Emmons K M, Kawachi I, Barclay G
Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Hematol Oncol Clin North Am. 1997 Apr;11(2):177-95. doi: 10.1016/s0889-8588(05)70425-1.
Smoking prevalence among American adults is at its lowest point in the last 30 years, and there is unprecedented popular support for tobacco control measures. The financial resources to carry on the battle for tobacco control are still heavily stacked in favor of the industry, which by current estimates is worth $45 billion, including $6 billion spent each year on advertising and promotion alone. Nonetheless, industry executives must realize that, even if they can win individual battles, they are losing the war. This article has discussed key events in the history of tobacco control, as well as some of the most innovative strategies currently being used for tobacco control. Although it is important that tobacco control efforts be disseminated widely and through novel channels, the challenge facing public health advocates in the next several decades will be to anticipate the industry's response to key initiatives, as well as to launch organized and strategic counterattacks against efforts to dissuade acceptance of such initiatives. The history of tobacco control demonstrates that public health advocacy resources should be strategically focused in precisely the areas in which the industry feels most vulnerable (e.g., nicotine addiction, regulation of nicotine, environmental tobacco smoke), rather than in areas in which the industry maintains a vocal presence for the purposes of public relations (e.g., youth access). Through its lobbying efforts and financial clout, the tobacco industry has played a key role in the development of public health policy. Although it is no secret that the tobacco industry regularly makes campaign contributions to both Republicans and Democrats, the impact of these donations on public policy making have only recently begun to be quantified and documented. Moore et al found that the more tobacco money a politician received, the less likely he or she was to support tobacco control legislation. Similar distortional effects of tobacco money have been demonstrated at the state level. The political expenditure of 12 tobacco firms increased 10-fold in California after the implementation of Proposition 99 in California--from $790,050 in the 1985-1986 election, to $7,615,091 in the 1991-1992 election. In an analysis of the behavior of the California legislature between 1991 and 1992, a statistically significant relationship was found between members' receipt of tobacco money and their likelihood of opposing tobacco control measures. Tobacco control advocates as well as health professionals in general have an important role to play in holding their legislators accountable for developing public health policy that reflects the concerns of their constituencies, not of the tobacco lobby. Public health advocates should pay particular attention to the recent regulations placed on cigarettes as a key tobacco control strategy for the next several decades. For the first time in the history of the United States, a President has introduced legislation that will allow a governmental agency to regulate tobacco. The FDA has faced relentless attacks by the tobacco industry, and it will continue to be a target. Public health advocates and health care providers have a critical role to play in the FDA's efforts to bring this issue to fruition. If the public health community fails to support this initiative and create an active and forceful opposition to the industry's efforts to derail it, it is likely that the impact on tobacco control efforts will be resounding and far-reaching.
美国成年人的吸烟率处于过去30年来的最低点,并且烟草控制措施获得了前所未有的民众支持。用于开展烟草控制斗争的财政资源仍然严重偏向烟草行业,据目前估计,该行业价值450亿美元,仅每年用于广告和促销的费用就达60亿美元。尽管如此,烟草行业高管必须认识到,即便他们能打赢个别战役,但正在输掉这场战争。本文讨论了烟草控制历史上的关键事件,以及目前用于烟草控制的一些最具创新性的策略。尽管广泛且通过新颖渠道传播烟草控制措施很重要,但公共卫生倡导者在未来几十年面临的挑战将是预测烟草行业对关键举措的反应,并对劝阻接受此类举措的努力发起有组织、有策略的反击。烟草控制的历史表明,公共卫生宣传资源应战略性地集中于烟草行业感觉最脆弱的领域(如尼古丁成瘾、尼古丁监管、环境烟草烟雾),而非烟草行业为了公关目的而高调参与的领域(如青少年获取烟草)。通过游说努力和资金影响力,烟草行业在公共卫生政策的制定中发挥了关键作用。尽管烟草行业定期向共和党人和民主党人进行竞选捐款已不是什么秘密,但这些捐款对公共政策制定的影响直到最近才开始得到量化和记录。摩尔等人发现,一位政客收到的烟草资金越多,他或她支持烟草控制立法的可能性就越小。在州一级也证明了烟草资金有类似的扭曲作用。加利福尼亚州实施第99号提案后,12家烟草公司的政治支出增加了10倍——从1985 - 1986年选举中的790,050美元,增至1991 - 1992年选举中的7,615,091美元。在对1991年至1992年加利福尼亚州立法机构行为的分析中,发现议员收到烟草资金与他们反对烟草控制措施的可能性之间存在统计学上的显著关系。烟草控制倡导者以及一般的卫生专业人员在要求立法者为制定反映选民而非烟草游说团体关切的公共卫生政策负责方面可发挥重要作用。公共卫生倡导者应特别关注近期针对香烟的规定,这是未来几十年关键的烟草控制策略。在美国历史上,总统首次提出了一项立法,将允许政府机构对烟草进行监管。美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)一直面临烟草行业的无情攻击,并且仍将是攻击目标。公共卫生倡导者和医疗服务提供者在FDA使这个问题取得成果的努力中可发挥关键作用。如果公共卫生界未能支持这一举措,并对烟草行业破坏该举措的努力发起积极有力的反对,那么对烟草控制努力的影响可能是巨大且深远的。