco.

Healthcare settings and systems have been slow to adopt and implement many effective cancer prevention and control interventions. Understanding the factors that determine successful implementation is essential to accelerating the translation of effective interventions into practice. Many scholars have studied the determinants of implementation, and much of this research has been guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). The CFIR categorizes implementation determinants at five levels (characteristics of the intervention, inner setting, individual, processes, and outer setting). Of these five levels, determinants at the level of the outer setting are the least developed. Extensive research in fields other than healthcare suggest that determinants at the level of the outer setting (e.g., funding streams, contracting practices, and public policy) play a central role in shaping when and how an organization implements new structures and practices. Thus, a more comprehensive understanding of outer-setting determinants is critical to efforts to accelerate the implementation of effective cancer control interventions. The Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network (CPCRN) created a cross-center workgroup to review organizational theories and begin to contribute to the creation of a future framework of constructs related to outer setting determinants. In this paper, we report findings from the review of three organizational theories: Institutional Theory, Transaction Cost Economics, and Contingency Theory. To demonstrate the applicability of this work to implementation science and practice, we have applied findings to three case studies of CPCRN researchers' efforts to implement colorectal cancer screening interventions in Federally Qualified Health Centers.

BackgroundCigarette packs are a form of advertising that distributes brand information wherever smokers go. In the 21st century, tobacco companies began using onserts on cigarette packs to communicate new advertising messages to smokers.MethodsWe reviewed tobacco industry documents dated 1926 to 2017 to identify how the tobacco industry developed and used onserts in marketing and to serve the industry's political and legal objectives.ResultsOnserts added to cigarette packs became a more cost-effective way for brands to market in the year 2000. Manufacturers then began studying them, finding that new messages were appealing, while repeated messages were ignored. By 2005, tobacco companies were using onserts to effectively communicate about new tobacco products and packaging changes. They also used repeated 'corporate responsibility' messages that were, according to the industry's own research, likely to be ignored.ConclusionsTobacco companies have expanded on cigarette pack-based advertising. Twenty-first century onserts simultaneously seek to increase sales using materials that are novel, attractive and provide independent value, while undercutting public health messages about the risks of tobacco use using materials that repeat over time and are comparatively unattractive. Health authorities can use this industry research to mandate onserts to communicate effective health messages.

BackgroundIn response to a changing regulatory and consumer landscape, tobacco companies developed new strategies to promote cigarettes and smoking. We examined one of these strategies: to fund and conduct scientific research related to potential benefits of nicotine, and to use their findings to promote nicotine.MethodsQualitative analysis of previously secret tobacco industry documents from the Truth (formerly Legacy) Tobacco Documents Library (industrydocuments.library.ucsf.edu/tobacco), triangulated with data from other sources, including the online search engine Google, from the 1970s to December 2017.ResultsAfter publication of the 1988 Surgeon General's report on nicotine addiction, tobacco companies (particularly RJ Reynolds) intensified efforts to promote the benefits of nicotine while downplaying its addictiveness and health risks. Activities included building relationships with academic institutions and funding scientific studies of the benefits of nicotine on cognition and other performance areas through intramural and extramural programmes. Companies then promoted their research findings through public relations campaigns, often minimising nicotine's health risks by comparing it to caffeine or coffee. These comparisons appeared in highly publicised scientific meetings and interviews with the press. Nicotine-positive messages reappeared in the popular press and on some company websites in the 2010s.ConclusionsTobacco companies implemented strategies to promote benefits of nicotine to scientific and general audiences while minimising its health risks. These strategies reappeared at the time novel tobacco products like electronic cigarettes were introduced. A greater awareness of the source of claims related to purported benefits of nicotine could inform discussions about emerging tobacco products.

