L Biener1, J E Harris, W Hamilton. 1. Center for Survey Research, University of Massachusetts Boston, 100 Morrissey Blvd, Boston, MA 02125, USA. lois.biener@umb.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of the Massachusetts tobacco control programme, which, since its start in January 1993, has spent over $200m-"the highest per capita expenditure for tobacco control in the world"-funded by an extra tax of 25 cents per pack of cigarettes. DESIGN: Population based trend analysis with comparison group. SUBJECTS: Adult residents of Massachusetts and other US states excluding California. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Per capita consumption of cigarettes as measured by states' sales tax records; prevalence of smoking in adults as measured by several population-based telephone surveys. RESULTS: From 1988 to 1992, decline in per capita consumption of cigarettes in Massachusetts (15%) was similar to that in the comparison states (14%), corresponding to an annual decline of 3-4% for both groups. During 1992-3, consumption continued to decline by 4% in the comparison states but dropped 12% in Massachusetts in response to the tax increase. From 1993 onward, consumption in Massachusetts showed a consistent annual decline of more than 4%, whereas in the comparison states it levelled off, decreasing by less than 1% a year. From 1992, the prevalence of adult smoking in Massachusetts has declined annually by 0.43% (95% confidence interval 0.21% to 0.66%) compared with an increase of 0. 03% (-0.06% to 0.12%) in the comparison states (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: These findings show that a strongly implemented, comprehensive tobacco control programme can significantly reduce tobacco use.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of the Massachusetts tobacco control programme, which, since its start in January 1993, has spent over $200m-"the highest per capita expenditure for tobacco control in the world"-funded by an extra tax of 25 cents per pack of cigarettes. DESIGN: Population based trend analysis with comparison group. SUBJECTS: Adult residents of Massachusetts and other US states excluding California. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Per capita consumption of cigarettes as measured by states' sales tax records; prevalence of smoking in adults as measured by several population-based telephone surveys. RESULTS: From 1988 to 1992, decline in per capita consumption of cigarettes in Massachusetts (15%) was similar to that in the comparison states (14%), corresponding to an annual decline of 3-4% for both groups. During 1992-3, consumption continued to decline by 4% in the comparison states but dropped 12% in Massachusetts in response to the tax increase. From 1993 onward, consumption in Massachusetts showed a consistent annual decline of more than 4%, whereas in the comparison states it levelled off, decreasing by less than 1% a year. From 1992, the prevalence of adult smoking in Massachusetts has declined annually by 0.43% (95% confidence interval 0.21% to 0.66%) compared with an increase of 0. 03% (-0.06% to 0.12%) in the comparison states (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: These findings show that a strongly implemented, comprehensive tobacco control programme can significantly reduce tobacco use.
Authors: M Siegel; P D Mowery; T P Pechacek; W J Strauss; M W Schooley; R K Merritt; T E Novotny; G A Giovino; M P Eriksen Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2000-03 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Micaela H Coady; John Jasek; Karen Davis; Bonnie Kerker; Elizabeth A Kilgore; Sarah B Perl Journal: J Urban Health Date: 2012-10 Impact factor: 3.671
Authors: Mary Kay Rayens; Karen M Butler; Amanda T Wiggins; Ganna Kostygina; Ronald E Langley; Ellen J Hahn Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2015-09-18 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: John A Tauras; Frank J Chaloupka; Matthew C Farrelly; Gary A Giovino; Melanie Wakefield; Lloyd D Johnston; Patrick M O'malley; Deborah D Kloska; Terry F Pechacek Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Lorraine Greaves; Joy Johnson; Joan Bottorff; Susan Kirkland; Natasha Jategaonkar; Melissa McGowan; Lucy McCullough; Lupin Battersby Journal: Can J Public Health Date: 2006 Jul-Aug