Literature DB >> 11799542

'Light' and 'mild' cigarettes: who smokes them? Are they being misled?

M J Ashley1, J Cohen, R Ferrence.   

Abstract

Using two population-based surveys of Ontarians, we examined the proportions of smokers who smoke 'light' and 'mild' cigarettes (L/M). We compared L/M smokers to regular cigarette smokers regarding demographic, health knowledge, and smoking characteristics and examined their health-related perceptions of L/M and reasons for smoking them. Use of these cigarettes increased from 71% in 1996 to 83% in 2000. Those who smoked L/M were more likely to be female, to be less addicted, and to be more advanced toward quitting. In 1996, one in five believed that smoking L/M lowers the risk of cancer and heart disease. In 1996 and 2000, respectively, 44% and 27% smoked L/M to reduce health risks, 41% and 40% smoked them as a step toward quitting, and 41% in both years said they would be more likely to quit if they learned L/M could provide the same tar and nicotine as regular cigarettes. These data provide empirical support for banning 'light' and 'mild' on cigarette packaging.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11799542

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can J Public Health        ISSN: 0008-4263


  9 in total

1.  The temporal relationship between advertising and sales of low-tar cigarettes.

Authors:  Mark B Reed; Christy M Anderson; David M Burns
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 7.552

2.  Impact of corrective health information on consumers' perceptions of "reduced exposure" tobacco products.

Authors:  Lois Biener; Karen Bogen; Gregory Connolly
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 7.552

Review 3.  Tobacco packaging and labeling policies under the U.S. Tobacco Control Act: research needs and priorities.

Authors:  David Hammond
Journal:  Nicotine Tob Res       Date:  2011-10-29       Impact factor: 4.244

4.  The Virginia Slims identity crisis: an inside look at tobacco industry marketing to women.

Authors:  B A Toll; P M Ling
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 7.552

5.  The unbearable lightness of "light" cigarettes: a comparison of smoke yields in six varieties of Canadian "light" cigarettes.

Authors:  Paul L Gendreau; Frank Vitaro
Journal:  Can J Public Health       Date:  2005 May-Jun

6.  Stealing a march in the 21st century: accelerating progress in the 100-year war against tobacco addiction in the United States.

Authors:  Michael C Fiore; Timothy B Baker
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2009-05-14       Impact factor: 9.308

7.  Misperceptions of "light" cigarettes abound: national survey data.

Authors:  Nick Wilson; Deepa Weerasekera; Jo Peace; Richard Edwards; George Thomson; Miranda Devlin
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2009-05-08       Impact factor: 3.295

8.  Machine-assessed tar yield marketing on cigarette packages from two cities in South Korea.

Authors:  Michael Iacobelli; Juhee Cho; Kevin Welding; Kate Smith; Joanna E Cohen
Journal:  Tob Induc Dis       Date:  2021-06-25       Impact factor: 2.600

9.  Impact of the removal of light and mild descriptors from cigarette packages in Ontario, Canada: switching to "light replacement" brand variants.

Authors:  Joanna E Cohen; Jingyan Yang; Elisabeth A Donaldson
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2014-09-16       Impact factor: 4.018

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.