Register for email alerts and news feeds:
This journal | BMJ Group
rss
Tobacco Control 1999;8:37-44; doi:10.1136/tc.8.1.37
Copyright © 1999 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.
Tob Control 1999;8:37-44 ( Spring )

Sharing the blame: smoking experimentation and future smoking-attributable mortality due to Joe Camel and Marlboro advertising and promotions

John P Pierce, Elizabeth A Gilpin, Won S Choi

Cancer Prevention and Control Program, University of California, San Diego, Cancer Center, La Jolla, California, USA

Correspondence to: Dr JP Pierce, Cancer Prevention and Control Program, University of California, San Diego, Cancer Center, La Jolla, California 92093-0901, USA; jppierce{at}ucsd.edu

BACKGROUND---Despite public denials, internal tobacco company documents indicate that adolescents have long been the target of cigarette advertising and promotional activities. Recent longitudinal evidence suggests that 34% of new experimentation occurs because of advertising and promotions.
OBJECTIVE---To apportion responsibility for smoking experimentation and future smoking-attributable mortality among major cigarette brands attractive to young people (Camel and Marlboro).
DATA SOURCES, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS---Data were from confirmed never-smoking adolescents (12-17 years old) responding to the 1993 (n = 2659) and 1996 (n = 2779) population-based California Tobacco Surveys.
MAIN OUTCOMES---Adolescents named the brand of their favourite cigarette advertisements and tobacco promotional items. Using these "market shares" and the relative importance of advertising and promotions in encouraging smoking, we estimated how many new experimenters from 1988 to 1998 in the United States can be attributed to Camel and Marlboro. From other data on the natural history of smoking, we projected how many future deaths in the United States can be attributed to each brand.
RESULTS---Although Camel advertisements were favoured more than Marlboro and other brands in 1993 and 1996, the "market share" for promotional items shifted markedly during this period from Camel and other brands towards Marlboro. We estimated that between 1988 and 1998, there will be 7.9 million new experimenters because of tobacco advertising and promotions. This will result in 4.7 million new established smokers: 2.1, 1.2, and 1.4 million due to Camel, Marlboro, and other brands' advertising and promotions, respectively. Of these, 1.2 million will eventually die from smoking-attributable diseases: 520 000 from Camel, 300 000 from Marlboro, and the remainder from other brands.
CONCLUSIONS---Our analysis provides a reasonable first estimate at sharing the blame for the long-term health consequences of smoking among the major brands that encourage adolescents to start smoking.


Keywords: adolescence; smoking initiation; smoking-attributable diseases; advertising


© 1999 by Tobacco Control

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

  • Braverman, M. T., Aaro, L. E. (2004). Adolescent Smoking and Exposure to Tobacco Marketing Under a Tobacco Advertising Ban: Findings From 2 Norwegian National Samples. AJPH 94: 1230-1238 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Distefan, J. M., Pierce, J. P., Gilpin, E. A. (2004). Do Favorite Movie Stars Influence Adolescent Smoking Initiation?. AJPH 94: 1239-1244 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Gilpin, E. A., Distefan, J. M., Pierce, J. P. (2004). Population Receptivity to Tobacco Advertising/ Promotions and Exposure to Anti-Tobacco Media: Effect of Master Settlement Agreement in California: 1992-2002. Health Promot Pract 5: 91S-98S [Abstract]  
  • Hastings, G., Saren, M. (2003). The Critical Contribution of Social Marketing: Theory and Application. Marketing Theory 3: 305-322 [Abstract]  
  • Lantz, P M (2003). Smoking on the rise among young adults: implications for research and policy. Tobacco Control 12: i60-70 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Donovan, R J, Jancey, J, Jones, S (2002). Tobacco point of sale advertising increases positive brand user imagery. Tobacco Control 11: 191-194 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Landman, A., Ling, P. M., Glantz, S. A. (2002). Tobacco Industry Youth Smoking Prevention Programs: Protecting the Industry and Hurting Tobacco Control. AJPH 92: 917-930 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Celebucki, C C, Diskin, K (2002). A longitudinal study of externally visible cigarette advertising on retail storefronts in Massachusetts before and after the Master Settlement Agreement. Tobacco Control 11: ii47-53 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Hamilton, W L, Turner-Bowker, D M, Celebucki, C C, Connolly, G N (2002). Cigarette advertising in magazines: the tobacco industry response to the Master Settlement Agreement and to public pressure. Tobacco Control 11: ii54-58 [Abstract] [Full Text]  

This Article

Services
Citing Articles
Google Scholar
PubMed
Bookmark with

Register for free content

The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.

Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.