scholarly journals Tobacco Harm Reduction as a Path to Restore Trust in Tobacco Control

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (11) ◽  
pp. 5560
Author(s):  
Tamar M. J. Antin ◽  
Geoffrey Hunt ◽  
Rachelle Annechino
Keyword(s):  
Harm Reduction ◽  
Tobacco Control ◽  
Significant Proportion ◽  
The United States ◽  
Tobacco Prevention ◽  
Tobacco Harm Reduction ◽  
The People ◽  
Reduction Strategies ◽  
Control And Prevention ◽  
And Control

The controversy of tobacco harm reduction in the United States persists despite evidence that an important audience of tobacco prevention and control, i.e., the people who use or are likely to use nicotine and tobacco products, are engaging in practices that may be considered harm reduction. Despite this, a significant proportion of the US tobacco control and prevention field continues to be guided by a precept that there is “no safe tobacco,” therefore failing to acknowledge practices that may be used to reduce the harms associated with consuming combustible forms of nicotine and tobacco. In this commentary, we argue that ignoring the potential benefits of harm reduction strategies may unintentionally lead to an erosion of trust in tobacco control among some members of the public. Trust in tobacco control as an institution is crucial for the success of tobacco control efforts. To ensure trust, we must return to our basic principles of doing no harm, developing programs that are responsive to people’s experiences, and providing resources in assisting people to reduce the harms that may be associated with practices, such as smoking, which adversely affect health. Only by respecting an individual’s priorities can we cultivate trust and develop tobacco prevention efforts that are grounded in the realities of people’s lives and responsive to their needs.

Community Perceptions of Harm Reduction and Its Implications for Syringe Exchange Policy

2020 ◽  
Vol 50 (4) ◽  
pp. 507-523 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amanda Sharp ◽  
Joshua T. Barnett ◽  
Enya B. Vroom
Keyword(s):  
Harm Reduction ◽  
Community Education ◽  
The United States ◽  
Syringe Exchange ◽  
Policy Integration ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Exchange Program ◽  
Reduction Strategies ◽  
National Public Health ◽  
Overdose Deaths

In the United States, the rising prevalence of opioid addiction has led to an increase in opioid-related overdose deaths and transmission of infectious disease. This resulted in the declaration of a national public health emergency and the need for harm reduction strategies such as syringe exchange. Florida has seen increases in blood-borne diseases and fatal/nonfatal opioid overdoses, yet harm reduction policy integration has been historically limited. To inform policy change, this study explores the perspectives of community members in Manatee County, Florida, on harm reduction services. Six focus groups were conducted with findings centralized around three emergent themes related to the implementation of a syringe exchange program: (a) awareness and acceptability; (b) facilitating factors; and (c) perceived barriers. The results of this qualitative research helped to inform the successful adoption of a local syringe exchange ordinance. Recommendations for community education and engagement regarding harm reduction policy are discussed.

scholarly journals Influence and the New American Revolution

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 39-44
Author(s):  
Raghav Sharma
Keyword(s):  
American Revolution ◽  
The United States ◽  
American People ◽  
American Government ◽  
Finance Reform ◽  
Effect Change ◽  
The People ◽  
The Government ◽  
And Control ◽  
The Relationship

Contemporary political discourse in the United States is rife with ideas on how our society can change and reform — in particular, issues such as campaign finance reform, income inequality, and the use and control of firearms are in need of a comprehensive response that is attentive to the needs and will of the American people. Sadly, the relationship between the American people and our government is currently in a dismal state. This relationship between the people and the government has become unbalanced and unfair, reducing the likelihood of change and deterring individuals from believing in their ability to influence such reform. The need to understand our capacity to effect change, though, is absolutely necessary. The issues facing the American government at this time are as numerous as they are serious, but ideas and proposals are coming forward with the potential to rebalance this relationship. More importantly, they have the potential to usher in a new American Revolution that makes good on the democratic promise of a government for, of and by the people. 

Boosting the Tobacco Control Vaccine: recognizing the role of the retail environment in addressing tobacco use and disparities

2020 ◽  
pp. tobaccocontrol-2020-055722 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amanda Y. Kong ◽  
Brian A. King
Keyword(s):  
Tobacco Control ◽  
Population Level ◽  
Tobacco Prevention ◽  
Retail Environment ◽  
Demographic Groups ◽  
Innovative Strategies ◽  
And Control ◽  
Racial Ethnic ◽  
Tobacco Endgame

Much of the progress in reducing cigarette smoking and tobacco-related morbidity and mortality among youth and adults is attributable to population-level strategies previously described in the context of the Tobacco Control Vaccine. The retail environment is used heavily by the tobacco industry to promote and advertise its products, and variations in exposure to and characteristics of the retail environment exist across demographic groups. It is therefore also an essential environment for further reducing smoking, as well as ameliorating racial, ethnic and socioeconomic tobacco-related disparities. This commentary provides an overview of the importance of incorporating strategies focused on the tobacco retailer environment (availability; pricing and promotion; advertising and display; age of sale; and retail licensure) as part of a comprehensive approach to tobacco prevention and control. To reach tobacco endgame targets, such innovative strategies are a complement to, but not a replacement for, long-standing evidence-based components of the Tobacco Control Vaccine.

