Major Tobacco Companies Research Articles

Assessment of the European Union's illicit trade agreements with the four major Transnational Tobacco Companies

To address the illicit cigarette trade, the European Union (EU) has signed agreements with the four major Transnational Tobacco Companies (TTCs) that involve establishing extensive systems of cooperation. All agreements...

E-cigarettes: a scientific review.

Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) are products that deliver a nicotine-containing aerosol (commonly called vapor) to users by heating a solution typically made up of propylene glycol or glycerol (glycerin), nicotine, and flavoring agents (Figure 1) invented in their current form by Chinese pharmacist Hon Lik in the early 2000s.1 The US patent application describes the e-cigarette device as “an electronic atomization cigarette that functions as substitutes [sic] for quitting smoking and cigarette substitutes ” (patent No. 8,490,628 B2). By 2013, the major multinational tobacco companies had entered the e-cigarette market. E-cigarettes are marketed via television, the Internet, and print advertisements (that often feature celebrities)2 as healthier alternatives to tobacco smoking, as useful for quitting smoking and reducing cigarette consumption, and as a way to circumvent smoke-free laws by enabling users to “smoke anywhere.”3 Figure 1. Examples of different electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) products. Reproduced from Grana et al.1 There has been rapid market penetration of e-cigarettes despite many unanswered questions about their safety, efficacy for harm reduction and cessation, and total impact on public health. E-cigarette products are changing quickly, and many of the findings from studies of older products may not be relevant to the assessment of newer products that could be safer and more effective as nicotine delivery devices. In addition, marketing and other environmental influences may vary from country to country, so patterns of use and the ultimate impact on public health may differ. The individual risks and benefits and the total impact of these products occur in the context of the widespread and continuing availability of conventional cigarettes and other tobacco products, with high levels of dual use of e-cigarettes and conventional cigarettes at the same time among adults4–8 and youth.9–11 It is important to assess e-cigarette toxicant exposure and …

The 50th Anniversary of the US Surgeon General's Report on Tobacco: What We've Accomplished and Where We Go From Here

January 11, 2014, marks the 50th anniversary of a significant milestone in our nation's public health. It was on this date in 1964 that US Surgeon General, Dr. Luther Terry, courageously released the first Surgeon General's Report on Smoking and Health.[1][1] This landmark report transformed the way

The use and perception of electronic cigarettes and snus among the U.S. population.

BackgroundE-cigarettes have generated controversy in the tobacco control field similar to that of Swedish snus, which came to the U.S. market six years earlier. Some argue that e-cigarettes have great potential to help smokers quit regular cigarettes while others contend they should be banned for lack of safety and efficacy data. This study examined population data from the U.S.MethodsA U.S. population survey with a national probability sample (N=10,041) was conducted (February 24 to March 8, 2012, before any major paid advertisement of e-cigarettes appeared on television). Survey respondents were asked if they had heard about e-cigarettes, where they had heard about them, whether they had used e-cigarettes or snus, how often they used them, and why they used them. Responses were weighted to represent the entire U.S. population.FindingsA high proportion, 75.4%, reported having heard about e-cigarettes. Television ranked as the number one source of information, followed by “in-person conversation” and “Internet.” About 8.1% had tried e-cigarettes, and 1.4% were current users. These rates were twice those of snus (4.3% and 0.8%, respectively). Among current smokers, 32.2% had tried e-cigarettes, and 6.3% were current users. Over 80% of current e-cigarette users were non-daily users. Women were significantly more likely to have tried e-cigarettes than men. Those who had tried e-cigarettes were more likely than those who tried snus to report their products being safer than regular cigarettes (49.9% vs. 10.8%). Almost half (49.5%) of current smokers were susceptible to using e-cigarettes in the future.ConclusionsThat e-cigarettes have surpassed snus in adoption rate, even before any promotion by major tobacco companies, suggests that the former have tapped into smokers’ intuitive preference for potentially harm-reducing products, probably due to the product design. E-cigarette use is likely to increase in the next few years.

Tobacco industry tangos with descriptor ban in Malaysia

Malaysia's 2008 Control of Tobacco Product (Amendment) Regulations (CTPR)1 prohibit use of misleading information or terms on cigarette packages. This measure marks another major milestone in Malaysian public health and...

