Download PDFPDF
What contributed to the major decline in per capita cigarette consumption during California’s comprehensive tobacco control programme?
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g.
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests


  • Responses are moderated before posting and publication is at the absolute discretion of BMJ, however they are not peer-reviewed
  • Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. Removal or editing of responses is at BMJ's absolute discretion
  • If patients could recognise themselves, or anyone else could recognise a patient from your description, please obtain the patient's written consent to publication and send them to the editorial office before submitting your response [Patient consent forms]
  • By submitting this response you are agreeing to our full [Response terms and requirements]

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on:
    Reduction as Prelude to Cessation

    The recent article by Gilpin, et al.,[1] reported the major initial impact of California’s tobacco control efforts was to initially reduce cigs/day among continuing smokers and this was followed by an increase in quitting.[1] We would like to make three comments on this paper.

    First, this study was one of the first to decompose the effects of tobacco control into effects on initiation, cessation and reducti...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.