The California Tobacco Control Program is the longest standing, publicly funded tobacco control program in the U.S. California's adult smoking rate declined from 23.7% (1989) to 11% (2016) but California still has more than 3 million smokers dispersed over 58 counties, requiring a coordinated approach to further tobacco control. Early California Tobacco Control Program success is rooted in public health policy strategies and a statewide media campaign that shifted social norms. In 2009, concepts for a coordinated approach were introduced by the California Tobacco Control Program in the state's first tobacco quit plan. The state quit plan called for public health's tobacco control programs to engage healthcare systems and insurers to work more directly with the California Smoker's Helpline (Helpline). With California's Medicaid (Medi-Cal) program expansion and the implementation of electronic medical record systems, health care plans and providers received additional support for system changes. Simultaneous with these changes, coordinated tobacco control efforts began, including California's Medi-Cal Incentives to Quit Smoking project (2012-2015). In the Medi-Cal Incentives to Quit Smoking project, safety-net providers and Medi-Cal plans were outreached and engaged to promote incentives for Medi-Cal members to utilize Helpline services. In another effort, UC Quits (2013-2015), the five University of California health systems used electronic medical record tools to promote tobacco treatments and electronic referrals to the Helpline. Now, as tobacco prevention is increasingly prioritized for quality improvement, California Tobacco Control Program is funding CA Quits, a statewide tobacco-cessation learning collaborative and technical assistance resource to promote integration of tobacco treatment services and quality improvement activities into safety-net health systems. CA Quits, in coordination with the Helpline, will connect public health departments, Medi-Cal plans, and safety-net providers to accelerate health systems change for tobacco-cessation treatment throughout the state. SUPPLEMENT INFORMATION: This article is part of a supplement entitled Advancing Smoking Cessation in California's Medicaid Population, which is sponsored by the California Department of Public Health.

Nicotine addiction is the proximate cause of disease and death from cigarette smoking. In 1994, we proposed reducing the nicotine content of cigarettes to non-addicting levels to reduce the risk of youth becoming addicted smokers and promoting quitting in established smokers. In 2009, the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act provided the authority to FDA to reduce nicotine levels as appropriate to benefit public health. Over the past 15 years, considerable research has determined that nicotine reduction is feasible and safe, resulting in reduced nicotine dependence with little evidence of compensatory over-smoking. The availability of acceptable non-combusted form of nicotine would provide support and enhance acceptability of nicotine reduction in tobacco. Most recently, the FDA promulgated a nicotine-based regulatory framework, which includes nicotine reduction combined with ready availability of noncombustible nicotine products. Nicotine reduction could contribute to a virtual end to the use of cigarette smoking, with enormous benefits to public health.

There has been a global decline in tobacco consumption that, if continued, will negatively impact the tobacco industry's profits. This decline led the industry to invent and market new products, including heated tobacco products (HTP). HTP are an extension of the industry's strategies to undermine government's tobacco regulatory efforts as they are being promoted as part of the solution for the tobacco epidemic. Under the moniker of 'harm reduction', the tobacco companies are attempting to rehabilitate their reputation so they can more effectively influence governments to roll back existing tobacco control policies or create exemptions for their HTP. Rolling back tobacco control policies will make it easier for the companies to renormalise tobacco use to increase social acceptability for all their products. When regulations are absent or when loopholes exist in classifying HTP as a tobacco product (thus subject to all tobacco control regulations), the industry's marketing of HTP is making these products more visible to the public and more accessible. Governments need to ensure that HTP are regulated as tobacco products or drugs and reject partnerships with the tobacco companies to promote 'harm reduction'. The tobacco companies remain the vector of the tobacco-caused epidemic and cannot be part of the global tobacco control solution.