From cigarette smuggling to illicit tobacco trade

BackgroundTax policy is considered the most effective strategy to reduce tobacco consumption and prevalence. Tax avoidance and tax evasion therefore undermine the effectiveness of tax policies and result in less...

How online sales and promotion of snus contravenes current European Union legislation

ContextThe European Union (EU) Tobacco Products Directive that bans sales of snus (a form of oral tobacco) in EU countries other than Sweden is currently under review. Major tobacco companies...

The price paid: Manipulation of otolaryngologists by the tobacco industry to obfuscate the emerging truth that smoking causes cancer

Our objectives were to explore the multifaceted campaign by the tobacco industry to enlist otolaryngologists in support of their efforts to reassure consumers that cigarettes were safe, and to elucidate the incentives that led so many leading otolaryngologists to give testimony denying a causal linkage between tobacco use and head and neck cancer. Historical analyses. Recent litigation has exposed for public viewing a huge trove of internal tobacco industry documents. These documents include correspondence files, internal memoranda, research solicitations, grant agreements, records of payments, marketing plans, and testimony by otolaryngologists on behalf of tobacco interests in court proceedings, before congressional committees, and at U.S. Federal Trade Commission hearings. Evidence shows that marketing divisions of major tobacco companies systematically sought to use the authority and prestige of otolaryngologists to support their promotional efforts. Industry documents reveal widespread collaboration by leaders in the field through conducting research and giving well-compensated testimony favorable to tobacco interests. Invariably, industry-funded research showed tobacco in a favorable light. The industry also sought to influence otolaryngologists with free cigarettes, elegant dinners, and hospitality booths at conventions. In revealing this unfortunate period in our history, we by no means intend to diminish the memory of distinguished leaders whose tobacco involvements were certainly more acceptable by the standards of their own time. Rather, by exposing the pervasive tobacco industry manipulation of scientific research for commercial purposes we seek to encourage vigilance by contemporary researchers who might consider seeking funding from an industry that places the pursuit of profits above the well-being of its customers.

The tobacco industry's past role in weight control related to smoking

Background: Smoking is thought to produce an appetite-suppressing effect by many smokers. Thus, the fear of body weight gain often outweighs the perception of health benefits associated with smoking cessation, particularly in adolescents. We examined whether the tobacco industry played a role in appetite and body weight control related to smoking and smoking cessation. Methods: We performed a systematic search within the archives of six major US and UK tobacco companies (American Tobacco, Philip Morris, RJ Reynolds, Lorillard, Brown & Williamson and British American Tobacco) that were Defendants in tobacco litigation settled in 1998. Findings are dated from 1949 to 1999. Results: The documents revealed the strategies planned and used by the industry to enhance effects of smoking on weight and appetite, mostly by chemical modifications of cigarettes contents. Appetite-suppressant molecules, such as tartaric acid and 2-acetylpyridine were added to some cigarettes. Conclusion: These tobacco companies played an active and not disclaimed role in the anti-appetite effects of smoking, at least in the past, by adding appetite-suppressant molecules into their cigarettes.

Evidence of sex and gender differences spurs call for more research funding

Evidence of sex and gender differences spurs call for more research funding

Tobacco industry attempts to undermine Article 5.3 and the “good governance” trap: Table 1

The Framework Convention on Tobacco Control1 (FCTC), which has now been ratified by 166 countries, is the first global public health treaty to be developed by the World Health Organization and represents a crucial milestone for tobacco control. In recognition of systematic, often covert tobacco industry efforts to undermine tobacco control policy, Article 5.3 of the FCTC specifically requires that, “in setting and implementing their public health policies with respect to tobacco control, Parties shall act to protect these policies from commercial and other vested interests of the tobacco industry in accordance with national law”.1 The impact of Article 5.3 depends on governments’ commitment to implementing the guidelines agreed in Durban, in November 2008.2 Given that tobacco industry success in undermining tobacco control to date has relied on its ability to influence policy,3 it is perhaps unsurprising that tobacco companies lobbied hard against the Article 5.3 guidelines and are now trying to undermine their implementation by claiming that they contravene existing commitments to “better regulation” and “good governance”.4 5 6 7 What the companies fail to acknowledge is that at least one major tobacco company, British American Tobacco (BAT), had a lead role in promoting these concepts. In the European Union and the United Kingdom the strategy being employed by major tobacco companies (both before and after the agreement of the Article 5.3 guidelines) is to claim that Article 5.3 contravenes existing official standards on consultation because it requires complete exclusion of the tobacco industry from policy discussions (in fact, it merely requires that consultation should be limited to that which is strictly necessary and should be transparent and accountable). Such claims are frequently framed within broader policy commitments to “better regulation” or “good governance”, as table 1 illustrates. View this table: Table 1 Tobacco industry attempts to undermine Article …

