J Robert Branston1, Ann McNeill2, Anna B Gilmore3, Rosemary Hiscock3, Timea R Partos2. 1. School of Management, University of Bath, Claverton Down, BA2 7AY, Bath, UK. Electronic address: J.R.Branston@bath.ac.uk. 2. UK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies; King's College London, Addictions Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, 4 Windsor Walk, London, SE5 8BB, UK. 3. UK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies; Department for Health, University of Bath, Claverton Down, BA2 7AY, Bath, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Roll-Your-Own tobacco (RYO) use is increasingly popular in many countries: it is generally cheaper than factory-made cigarettes (FM), and smokers can further reduce costs by adjusting the amount of tobacco in each cigarette. However, the level of risk of RYO compared with FM cigarettes is similar and does not meaningfully change with cigarette weight. We assessed the weight of tobacco in RYO cigarettes across jurisdictions with differing tobacco taxes/prices and over time. METHOD: Six waves of the International Tobacco Control 4 Country longitudinal study of smokers and recent ex-smokers, providing 3176 observations from exclusive RYO users covering 2006-15, are used to calculate the weight of tobacco used in RYO cigarettes in the US, Canada, Australia, and the UK. Multilevel regression analyses were used to compare weights across countries, socio-demographic factors, and over time. RESULTS: Smokers in the UK and Australia, where tobacco is relatively expensive, show higher levels of exclusive RYO use (25.8% and 13.8% respectively) and lower mean weights of tobacco per RYO cigarette (0.51 g(sd 0.32 g) and 0.53 g(0.28 g)), compared with both Canada and especially the US (6.0% and 3.5%, and 0.76 g(0.45 g) and 1.07 g(0.51 g)). Smokers in the UK and Australia also exhibited a statistically significant year-on-year decrease in the mean weight of each RYO cigarette. CONCLUSIONS: Taxation of RYO should increase considerably in the UK and Australia so that RYO and FM cigarettes are taxed equivalently to reduce RYO attractiveness and inequalities. Other measures to reduce the price differentials, including taxing RYO solely on weight, are also discussed.
BACKGROUND: Roll-Your-Own tobacco (RYO) use is increasingly popular in many countries: it is generally cheaper than factory-made cigarettes (FM), and smokers can further reduce costs by adjusting the amount of tobacco in each cigarette. However, the level of risk of RYO compared with FM cigarettes is similar and does not meaningfully change with cigarette weight. We assessed the weight of tobacco in RYO cigarettes across jurisdictions with differing tobacco taxes/prices and over time. METHOD: Six waves of the International Tobacco Control 4 Country longitudinal study of smokers and recent ex-smokers, providing 3176 observations from exclusive RYO users covering 2006-15, are used to calculate the weight of tobacco used in RYO cigarettes in the US, Canada, Australia, and the UK. Multilevel regression analyses were used to compare weights across countries, socio-demographic factors, and over time. RESULTS: Smokers in the UK and Australia, where tobacco is relatively expensive, show higher levels of exclusive RYO use (25.8% and 13.8% respectively) and lower mean weights of tobacco per RYO cigarette (0.51 g(sd 0.32 g) and 0.53 g(0.28 g)), compared with both Canada and especially the US (6.0% and 3.5%, and 0.76 g(0.45 g) and 1.07 g(0.51 g)). Smokers in the UK and Australia also exhibited a statistically significant year-on-year decrease in the mean weight of each RYO cigarette. CONCLUSIONS: Taxation of RYO should increase considerably in the UK and Australia so that RYO and FM cigarettes are taxed equivalently to reduce RYO attractiveness and inequalities. Other measures to reduce the price differentials, including taxing RYO solely on weight, are also discussed.
Authors: M E Thompson; G T Fong; D Hammond; C Boudreau; P Driezen; A Hyland; R Borland; K M Cummings; G B Hastings; M Siahpush; A M Mackintosh; F L Laux Journal: Tob Control Date: 2006-06 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: G T Fong; K M Cummings; R Borland; G Hastings; A Hyland; G A Giovino; D Hammond; M E Thompson Journal: Tob Control Date: 2006-06 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: Andrea S Licht; Andrew J Hyland; Richard J O'Connor; Frank J Chaloupka; Ron Borland; Geoffrey T Fong; Nigar Nargis; K Michael Cummings Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2011-01-20 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Sarah Aleyan; Katherine East; Ann McNeill; K Michael Cummings; Geoffrey T Fong; Hua-Hie Yong; James F Thrasher; Ron Borland; Sara C Hitchman Journal: Addiction Date: 2019-06-18 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: Joan S Tucker; William G Shadel; Rachana Seelam; Daniela Golinelli; Daniel Siconolfi Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2019-10-18 Impact factor: 4.492