BackgroundThe electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) industry has grown in size and organizational complexity in recent years, most notably with the entry of major tobacco companies in 2012 and the proliferation of vape shops. Many brands maintain retail websites that present e-cigarette marketing claims and sell directly to consumers. Understanding of the evolving composition of different types of e-cigarette brand websites is currently underdeveloped.ObjectiveThis paper presents how e-cigarette brand websites surveyed in 2013-2014 evolved by 2016-2017, and how the websites run by different types of e-cigarette producers currently differ.MethodsIn 2016-2017, we revisited 466 e-cigarette brand websites surveyed in 2013-2014, 288 of which were extant, and identified 145 new English-language websites. We compared product designs, marketing claims, and age-based warnings presented by types of e-cigarette producers: major tobacco companies, independent vape shops, and independent internet-only companies.ResultsAmong the 433 websites examined in 2016-2017, 12 were owned by major tobacco companies, 162 operated a physical vape shop, and 259 were internet-only operations. Closed-system product designs were sold by 83% (10/12) of tobacco-owned brands. In comparison, 29.0% (47/162, P

The great potential for reducing the cancer burden and cancer disparities through prevention and early detection is unrealized at the population level. A new community-based coalition, the San Francisco Cancer Initiative (SF CAN), focuses on the city and county of San Francisco, where cancer is the leading cause of death. SF CAN is an integrated, cross-sector collaboration launched in November 2016. It brings together the San Francisco Department of Public Health; the University of California, San Francisco; major health systems; and community coalitions to exert collective impact. Its goals are to reduce the burden of five common cancers-breast, lung and other tobacco-related, prostate, colorectal, and liver-for which there are proven methods of prevention and detection, while reducing known disparities. We describe the infrastructure, coalition building, and early progress of this initiative, which may serve as a model for other municipalities.

BackgroundTobacco pricing impacts use, yet military retailers sell discounted cigarettes. No systematic research has examined how military retail stores use internal community comparisons to set prices. We analysed data obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request on community price comparisons used by military retail to set cigarette prices.MethodsData on cigarette prices were obtained directly from military retailers (exchanges) from January 2013 to March 2014. Complete pricing data were obtained from exchanges on 114 military installations.ResultsThe average price for a pack of Marlboro cigarettes in military exchanges was US$5.51, which was similar to the average lowest community price (US$5.45; mean difference=-0.06; p=0.104) and almost a US$1.00 lower than the average highest price (US$6.44). Military retail prices were 2.1%, 6.2% and 13.7% higher than the lowest, average and highest community comparisons, respectively, and 18.2% of exchange prices violated pricing instructions. There was a negative correlation (r=-0.21, p=0.02) between the number of community stores surveyed and exchange cigarette prices.ConclusionsThere was no significant difference between prices for cigarettes on military installations and the lowest average community comparison, and in some locations, the prices violated Department of Defense (DoD) policy. US Marine Corps exchanges had the lowest prices, which is of concern given that the Marines also have the highest rates of tobacco use in the DoD. Given the relationship between tobacco product prices and demand, a common minimum (or floor) shelf price for tobacco products should be set for all exchanges and discount coupon redemptions should be prohibited.

BackgroundThis paper describes the methods and conceptual framework for Wave 1 of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study data collection. The National Institutes of Health, through the National Institute on Drug Abuse, is partnering with the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Center for Tobacco Products to conduct the PATH Study under a contract with Westat.MethodsThe PATH Study is a nationally representative, longitudinal cohort study of 45 971 adults and youth in the USA, aged 12 years and older. Wave 1 was conducted from 12 September 2013 to 15 December 2014 using Audio Computer-Assisted Self-Interviewing to collect information on tobacco-use patterns, risk perceptions and attitudes towards current and newly emerging tobacco products, tobacco initiation, cessation, relapse behaviours and health outcomes. The PATH Study's design allows for the longitudinal assessment of patterns of use of a spectrum of tobacco products, including initiation, cessation, relapse and transitions between products, as well as factors associated with use patterns. Additionally, the PATH Study collects biospecimens from consenting adults aged 18 years and older and measures biomarkers of exposure and potential harm related to tobacco use.ConclusionsThe cumulative, population-based data generated over time by the PATH Study will contribute to the evidence base to inform FDA's regulatory mission under the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act and efforts to reduce the Nation's burden of tobacco-related death and disease.