Decline in Smoking during Pregnancy in New York City, 1995–2005

The 1998 Master Settlement Agreement (MSA) between 46 states and four major tobacco companies increased tobacco control funding and restricted tobacco marketing. In 2002, New York City (NYC) began a comprehensive tobacco control program that raised the price of cigarettes, banned indoor workplace smoking, and increased access to cessation treatment. We examined the temporal pattern of smoking during pregnancy, including ethnic variation in smoking prevalence, relative to the implementation of the MSA and NYC's comprehensive tobacco control program using birth certificate data. Using multiple logistic regression, we analyzed NYC birth certificate data to examine prenatal smoking during three time periods: 1995-1998 (pre-MSA), 1999-2002 (post-MSA, pre-NYC tobacco control), and 2003-2005 (post-MSA, post-tobacco control). Overall, 3.0% of 1,136,437 births included were to smoking mothers. The proportion of smoking mothers declined from 4.5% in 1995-1998 to 1.7% in 2003-2005. Compared with non-Hispanic white women, African American women had 2.46 increased odds (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.36, 2.55) of smoking during 1995-1998, and 3.63 increased odds (95% CI 3.39, 3.88) of smoking during 2003-2005, despite an absolute reduction in smoking from 10.4% to 5.0%. Puerto Rican women also smoked considerably more than non-Hispanic white women. These findings document a striking temporal decline in prenatal smoking in NYC concurrent with changing tobacco control policies. Targeted efforts may be required to address the increasing disparity in prenatal smoking between non-Hispanic white and African American and Puerto Rican women.

A Coalition of the Film Industry and Public Health Leaders: In Reply

We welcome the opportunity to recognize those whose actions over the past decade helped to raise public awareness about the influence of smoking in movies on adolescents and to convince the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) to take this issue seriously.In 1998, the US Attorneys General resolved to deal with the problem of tobacco depictions in movies. In 2003, California Attorney General Lockyer contacted major tobacco companies and the MPAA to express concern about tobacco in movies. Prompted in part by our published research,1 Maryland Attorney General Curran and 27 other state attorneys general called on the MPAA and leaders in the motion picture industry to reduce smoking in movies. In response, Dr Dalton was invited to present our research findings to members of the MPAA, the Directors Guild, senior executives from the top movie production companies, and others from the motion picture industry. In 2004, Senator Ensign of Nevada held a Senate committee hearing on smoking in movies, which raised public awareness and sent a clear message to the MPAA that US legislators are concerned about the impact of smoking in movies on children.For years, public health advocates, including Stanton Glantz and members of SmokeFree Movies, have pressured the MPAA to assign “R” ratings to movies that portray smoking. Endorsement of this recommendation by the American Medical Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, and other major medical associations has helped to bring the issue to the forefront. The Legacy Foundation has supported antismoking efforts by funding research, promoting policies to reduce smoking in movies, and sponsoring antismoking public service announcements for use in theaters. State-level organizations such as Reality Check (New York) and Our Voices Exposed (Vermont) have inspired youth to become involved and communicate directly with members of the motion picture industry regarding their concern that movies are promoting smoking among youth.In response to a decade's worth of unrelenting efforts, the MPAA announced its collaboration with Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH) experts to address the issue of tobacco depictions in movies. The HSPH statement advocating eliminating smoking from youth-rated movies, publicly released in April 2007,2 was remarkably consistent with our research-based conclusions that a “practical solution to reduce children's exposure to movie smoking would be to eliminate smoking from youth-rated movies.”3 We are pleased that our work in this area, which began more than 10 years ago, provides scientific support for those who embrace the mission of changing public health policy to reduce smoking.

