eLetters

66 e-Letters

published between 2012 and 2015

  • Questions asked and answered
    Jonathan D. Heck
    NOT PEER REVIEWED

    This letter responds to misrepresentations in a recent article by Daniel Stevens and Stanton Glantz (1). In the article, Stevens and Glantz question my integrity based on some questions during a 4-day deposition which I gave in 2014 in a legal proceeding against my employer. These writers cite snippets from the 1,000+-page transcript of that deposition, relating the text of a facetious note that I h...

    Show More
  • Re:No evidence that the tobacco industry evaded the FDA's ban on 'Light' cigarette descriptors
    Hillel R Alpert

    NOT PEER REVIEWED This comment summarizes, but mischaracterizes the findings and conclusions of our study. Our analyses and interpretation are based strictly on the letter of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (FSPTCA) and its requirements, including Section 911(b)(2)(ii), which bans "the use of explicit or implicit descriptors that convey messages of reduced risk including 'light', 'mild' and 'low', o...

    Show More
  • Review of air quality, biological indicators and health effects of second-hand waterpipe smoke exposure - Letter
    Luis D Ramirez

    NOT PEER REVIEWED Dear Editor,

    Research on waterpipe smoking, also called hookah, is still emerging, and research on second-hand hookah exposure is still in its nascent stages. However, after reading the review on the various effects of second -hand waterpipe smoke exposure by Kumar et al recently published in Tobacco Control1, we noted several major issues in its execution and have serious reservations about th...

    Show More
  • An update on smoking prevalence projections to 2025 and beyond in New Zealand
    Frederieke S. van der Deen
    NOT PEER REVIEWED

    Frederieke S. van der Deen and Nick Wilson (on behalf of the other authors; both from the University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand)

    This electronic letter aims to give readers an update on the smoking prevalence projections to 2025 and beyond in New Zealand (NZ) that were provided in the paper by Ikeda et al. NZ is now one of four nations with an official smokefree goal (others are: Fin...

    Show More
  • Tobacco industry peddling overestimates of illicit cigarettes to dampen tax increase
    Sophapan Ratanachena

    NOT PEER REVIEWED

    We refer to the article, "Did the tobacco industry inflate estimates of illicit cigarette consumption in Asia? An empirical analysis" Chen J, et al. published in Tobacco Control on November 25, 2014 (Tob Control 2015;0:1-7) and concur with the important points raised in this article. While the article focuses on Hong Kong, other countries in South East Asia also faced a similar experience. The...

    Show More
  • Cook Islands data: some information and comment
    Erik Martin

    NOT PEER REVIEWED I commend the authors on a significant effort involved in conducting this rather insightful research.

    Having conducted qualitative research on FCTC implementation in the Pacific, I can provide comment in relation to the Cook Islands which may explain why MPOWER measures mentioned here did not achieve decreases in prevalence (at least in the figures obtained in this study).

    Firstly, th...

    Show More
  • Consider health-related outcomes when assessing the equity impacts of smoking ban policies
    Sericea Stallings-Smith

    NOT PEER REVIEWED We welcome the timely review published by Hill et al. [1], and agree that more research is needed to assess the equity impacts of tobacco control interventions. The results of the review indicated that "increases in tobacco price have a pro-equity effect on socioeconomic disparities in smoking", but that "evidence on the equity impact of other interventions was inconclusive [...]". The inconclusiveness o...

    Show More
  • Taxation may help, but perhaps new thinking is needed?
    Kristiina Patja

    NOT PEER REVIEWED Tobacco is an interesting consumer product. It is legal, toxic and dangerous. It kills people when used as intended. There is a global initiative to reduce use of this product opposed heavily by those profiting from it, tobacco industry stockowners. Industry has successfully blurred consumers, health professionals and policy makers over the years with false science, modulation of product and misleading m...

    Show More
  • Working toward a more sophisticated conceptualization of health and trade
    Jeffrey M Drope

    In this rejoinder, we will address the recent response by Mary Assunta to our article, "Complexities at the intersection of tobacco control and trade liberalisation: evidence from Southeast Asia." To be sure, we believe that trade policy remains a very important issue for public health both in Southeast Asia and globally. Before addressing the specific concerns raised by the reader, it is worthwhile to restate the ove...

    Show More
  • A tobacco carve-out is the way for the future
    Mary Assunta

    I would like to respond to this paper by Drope J and Chavez JJ whose analysis focuses on cigarettes, not tobacco leaf production and trade, and seeks to question the "conventional wisdom" that "trade liberalization naturally leads to lower prices for tobacco products, increased consumption and decreased levels of regulation." The authors use theoretically guided empirical research to demonstrate there is little cause for...

    Show More

Pages