Reader Comments
Post a new comment on this article
Post Your Discussion Comment
Please follow our guidelines for comments and review our competing interests policy. Comments that do not conform to our guidelines will be promptly removed and the user account disabled. The following must be avoided:
- Remarks that could be interpreted as allegations of misconduct
- Unsupported assertions or statements
- Inflammatory or insulting language
Thank You!
Thank you for taking the time to flag this posting; we review flagged postings on a regular basis.
closeThe Nature of the Program Matters
Posted by plosmedicine on 31 Mar 2009 at 00:31 GMT
Author: Stanton Glantz
Position: Professor of Medicine
Institution: UC San Francisco
E-mail: glantz@medicine.ucsf.edu
Submitted Date: October 26, 2008
Published Date: October 29, 2008
This comment was originally posted as a “Reader Response” on the publication date indicated above. All Reader Responses are now available as comments.
The reason that we described the nature and key messages of the California Tobacco Control Program is that they do, in fact, matter. Increasing distrust of the tobacco industry is a strong predictor of smoking behavior as is creation of smokefree environments (see citations in our original paper).
Weaker programs, or programs focused on children, would not be expected to show the same magnitude benefits that the California Program demonstrated.
The fact that secondhand smoke causes lung cancer has been established since 1986, when the US Surgeon General published "The Health Consequences of Involuntary Smoking." Many additional disease have been added to the list of those caused by secondhand smoke since then, most importantly, heart disease.