Changing Smokeless Tobacco Products: New Tobacco-Delivery Systems

Smokeless or noncombusted oral tobacco use as a substitute for cigarette smoking has been gaining greater interest and attention by the public health community and the tobacco industry. In order for the product to appeal to smokers, tobacco companies have been manufacturing new noncombusted oral tobacco (i.e., moist snuff) that is lower in moisture content and nitrosamine levels, packaged in small sachets and “spitless.” While the primary motives of the major tobacco companies are to maintain or increase tobacco use, some members of the public health community perceive the use of noncombusted oral tobacco products as a harm reduction tool. Because cigarette smoking is associated with greater toxicant exposure compared to noncombusted oral tobacco, reduced mortality and morbidity are hypothesized to ensue, if cigarette smokers switched completely to these products. However, variability exists in levels of nicotine and toxicants and potential health consequences from use within and across countries. Therefore, promulgating noncombusted oral tobacco products as a safer alternative to smoking or as a substitute for smoking may engender more rather than less harm. To date, limited research is available on the effects of marketing noncombusted oral tobacco products to smokers, to support the use of these products as a harm reduction tool, and to determine the effects of varying levels of tobacco toxicants including nicotine on health. The need exists for manufacturing standards to lower toxicant levels of all noncombusted oral tobacco products, for the formulation of appropriate tobacco-product regulations and for the development of a strategic plan by the public health community to address this controversial topic.

Racialized Geography, Corporate Activity, and Health Disparities: Tobacco Industry Targeting of Inner Cities

Industry has played a complex role in the rise of tobacco-related diseases in the United States. The tobacco industry's activities, including targeted marketing, are arguably among the most powerful corporate influences on health and health policy. We analyzed over 400 internal tobacco industry documents to explore how, during the past several decades, the industry targeted inner cities populated predominantly by low-income African American residents with highly concentrated menthol cigarette marketing. We study how major tobacco companies competed against one another in menthol wars fought within these urban cores. Little previous work has analyzed the way in which the inner city's complex geography of race, class, and place shaped the avenues used by tobacco corporations to increase tobacco use in low-income, predominantly African American urban cores in the 1970s-1990s. Our analysis shows how the industry's activities contributed to the racialized geography of today's tobacco-related health disparities.

CIGARETTE TAXES AND THE MASTER SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

I. INTRODUCTION In 1998, 46 states and the four major tobacco companies entered into the Master Settlement Agreement (MSA), which settled litigation brought on behalf of the states to recover medical expenses paid by government insurance agencies for illness brought on by consumption of tobacco products (National Association of Attorneys General 2003). The four remaining states (Florida, Minnesota, Mississippi, and Texas) settled separately with the companies. The MSA stipulated that the tobacco companies pay the states an estimated $206 billion over the next several years. The payments are made annually and are adjusted for the number of cigarettes sold in each state in each year. In this sense, the MSA payment structure resembles an excise tax. The strategy of using litigation as an instrument for discouraging consumption of a commodity deemed to be harmful to consumers is becoming more common (Parmet and Daynard 2000). The impact that such litigation has on other tobacco control policies, such as excise taxes, depends on the extent to which litigation and such policies are substitutable. The MSA payments could substitute for excise taxes at the state level. This may be so to the extent that state legislatures have succeeded in levying socially optimal excise tax rates. (1) If so, states would be expected to have reduced excise taxes on cigarettes after the settlements were reached. Similarly, one would expect that various tobacco control policies, such as workplace smoking bans, would be substitutes, albeit imperfect ones, for state cigarette excise taxes and for penalties resulting from litigation that function as excise taxes. Alternatively, litigation and the resulting settlement may have changed the balance of power between tobacco control advocates and the tobacco manufacturers with the consequence that the settlements and state excise taxes are complements. The tobacco industry's influence on federal and state legislatures, historically, has been an impediment to enacting tobacco control legislation at either federal or state levels (Kelder and Daynard 1997; Parmet and Daynard 2000). Rather than crowd out state excise taxes, the MSA could have led to crowding in. A cursory glance at the data supports the view that litigation changes the balance of power. Since the MSA and four individual state settlements were reached, the former in November 1998 and the individual settlements somewhat earlier, state legislatures have increasingly looked to state excise taxes on cigarettes as a source of revenue, relative to both excise taxes imposed on alcohol and state taxes more generally (Figure 1). In particular, the largest jumps in the mean real state excise tax on cigarettes occurred in 1997 and 2002. In fiscal year 2003, for example, state excise tax increases were larger than any other single type of tax including major sources of revenue such as income taxes (National Governors Association and National Association of State Budget Officers 2002). These increases did not coincide with increases in the mean real state excise tax on beer; the only year in which real state excise taxes on beer rose was 1998. [FIGURE 1 OMITTED] Such trends could have been due to factors other than the settlement. The goal of our empirical analysis is to assess whether the changes in cigarette excise taxes can be attributed to the settlement when other factors are held constant. Using pre-post as well as state excise taxes on beer as controls in a panel data difference-in-difference approach, the evidence on balance provides support for the view that litigation and cigarette excise taxes are complements, which is consistent with changes in the political equilibrium. II. DATA AND EMPIRICAL SPECIFICATION Overview We use a panel data difference-in-difference (D-D) regression design to test whether the litigation substituted for (crowd out) or complemented (crowd in) state excise taxes. …

