Israel T Agaku1, Olalekan A Ayo-Yusuf2. 1. Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA iagaku@post.harvard.edu. 2. Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: This study assessed the influence of exposure to pro-tobacco advertisements on experimentation with emerging tobacco products among U.S. adolescents aged ≥9 years, in Grades 6 to 12. METHOD: Data were obtained from the 2011 National Youth Tobacco Survey. Multivariate logistic regression was used to measure the association between experimentation with snus and e-cigarettes and exposure to pro-tobacco advertisements from three sources: over the Internet, in newspapers/magazines, and at retail stores. RESULTS: After controlling for sociodemographic characteristics and current use of other tobacco products, the odds of experimenting with snus were 1.36 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.88-3.16), 2.03 (95% CI = 1.30-3.17), and 3.24 (95% CI = 2.07-5.07), among students exposed to one, two, or all three types of pro-tobacco advertisements, respectively, compared with those exposed to none. Similar results were obtained for e-cigarettes. CONCLUSION: Stronger restrictions on tobacco advertisements, in concert with increased tobacco taxes and warning about the dangers of tobacco, use may help reduce youth tobacco use.
INTRODUCTION: This study assessed the influence of exposure to pro-tobacco advertisements on experimentation with emerging tobacco products among U.S. adolescents aged ≥9 years, in Grades 6 to 12. METHOD: Data were obtained from the 2011 National Youth Tobacco Survey. Multivariate logistic regression was used to measure the association between experimentation with snus and e-cigarettes and exposure to pro-tobacco advertisements from three sources: over the Internet, in newspapers/magazines, and at retail stores. RESULTS: After controlling for sociodemographic characteristics and current use of other tobacco products, the odds of experimenting with snus were 1.36 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.88-3.16), 2.03 (95% CI = 1.30-3.17), and 3.24 (95% CI = 2.07-5.07), among students exposed to one, two, or all three types of pro-tobacco advertisements, respectively, compared with those exposed to none. Similar results were obtained for e-cigarettes. CONCLUSION: Stronger restrictions on tobacco advertisements, in concert with increased tobacco taxes and warning about the dangers of tobacco, use may help reduce youth tobacco use.
Authors: Tess Boley Cruz; Rob McConnell; Brittany Wagman Low; Jennifer B Unger; Mary Ann Pentz; Robert Urman; Kiros Berhane; Chih Ping Chou; Fei Liu; Jessica L Barrington-Trimis Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2019-06-21 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Emily T Hébert; Elizabeth A Vandewater; Michael S Businelle; Melissa B Harrell; Steven H Kelder; Cheryl L Perry Journal: Addict Behav Date: 2017-05-03 Impact factor: 3.913
Authors: Lauren Collins; Allison M Glasser; Haneen Abudayyeh; Jennifer L Pearson; Andrea C Villanti Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2019-01-01 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Dale S Mantey; Maria R Cooper; Stephanie L Clendennen; Keryn E Pasch; Cheryl L Perry Journal: J Adolesc Health Date: 2016-04-12 Impact factor: 5.012
Authors: Alison Breland; Eric Soule; Alexa Lopez; Carolina Ramôa; Ahmad El-Hellani; Thomas Eissenberg Journal: Ann N Y Acad Sci Date: 2016-01-15 Impact factor: 5.691