Tobacco Documents Online

The attadned docLm~nt is a revised and of the brochure .ETS: I~proving the Quality ' that~was in mid 1988. ~e doc~nt takes various Lsa~es relating to ETS (health claims, public ~n~ing etc.) and for eac~ of them provides detailed plans for introducing a pro-active programme. ~he do~-t provides a discussion of what types of activity ~ght be appL~iste to take for operating c~es %~o are at diff~ stages of the ~IS debate, and stresses the need te see the strategies as a 'm~lu' from which it mi~t be ~propriate to select certain activities. It is certainly not the case that we are p~osisg that all q~xating oo~pani~ ~hou/d carKF out all activities in the plan. ~ and appz~priate ccuzses of acticm will differ. Attached with the strateqy ~ is a selection of bro~ures and ~terisls that have been prcduced is differed: c~mtries around the world, and that may be suitable for reproduction or adaptation by other In any instance where a company wauld like to draw up an individual ETS programme of actioa based upon these suggestions and would lik~ advice or an indication of reseuroes, then please do not hesitate to contact me. \ / ~r s Boy~ lOth January 1991

ENVIRONMENTAL TOBACCO SMOKE Improving the Quality of Public Debate: Strategies ~- FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY NOVEMBER 1990

¢D~TENTS 1. Introduction. 2. BAT's Response to ETS Issugs, 3. Ti~g of ETS-related activities. 4. Key,elements of programmes. 5. Checklist of allies/resources. 6. ETS: Health Effects and lndoorAir Quality~ 7. Public Smoking. 8. Smoking On Board Aircraft 9. Smoking and Public Transport. 10. Smoking in the Workplace.

I~Vl'RODUCTIO N Communication of science to the public is notoriously bad. It is not because scientists themselves are unable to translate their work and thoughts into everyday terms. Rather, it is because the media and the public generafiy are more interested in sweeping headline stories than in the complexities, uncertainties and inconclusiveness that so often eharacterise truly scientific research and debate. One of the unfortunate consequences of this is that scientific research and opinion is often misreported, sensationafised, or treated selectively and promoted to the public as if it were uncontested and conclusive, when in fact it may be little more than speculation. This is particuIarly true with smoking issues, and especially ETS - environmental tobacco smoke - which is the subject here. On the one hand there are the results of scientific investigations which show themselves to be fragile, often contradictory and inconclusive; on the other, there are the populist assertions which deny that there is doubt and which claim certainty for the proposition that ETS seriously damages the health of non-smokers. Public debate about ETS should be concerned with the results of " scientific research and investigation. Instead, in many places around the world, the public debate has short-circuited that stage and moved on to argument about political action to restrict smoking in order to protect the health of the non-smoker. It is important that the debate is brought back to the roots of the unsubstantiated health claims that are made against ETS. The challenge that this presents to the tobacco industry and to the company if formidable. That is why this guide has been produced. However, it is not a scientific treatise. Its purpose is twofold: first, to state the company's viewpoint and position on ETS; second, to suggest action which operating companies should take in order to ensure that there is balanced and fair consideration of the facts by all concerned. The situation differs from country to country. In some, ETS is a well developed issue of high public awareness. In others, ETS has~- barely emerged as a subject of public debate. It is a matter for the management of each operating company in collaboration ~th Millbonk, to determine what action is most appropriate for them. It is hoped that the ideas presented here will be found to be of interest and practical help. They are based largeIy on the experience of BAT companies around the world and information provided by them. The structure of this guide such that after reviewing general policies and objectives on the ETS issue, five individua areas where action should be considered are identified: ETS health effects and indoor air quality Public Smoking Smoking on board aircraft Smoking and public transport Smoking in the workplace. 503 $74S

For each of the above areas, objectives, strategies and tactics are provided. It is the intention that each of these sections shouid stand alone; there is therefore of necessity a certain amount of repetition between the sections. It is not the intention thai every operating company should consider applying all of the tactics considered with in each of the sections. Some tactics clearly will not be appropriate for certain operating companies, or may simply be impossible to implement. However, each operating company should use the information contained within this document to prepare a plan on ETS-related issues, taking into account (a) the present level of awareness of the issues in their country and" (b) the suitability of the suggested approaches for Ihelr situation. The section "Timing of ETS-related activities" provides gnidellnes for establishing at which stage of the public debate action is necessary, and the types of activity that are most suited to countries at those various stages. The section entitled 'Key elements of progyammes" considers the pros and cons of using certain materials such as brochures, advertising campaigns etc. and gives general guidance on when they may be appropriate. However, inall cases when companies are considering an ETS programme, planning and use of resources and materials should he discussed with MUlbank beforehand. At the end of each of the five strategy sections is a list of "interview pointsL This is essentially a checldist of important points on the issue that can be made in a press interview, government discussion, briefing document etc. It isnot intended to be a source of detailed argumentation. For more specific or more detailed information, companies should refer to the recently distributed 'Smoking Issues: Ciaims and Responses~ document or to MillhanI~ Summary statements of company policy on ETS issues are provided in the section entitled "BAT's response to ETS issues'. 50 3P $749