Perceptions of nicotine in current and former users of tobacco and tobacco harm reduction products from seven countries

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 191-206
Author(s):  
Sarah Rajkumar ◽  
Nada Adibah ◽  
Michael Jonathan Paskow ◽  
Brian Eric Erkkila
Keyword(s):  
Harm Reduction ◽  
The United States ◽  
Public Perceptions ◽  
Tobacco Harm Reduction ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Other Substances ◽  
The Media ◽  
Conflicting Messages

Purpose Nicotine is widely known as a tobacco constituent and for its use as a tobacco cessation aid. The development of new devices for nicotine delivery in recent years has led to uncertainty among consumers regarding the health risks of nicotine relative to tobacco. The purpose of this study was to discover if current and former consumers of tobacco and tobacco harm reduction (THR) products could distinguish between “nicotine” and “cigarettes” and examined the preceding media dialogue to determine if conflicting messages by the media influence public perceptions. Design/methodology/approach A quantitative survey was administered online in Norway (NO), Japan (JP), the United Kingdom (UK) and the United States (US), while face-to-face computer-aided interviews were conducted with randomly selected samples in India (IN), Greece (GR) and South Africa (SA). Participants were between 18 and 69 years of age and either current users of tobacco and THR products or previous users who quit within the past five years. Questions assessed beliefs about harmfulness of nicotine. Nicotine and other products and substances were also independently rated for harmfulness on a scale of 1–10 and subsequently compared. In addition, the authors examined the media dialogue of top media outlets in four countries to assess the potential influence on people’s beliefs. Findings A total of 54,267 participants (NO: 1,700, JP: 2,227, UK: 2,250, USA: 2,309, IN: 41,633, GR: 1,801, SA: 2,359) were sampled with the percentage of women participants ranging from 14.8% (IN) to 53.8% (UK). Between 68.3% (men, IN) and 88.7% (men, USA) of current consumers believed nicotine is harmful. Current consumers who agreed with the statement that nicotine is the primary cause of tobacco-related cancer ranged from 43.7% (men, UK) to 78.0% (men, SA). In six countries nicotine was rated nearly as harmful as cigarettes and alcohol, while other substances such as sugar, salt or caffeine, were usually rated as less harmful. Research limitations/implications A large proportion of consumers across all surveyed countries view nicotine and cigarettes similarly. Clearer communication on the harmful properties of both by the media is needed to help consumers make informed decisions about products across the continuum of risk. Messaging to consumers, especially via the media, propagates misinformation about the relative harms of tobacco and nicotine through reporting that is often incomplete and biased toward more negative aspects. Originality/value This study specifically assessed public perceptions of nicotine as opposed to products containing nicotine, which is the focus of previous studies. Apart from showing that consumers often incorrectly perceive nicotine and cigarettes as similar in terms of harmfulness, the authors highlight the need for more accurate and complete reporting by the media to clarify widespread misunderstandings and mitigate public uncertainty.

Projecting the future impact of past accomplishments in tobacco control

2020 ◽  
pp. tobaccocontrol-2019-055487
Author(s):  
Michael V Maciosek ◽  
Ann W St Claire ◽  
Paula A Keller ◽  
Amy B LaFrance ◽  
Zack Xu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Tobacco Control ◽  
Smoking Prevalence ◽  
Control Measures ◽  
Tobacco Prevention ◽  
Quit Smoking ◽  
Control Programmes ◽  
And Control ◽  
Productivity Gains ◽  
Population Effects

BackgroundThe benefits to adults who quit smoking increase over time as former smokers live longer, healthier lives. Youth who never smoke will benefit for decades. Thus, the long-term population effects of tobacco prevention and control policies may be substantial. Yet they are rarely quantified in evaluations of state tobacco control programmes.MethodsUsing a microsimulation model, we predicted the benefits to Minnesotans from 2018 to 2037 of having reduced cigarette smoking prevalence from 1998 to 2017. We first simulated the health and economic harms of tobacco that would have occurred had smoking prevalence stayed at 1997 levels. The harms produced by that scenario were then compared with harms in scenarios with smoking declining at observed rates from 1998 to 2017 and either expected declines from 2018 to 2037 or a greater decline to 5% prevalence in 2037.ResultsWith expected smoking prevalence decreases from 2018 to 2037, Minnesotans will experience 12 298 fewer cancers, 72 208 fewer hospitalisations for cardiovascular disease and diabetes, 31 913 fewer respiratory disease hospitalisations, 14 063 fewer smoking-attributable deaths, $10.2 billion less in smoking-attributable medical expenditures and $9.4 billion in productivity gains than if prevalence had stayed at 1997 levels. These gains are two to four times greater than for the previous 20 years, and would be about 15% higher if Minnesota achieves a 5% adult prevalence rate by 2037.ConclusionsThe tobacco control measures implemented from 1998 to 2017 will produce accelerated benefits during 2018–2037 if modest progress in tobacco prevalence rates is maintained.

scholarly journals Specific harm reduction strategies employed by 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetmine/ ecstasy users in the United States and the United Kingdom

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 205032451771106 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan K Davis ◽  
Harold Rosenberg
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Harm Reduction ◽  
The United States ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Web Based ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Assessment Period ◽  
Reduction Strategies

Both recreational and problematic 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA)/ecstasy users could benefit from employing harm reduction interventions intended to preserve health and prevent negative consequences. To evaluate whether use of such interventions varied by country of residence and frequency of ecstasy use, we used web-based surveys to assess how often 104 lower-frequency and higher-frequency American ecstasy users and 80 lower-frequency and higher-frequency British ecstasy users employed each of 19 self-initiated harm reduction strategies when they used ecstasy during a 2-month period. Several significant differences notwithstanding, at least 75% of participants had used 11 of the 19 strategies one or more times during the 2-month assessment period, regardless of whether they lived in the United States or United Kingdom and whether they were lower-frequency or higher-frequency ecstasy users. When proportions of American and British participants using a strategy differed significantly, it was typically larger proportions of Americans using those strategies. Many of the less frequently employed strategies are not applicable on every occasion of ecstasy use. However, because ecstasy is not a diverted pharmaceutical of known quality/potency, testing for the presence of MDMA, other stimulants, and adulterants is a strategy that everyone should employ, regardless of country of residence or how frequently one consumes ecstasy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document