Cigarette butts and other postconsumer products from tobacco use are the most common waste elements picked up worldwide each year during environmental cleanups. Under the environmental principle of Extended Producer Responsibility, tobacco product manufacturers may be held responsible for collection, transport, processing and safe disposal of tobacco product waste (TPW). Legislation has been applied to other toxic and hazardous postconsumer waste products such as paints, pesticide containers and unused pharmaceuticals, to reduce, prevent and mitigate their environmental impacts. Additional product stewardship (PS) requirements may be necessary for other stakeholders and beneficiaries of tobacco product sales and use, especially suppliers, retailers and consumers, in order to ensure effective TPW reduction. This report describes how a Model Tobacco Waste Act may be adopted by national and subnational jurisdictions to address the environmental impacts of TPW. Such a law will also reduce tobacco use and its health consequences by raising attention to the environmental hazards of TPW, increasing the price of tobacco products, and reducing the number of tobacco product retailers.

Compelling evidence suggests that early life exposures can affect lifetime cancer risk. In 2014, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC's) Cancer Prevention Across the Lifespan Workgroup hosted a series of virtual meetings with select experts to discuss the state of the evidence linking factors during the prenatal period and early childhood to subsequent risk of both pediatric and adult cancers. In this article, we present the results from a qualitative analysis of the meeting transcripts and summarize themes that emerged from our discussions with meeting participants. Themes included the state of the evidence linking early life factors to cancer risk, research gaps and challenges, the level of evidence needed to support taking public health action, and the challenges of communicating complex, and sometimes conflicting, scientific findings to the public. Opportunities for collaboration among public health agencies and other stakeholders were identified during these discussions. Potential next steps for the CDC and its partners included advancing and building upon epidemiology and surveillance work, developing and using evidence from multiple sources to inform decision-making, disseminating and communicating research findings in a clear and effective way, and expanding collaborations with grantees and other partners. As the science on early life factors and cancer risk continues to evolve, there are opportunities for collaboration to translate science into actionable public health practice.

IntroductionHigher tobacco taxes reduce tobacco use. On military installations, cigarettes and other tobacco products are sold tax-free, keeping prices artificially low. Pricing regulations in the military specify that tobacco should be within 5% of the local most competitive price, but prices still average almost 13% lower than those at local Walmarts.MethodsTo gain insight into policy leaders' ideas and positions on military tobacco pricing, we interviewed members of the Department of Defense (DoD) Addictive Substances Misuse Advisory Committee and the Advisory Committee on Tobacco about tobacco pricing policies (n = 12).ResultsParticipants frequently lacked specific knowledge of details of military pricing policy, and the impact higher prices might have on military tobacco use. Most participants thought tobacco should not be sold at military stores, but many also felt that this policy change was unlikely due to tobacco industry pressure, and DoD reliance on tobacco profits to support Morale, Welfare, and Recreation funds.ConclusionsAchieving a tobacco-free military will require changing pricing policy, but this study suggests that for effective implementation, military leadership must also understand and articulate more clearly the rationale for doing so.ImplicationsPrevious work has found that adherence to military tobacco pricing policy is inconsistent at best. This study suggests that lack of knowledge about the policy and conflicting pressures resulting from the funding stream tobacco sales represent extend to high level military policy leaders. Without clearer information and direction, these leaders are unlikely to be able to establish and implement better tobacco pricing policy.

It’s difficult to develop infectious disease interventions (such as for HIV) for overlapping high-risk populations such as people who inject drugs, men who have sex with men, and female sex workers, where there are multiple transmission routes. Recent advances in dynamic modelling of coinfection epidemics could disentangle the contributions of different risk groups and behaviours to help develop more efficient and effective prevention interventions.

Tobacco use is prevalent among service members, but civilian public health groups have not effectively addressed military tobacco control policy issues. We conducted focus groups in 2010 and 2012 with participants from public health and tobacco control organizations regarding their understanding of the military and of tobacco use in that context. Misperceptions were common. Military personnel were believed to be young, from marginalized populations, and motivated to join by lack of other options. Tobacco use was considered integral to military life; participants were sometimes reluctant to endorse stronger tobacco control policies than those applied to civilians, although some believed the military could be a social policy leader. Engaging public health professionals as effective partners in tobacco-free military efforts may require education about and reframing of military service and tobacco control policy.