An~c and Irrit ti n There is nothing new in people finding the habits and behaviour of others annoying, irritating, or perhaps even objectionable. Intolerance however, is a trait which remains uncurbed at a price. That pr nc pie must apply between smokers and non-smokers, with each respecting the fundamental personal freedoms of the other. Research has shown that ETS is a minor contributor to the quantity of chemlcals in the air. Neve~heless, ETS can be physically irritating to non-smokers and smokers alike, if it is confined within an ill-ventilatc.d room or building. In those circumstances, and irrespective of people's smoking habits, it is proper first to consider the need to improve ventilation and to encourage the circulation of clean air. Restrictions on smoking It is accepted that smoking must be restricted in same buildings and areas because oftbe potential fire hazard, or for reasons of hygiene. However, propnsais to restrict smoking on the grounds of a claimed association between ETS and adverse health effects are scientifically unjustified and should therefore be strongly resisted. If the grounds claimed far restrictions on smoking are about annoyance to non-smokers, it should be possible to deal ~th them through the exercise of common sense and courtesy. The tobacco industrt does not oppose the voluntary designation of non-smoking areas in public places as a courtesy to those who object to tobacco smoke, lfthis is not possible, then improved ventilation should be considered. If even thai is not enough, then it will be more effective and acceptable to everyone concerned if restrictions are introduced an a voluntary rather than a compulsory basis: in the workplace, restrictions should be a matter for discussion and agreement between management and the workforee; for other business premises, customers should decide whether they want restrictions and of what kind. l~,latters of Law? There is a balance to be struck in the law between the precious right of individual freedom and the need to protect other members of society. Therefore the law only generally proscribes those activities of an individual which have a demonstrable injury on others. TheYe is no body of scientific evidence to support the contention that ETS, and thereby smoking~ should be regulated. 503,?,28750

2. BAT'SRESPON ETO TSIS CLAIMS THAT ARE MADE AGAINST ETS Non-smokers do not always object to the habit of smoking. Some, however, find it irritating, anno~ng, or perhaps even objectionable. They may not like the small ofht tobacco; find it discomforting to the eyes, or nose and throat, particularly when the environment is adequately ventilated; or simply thoroughly disapprove of the smoklng habit. They may cite that ETS is an invasion of their privacy, their right to clean air and personal fi'eedom. Nevertheless the main thrust of assertions against ETS is that it is a serious hazard to the boa th of non-smokers, Several regulatory and advisory bogies around the world have concluded that exposure to ETS poses a small risk to non-smokers in terms of the development of lung cancer in adults and short term respiratory effects in very young children. The same bodies agree, however, that there is insufficient evidence to establish that ETS is associated with any other adverse health effect, such as heart disease. Anti.smoking activists have concluded that, where smoking may affect non-smokers, prohibition or restrictions on smoking are justified. The argument is put with considerable emotional appeal to non-sfi~okers: that non-smokers have the right to smoke-free air and should not be exposed to the health hazard that they claim ETS presents; that smoking should therefore be prohibited in certain public places; that segregation should apply in other cases. The logical progression of the argument of anti-smo~.dng activists is that smoking should be outlawed, except in the home where it is conceded that the individual should have the fight to smoke~ if he or she wishes. TIlE BAT RESPONSE ETS - health claims Scientific studies have not proven that ETS causes disease in non-smokers. The evidence is weak and conflicting and individual studies have been taken out of context and misused by anti-smoklng groups. --- Responses to individual health claims about ETS and various diseases can be found in "Smoking Issues: Claims and Responses', claims no. 1-9, 13. ETS - indoor air aualilv The actual amount of ETS that is present in indoor spaces is small and has been greatly exaggerated by anti-smoking groups. Studies of ETS levels in restaurants, offices homes, aeroplanes, public transport and a wide variety of other publie p aces have b~n conducted throughout the world. The results consistently show that ETS dissipates rapidly in real-life conditions. Improving ventilation in indoor environments will lead to the rapid elimination not only ETS, hut of the many other chemicals in indoor air that are present in far greater quantity than ETS. Responses on indoor air quality issues can also be found in "Smoking Issues: Claims and Responses~, claims no. 1O, 14,15. 50322 7 1

