Tobacco Documents Online

American Medical Association Phvsicidns dedicated to the health of America News Release EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE: 10 a.m. (ET), TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 22, 1994 Media Advisory: David Satcher, MD, PhD, and Michael Eriksen, ScD, from the Centers for Disease Control, Atlanta, can be reached through 404/639-3286. BATTLE TO GET AMERICA TO STOP SMOKING NO BASIS FOR OPTIMISM Head of Centers for Disease Control says outlook for smoking among kids, teens is not good either NEW YORK--The decline in smoking rates enjoyed during the past 25 years appears to have stalled, even though nationwide efforts to control tobacco use may be viewed by some as a public health success story, says the head of the CDC in an editorial in this week's Journal of the American Meclical Association. David Satcher, MD, PhD, director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, with Michael Eriksen, ScD, director of the CDC's Office on Smoking and Health, write the most recent data on smoking prevalence provide no basis for optimism. Dr. Satcher presented the editorial at a media briefing sponsored here today by the AMA and The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. "The 1991 smoking prevalence estimate of 25.7 percent is virtually no different from the previous year's estimate of 25.5 percent. The outlook for smoking among children and adolescents is even worse. When comparing the use of alcohol, cigarettes, and other drugs, only cigarette use did not decline substantially among high school seniors between 1981 and 1991. During the last decade, smoking among white teens has scarcely declined at all," they write. "Since most children can buy cigarettes whenever they want to--even though the sale of tobacco 311, 50 against the oit`~,f has not been won," they continue. 515 North State Street Chicago, Illinois 60610 312 464 4430

(TOF3ACC0 PARADOX) Vo better achieve tobacco control, the responsibility for change must be shared by all. In 1994, the _~en,ltl~nt ~t111 ha~e a tobacco-control pr,1g.ram in every state, funded by the CDC, the National ('.incer Institute, or dedicated state excise taxes (as in California), they write. In addition to the symbolic step of having made the White House smoke-free, the current .:drnlnrtitratron has proposed quadrupling the excise tax on cigarettes--from 24 cents to 99 cents--an 01 _,reat si~tniticance to public health. "Not only will this action raise much-needed revenue ior health care, hut should also contribute to a major reduction in cigarette consumption," they write. `ke ~:xp«t that, as a resu;t of an increased cigarette tax, the annual decline in smoking prevalence %~ill heLln aLarn. I'he l. -_iing off, ~tihich began in 1991, corresponded with an increase in the .1%arlahilit` of discount cigarettes and cost-saving promotions sponsored,by the tobacco industry. " l'here is reason to c . t that by iding a financial incentive, the proposed tax increase will cncourage :urrent sn-„ .4 .. + s to quit teens never to start, rather than merely encourage smokers to "mokc li`%~cr ci~tarettes. The greatest effect is expected on teen smoking behavior, since teens are the most senslti~e to changes. both up and down, in the price of cigarettes," Satcher and Eriksen write. I he~ continue that we know smoking is the single greatest cause of death in the United States. "Yet, %~e are still plagued by an entirely preventable problem, and this is the paradox of tobacco control. t)nk through a broad-based approach to preventing tobacco use (like prevention, treating nicotine ,:.i,,tic:tion. protecting nonsmokers from environmental tobacco smoke, increasing the price of and rc`aulating tobacco products, and promoting nk -imoking messages while limiting tobacco ads) can we hope to end the staggering toll of needless disability and death," they write. ~ L i c l: Jnrr i L mltst nmE llV )" "a hu- ~ ~ }t W lV For more information, contact the AMA's Dept. of Science News at 312/464-5374. U~ Oo ~