Perceptions of industry responsibility and tobacco control policy by US tobacco company executives in trial testimony

Objective: Trial testimony from the United States provides a unique opportunity to examine strategies of the American tobacco industry. This paper examines congruence between the arguments for tobacco control policy...

Civil Claims of Foreign Sovereigns for Lost Taxes: The Big Tobacco Cases and the Revenue Rule

The article analyses some US federal court decisions which by relying on the so-called revenue rule rejected civil claims of foreign sovereigns against major tobacco companies based on tax losses suffered due to the smuggling of contraband tobacco products into the claimants’ territories. The revenue rule deals with the domestic court’s jurisdiction to enforce penal, revenue or other public law claims of foreign states. First, the article discusses the alleged rationale and the unclear scope of the globally accepted revenue rule. Then, it turns to the question whether the revenue rule was rightly applied by the courts to the civil claims of the foreign sovereigns. Finally, it questions the alleged rationale of the revenue rule and argues for its abandonment.

Youth smoking prevention and tobacco industry revenue

Epidemiological surveys make it clear that youth smoking contributes to both current and future tobacco industry revenue: over 80% of adult smokers reportedly began smoking before age 18. This paper estimates annual and lifetime revenue from youth smoking, and highlights the association between declines in youth smoking and declines in tobacco industry revenue. This paper reports the amount of tobacco industry revenue generated by youth smoking at two points in time (1997 and 2002), and describes the distribution of youth generated tobacco income among the major tobacco companies. The authors project the amount of tobacco industry revenue that will be generated by members of two cohorts (the high school senior classes of 1997 and 2002) over the course of their lifetimes. In 1997, youth consumed 890 million cigarette packs, generating $737 million in annual industry revenue. By 2002, consumption dropped to 541 million packs and revenue increased to nearly $1.2 billion. Fifty eight per cent of youth generated revenue goes to Philip Morris USA, 18% to Lorillard, and 12% to RJ Reynolds. The authors project that, over the course of their lives, the 1997 high school senior class will smoke 12.4 billion packs of cigarettes, generating $27.3 billion in revenue. The 2002 high school senior class is projected to smoke 10.4 billion packs, generating $22.9 billion in revenue over the course of their lives. Cigarette price increases from 1997 to 2002 have resulted in greater revenue for the tobacco industry, despite declines in youth smoking prevalence. However, in the absence of further cigarette price increases, declines in youth smoking are projected to lead ultimately to a loss of approximately $4 billion in future tobacco industry revenue from a single high school cohort.

Is the Tobacco Settlement Constitutional?

In August 2005, the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), a conservative advocacy organization, filed a lawsuit in Louisiana challenging the legality of the 1998 Master Settlement Agreement (MSA). The suit alleges that the MSA, under which the states receive monetary payments and the four major tobacco companies are insulated from price competition, violates the Compact Clause and other provisions of the U.S. Constitution. This lawsuit threatens to unravel of one of the most significant opportunities to improve public health in United States history. We consider the merits of the lawsuit, the problems with the MSA that it highlights, and the potential consequences of the suit for public health.