ObjectivesTo evaluate predictors of dual use of cigarettes with smokeless tobacco or e-cigarettes.MethodsAdult smokers (N = 1324) completed online cross-sectional surveys. Logistic regression evaluated predictors of dual use and cigarette quit attempts.ResultsSmokeless tobacco dual use was associated with past attempts to quit smoking by switching to smokeless products. E-cigarette dual use was associated with using stop-smoking medication and strong anti-tobacco industry attitudes. Ever use of stop-smoking medication was associated with quit attempts among dual e-cigarette users and cigarette-only users.ConclusionsDual users are more likely than cigarette-only users to endorse certain cessation-related attitudes and behaviors. This may provide an opportunity for clinicians or others to discuss evidence-based strategies for smoking cessation.

BackgroundTobacco use is a major cause of chronic disease, disability and death among military personnel and veterans. However, civilian public health and tobacco control advocates have been relatively silent on the issue. Research on the tobacco industry shows a long history of interference in military tobacco policy through relationships with the United States (US) Congress. The military cannot autonomously implement tobacco control, but is subject to Congressional oversight. Thus, the primary obstacles to effective tobacco control in the military are Congressional political opposition and tobacco industry influence, and by extension, a lack of civilian awareness and support in the policy arena.MethodsAs part of a larger project to explore the topic of civilian support for military tobacco control, we analyzed data from focus groups with public health professionals to better understand their sense of agency and authority in regards to military tobacco control. Researchers conducted 4 focus groups with a total of 36 public health professionals at key conferences for those working in public health and tobacco control. Data were coded and the research team developed an interpretive account that captured patterns and variations in the data.ResultsPublic health and tobacco control participants shared a sense of futility regarding civilian efforts to engage in military tobacco control. This stemmed from feeling ignorant of military culture and structure, identifying powerful discourses that opposed tobacco control, particularly in a military context, and the very-real presence of the tobacco industry lobby throughout the policy process.ConclusionsA strong public health voice on military tobacco control might serve to begin problematizing the tobacco industry's influence in the military policy arena. As the military moves to institute stronger tobacco control policy, public health and tobacco control professionals should work to engage with and aid its efforts from the outside. Only with such civilian side support can the goal of a tobacco free military be realized.

Literature suggests that 'negative advertising' is an effective way to encourage behavioral changes, but it has enjoyed limited use in public health media campaigns. However, as public health increasingly focuses on non-communicable disease prevention, negative advertising could be more widely applied. This analysis considers an illustrative case from tobacco control. Relying on internal tobacco industry documents, surveys and experimental data and drawing from political advocacy literature, we describe tobacco industry and public health research on the American Legacy Foundation's "truth" campaign, an example of effective negative advertising in the service of public health. The tobacco industry determined that the most effective advertisements run by Legacy's "truth" campaign were negative advertisements. Although the tobacco industry's own research suggested that these negative ads identified and effectively reframed the cigarette as a harmful consumer product rather than focusing solely on tobacco companies, Philip Morris accused Legacy of 'vilifying' it. Public health researchers have demonstrated the effectiveness of the "truth" campaign in reducing smoking initiation. Research on political advocacy demonstrating the value of negative advertising has rarely been used in the development of public health media campaigns, but negative advertising can effectively communicate certain public health messages and serve to counter corporate disease promotion.

We consider how industries use front groups to combat public health measures by relating the history of "Get Government Off Our Back", a coalition created by the tobacco industry to fight government regulation. Using tobacco industry documents, contemporaneous media reports, journal articles, and press releases, we review the establishment by RJ Reynolds of an industry front group, Get Government Off Our Back (GGOOB) in 1994. The group's goal was to advocate against U.S. federal regulation of tobacco. By keeping its involvement secret, RJ Reynolds was able to draw public and legislative support toward limiting government regulation of tobacco without having to address the tobacco industry's reputation for misrepresenting evidence. Unfortunately, the tobacco industry"s use of front groups is not unique; other industries use front groups to fight measures designed to protect public health. Research on the background and funding of advocacy organizations could help identify industry front groups and make them less useful to their creators. © 2007 Birkhäuser Verlag.