3. TIMING OF ETS-RELATED ACTIVITIES Factors influencin~ the likelihood of ETS deba!e/introductlon of _smokin~ restrictions - Public a'~areness of health claims about ETS. - Media coverage -locaI, or taken from overseas. - Presence of anti-smoking organisations. . Major WHO/pAHO influence. - Extent of current government restrictions/regulations on advertising, labelling etc. Assessin~ the need for action In theory, if, in a given country, all of the above are negative (i.e. no public awareness or media coverage, no WHO influence, no current restrictions) then it could be argued that ETS is unlikely to become a major public issue in the near future and there is no need for pre-emptive action at present. However, this is true for very few, if any, countries around the world. Most companies will find the above factors operating, albeit to a variable extent, in their markets, and an increa;e in activities of just one of these factors could very rapidly result in a high degree of public awareness of ETS or even in the introduction of smoking restrictions by government. Even in countries where the smoking and health debate has historically not been a major cause of concern, the mere fact of WHO pressure on governments can result in the introduction of smoking restrictions virtually overnight. This was certainly the case recently in Guatemala. Similarly, if a government previously inactive on smoking legislation begins to introduce regulations relating to advertising or labelling, then the chances are that smoking restrictions could be the next ones to be proposed. Virtually all anti-smoking groups around the world have ETS#moking restrictions on their agenda and are likely to begin lobbying government to introduce restrictions, or talking to the media about ETS. Even a small number of ETS stories syndicated fron~- overseas can dramatically raise public awareness of the issue. The release of a major US report such as that expected in 1991 from the US Environmental Protection Agency will inevitably increase coverage and will usuaIly have eredibillty in the eyes of the generaI public. In all countries where such activities are taking place, it cannot be oo soon to begin taking pre-emptive action or developing resources to deal with the issue as it develops. Although it is quite c ear that no company would wish to create an ETS issue where one does not yet rea y exis there are certain types of pre.emptive action that can be taken to reduce the ke hood of significant restrictions occurring. Some of these are listed in the next section. ,50322S752

In countries where significant restrictions already exist on ETS there is still a need for act vity. Vo untary restrictions or bans can be reversed, and leglslation may be amended or repealed. Again, suggested action is listed in the next sections. In summary, there are few, if any, countries in which no action should be taken at present. In countries where ETS is not yet a major issue but the factors d scussed n the previous section are operating, pre-emptive action should be taken and resources should be developed. In coutnries where level of awareness is high but restrictions are not yet widespread, more specific and targEeted activities should be undertaken. In countries where restrictions are widespread or - legislation is already in force, every attempt should be made to have them overturned or amended. Examples of vre-emvtive action on ET~ Preparation and planning preparing and "knowing where to find material, argumentation, consultants etc. developing contacts with government, media and influential organisations that can be used when crises occur. Examnlcs or action where ETS is a uub!i¢ issue* 1. Develop contacts in areas of business that may be affected by restrictions if they are proposed, employers, airlines, hospitalityD industry etc. Discuss the issue of restrictions and provide alternative suggestions e.g. ventilation - to try to prevent the introduction of restrictions. 2. Argue strongly for tolerance and courtesy and for voluI~ar~ regulation. Continue with courtesy campaigns. 3. Develop and distribute scientifically-based arguments on ETS and indoor air quality. 4. Encourage local consultants to comment on media articles/statements about ETS. Examnles of action when restrirtions/leeislation are oronose0* 1. 2, Introduce tareeted campaigns for the specific audiences relevant to the proposed restrictions (e.g. employers/unions etc. if workplace restrictions are proposed). Using advertising, brochures, briefings etc. as appropriate. Lobby all government, media, business contacts and other allies, and provide them with argumentation on science, the practicality and advisability of rest rletions, potential costs of restrictions etc. 50,.q228753

.'r Examples of actlou when restrictions/le~islation is wldes~read* 1. Develop information about the cost of the restrictions or legislation compared to any benefits that were proposed. 2. Research examples of instances where restrictions/l.egislation have caused inconvenience, embarrassment, loss of.lob etc. elc. and use them with the media and with government. Point out prsctlcal difficulties in complying with the legislation/ restrictions. w 3. As a result of the above, lobby to have legislation amended or repealed, or restrictions overturned. 4. Keep up media campaigns on health issues - do not assume all is completely lost if restrictions or legislation are introduced. Continue to report on the conflicting evidence and the results of conferences stating that there is no conclusive proof. Public opinion about ETS can still be influenced even if restrictions are commonplace. N.B, This is not an exhaustive list (which is the purpose of the body of this document) but a llst of examples to give an indication of appropriate types of actlvity. 503 $754