We investigated how industries use front groups to combat public health measures by analyzing tobacco industry documents, contemporaneous media reports, journal articles, and press releases regarding "Get Government Off Our Back," a coalition created by the tobacco industry. RJ Reynolds created Get Government Off Our Back in 1994 to fight federal regulation of tobacco. By keeping its involvement secret, RJ Reynolds was able to draw public and legislative support and to avoid the tobacco industry reputation for misrepresenting evidence. The tobacco industry is not unique in its creation of such groups. Research on organizational background and funding could identify other industry front groups. Those who seek to establish measures to protect public health should be prepared to counter the argument that government should not regulate private behavior.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is working with selected state and local health departments, academic centers, and others to develop an environmental public health tracking initiative to improve geographic and temporal surveillance of environmental hazards, exposures, and related health outcomes. The objective is to support policy strategies and interventions for disease prevention by communities and environmental health agencies at the federal, state, and local levels. The first 3 years of the initiative focused on supporting states and cities in developing capacity, information technology infrastructure, and pilot projects to demonstrate electronic linkage of environmental hazard or exposure data and disease data. The next phase requires implementation across states. This transition could provide opportunities to further integrate research, surveillance, and practice through attention to four areas. The first is to develop a shared and transparent knowledge base that draws on environmental health research and substantiates decisions about what to track and the interpretation of results. The second is to identify and address information needs of policy and stakeholder audiences in environmental health. The third is to adopt mechanisms for coordination, decision making, and governance that can incorporate and support the major entities involved. The fourth is to promote disease prevention by systematically identifying and addressing population-level environmental determinants of health and disease.

Data on tobacco use among the Asian American/Pacific Islander (AAPI) population remain limited, although existing studies indicate that tobacco use prevalence among males from specific AAPI groups is significantly higher than in the general US male population. This high prevalence of tobacco use and the disparities in use result from social norms, targeted marketing by the tobacco industry, lack of culturally and linguistically tailored prevention and control programs, and limited impact of mainstream tobacco control programs for AAPIs. We review the available literature on tobacco use among AAPI men and women, highlight a national agenda that promotes tobacco prevention and control for AAPI communities, and acknowledge recent trends including the increase of tobacco use among AAPI women and girls.

Litigation and regulatory assaults on the tobacco companies may create a willingness among tobacco manufacturers to bargain resources and acceptance of public policy changes for limitations of liability, as has been seen by the recent settlement with the Liggett Group. Two elements absolutely critical to any plan are the elimination of tobacco advertising and promotion and the removal of addiction as a reason for tobacco use. Minimal components of any settlement should include: (a) acceptance by the tobacco manufacturers of the causal relationship between tobacco use and disease, and the addictive nature of nicotine; (b) a total ban on tobacco advertising and promotion; (c) FDA jurisdiction over tobacco products and their nicotine content, with the intent of removing nicotine as soon as acceptable nicotine substitution products are available; (d) reimbursement to the states for Medicaid and other state expenditures attributable to smoking, to the maximum extent feasible; (e) funding for local, state, and federal programmes and research in tobacco control; (f) acceptance of legislation and regulations protecting the right of non-smokers to breathe air free of tobacco smoke; (g) funding for a large, national, media-led, anti-tobacco campaign; and (h) cessation assistance for addicted smokers. If negotiations toward a settlement proceed, it is essential that the public health community participate in defining the elements of any agreement to ensure that whatever agreement develops is focused on reducing tobacco-related disease rather than continuing the profitability of American tobacco companies. That participation requires articulation of the core elements essential to an acceptable agreement. If resolution of the public health issues surrounding continued sale of tobacco products can be reached in the United States, it may provide a model for similar resolution in other countries.