Abstract
Background
Since 1989 when health warning labels appeared on Canadian cigarette packages, the labels have changed from text only covering less than one quarter of the package to text and graphics covering over half the package. This study examines how Canadians in their 20s feel about the current graphic warning labels and their potential to prevent smoking and encourage quitting.
Methods
Participants between 20 and 24 years of age were part of a 10-year cohort study begun when the group was in Grade 6, with the purpose of examining factors that may affect smoking. Five questions about warning labels were added to the 2002 questionnaire requesting information on perceptions of the labels and their potential impact on smoking behaviours of young adults. One item had been included in previous questionnaires.
Results
32.8% (n=1267) of the respondents were smokers, with males (35.6%) being more likely to smoke than females (30.4%). Current smokers were less likely than experimental/ex-smokers to believe that warning labels with stronger messages would make people their age less likely to smoke. Female current smokers were more likely to think about quitting.
Conclusion
Despite the efforts taken in developing the labels, some young adults are skeptical about their effects. Warning labels may have to be modified to target issues that are relevant to young adults; gender differences are important in this modification. Warning labels can offer an additional component to a comprehensive tobacco control program, in that they provide health information.
MeSH terms: Smoking, product labelling, statistics
Résumé
Contexte
C’est en 1989 qu’est entrée en vigueur l’affichage obligatoire des étiquettes d’avertissement de dangers pour la santé sur les paquets de cigarettes vendus au Canada. Des étiquettes d’avertissement qui ne couvraient au départ que moins du quart de la surface du paquet de cigarettes, occupent maintenant plus de la moitié du paquet et sont assorties d’éléments textuels et graphiques. Cette étude vise à déterminer la perception des Canadiens dans la vingtaine à l’égard des éléments graphiques présents sur les étiquettes d’avertissement actuels et de leur efficacité comme mesure préventive du tabagisme et d’incitation à cesser de fumer.
Méthodes
Des personnes de 20 à 24 ans participaient à une étude de cohortes d’une durée de dix ans (qui a débuté alors que le groupe était en sixième année) qui portait sur les facteurs influant sur le tabagisme. On a ajouté au questionnaire de 2002 cinq questions liées aux étiquettes d’avertissement au sujet de la perception des étiquettes et leur effet éventuel sur les habitudes des mineurs au chapitre du tabagisme. Dans le passé, l’un de ces points avait été intégré aux questionnaires.
Résultats
Les fumeurs représentaient 32,8 % (n=1267) des répondants; les hommes (35,6 %) étaient davantage susceptibles de s’adonner au tabagisme que les femmes (30,4 %). Les fumeurs réguliers étaient moins susceptibles que les personnes qui tentaient l’expérience et celles qui ont cessé de fumer de croire que les étiquettes d’avertissement qui présenteraient des messages plus convaincants auraient un effet éventuel sur les habitudes de consommation du tabac des gens de leur âge. Les fumeuses régulières étaient plus susceptibles d’envisager de cesser de fumer.
Conclusion
Malgré les efforts investis dans la conception d’étiquettes, certains jeunes adultes émettent des doutes quant à l’efficacité d’une telle méthode. On faudrait probablement modifier les étiquettes d’avertissement pour mieux cibler les préoccupations des jeunes adultes; au moment de cette modification, on accorderait une place importante aux différences entre la perception des hommes et des femmes. Les étiquettes d’avertissement peuvent constituer un complément à un programme global de lutte contre le tabagisme dans la mesure où elles présentent des renseignements sur la santé.
References
- 1.Health Canada. Canadian Tobacco Use Monitoring Survey (CTUMS) summary results for 2003. Ottawa, ON: Author. Available on-line at: https://doi.org/www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hecs-sesc/tobacco/research/ctums/2003 (Accessed August 2004).
- 2.Health Canada. The National Strategy: Moving Forward. The 2002 Progress Report on Tobacco Control. 2002. pp. 1–17. [Google Scholar]
- 3.CDC. Cigarette Smoking Among Adults—United States, 2002. MMWR. 2004;53(20):427–31. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.CDC Cigarette Smoking Among Adults—United States, 2001. MMWR. 2003;52(40):953–56. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.CDC Cigarette Smoking Among Adults—United States, 2000. MMWR. 2002;51(29):642–45. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Meier KJ, Licari MJ. The effect of cigarette taxes on cigarette consumption, 1955 through 1994. Am J Public Health. 1997;87(7):1126–30. doi: 10.2105/ajph.87.7.1126. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Scollo M, Sweanor D. Cigarette taxes. Tob Control. 2000;8(1):110–11. doi: 10.1136/tc.8.1.110. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Sweanor D. Killing taxes and Canadians. Can J Public Health. 1994;85(2):78–79. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Laugesen M, Scollo M, Sweanor D, Shiffman S, Gitchell J, Barnsley K, et al. World’s best practice in tobacco control. Tob Control. 2000;9(2):228–36. doi: 10.1136/tc.9.2.228. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.USDHHS. Reducing Tobacco Use: A report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, Georgia, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health. 2000. pp. 1–4. [Google Scholar]
- 11.Liang L, Chaloupka F, Nichter M, Clayton R. Prices, Policies and youth smoking, May 2001. Addiction. 2003;98(Suppl1):105–22. doi: 10.1046/j.1360-0443.98.s1.7.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Crane FG, MacLean VA. A consumer evaluation of health warning labels on cigarette packages in Canada. Health Market Q. 1996;13(3):47. doi: 10.1300/J026v13n03_05. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Health Canada. The Tobacco Act: History of Labelling. 2000. [Google Scholar]
- 14.Koval JJ, Pederson LL. Stress-coping and other psychosocial risk factors: A model for smoking in grade 6 students. Addict Behav. 1999;24(2):207–18. doi: 10.1016/S0306-4603(98)00037-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Pederson LL, Koval JJ, O’Connor K. Are psychosocial factors related to smoking in grade-6 students? Addict Behav. 1997;22(2):169–81. doi: 10.1016/S0306-4603(96)00014-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Pederson LL, McGrady GA, Koval JJ, Mills CA, Carvajal SC. The role of stress, depression and other psychosocial factors in initiation to smoking: A comparison of models for a cohort of Grade 6 students who begin smoking by Grade 8 and by Grade 11. In: Columbus F, editor. Advances in Psychology Research: Volume IV. Huntington: NY: Nova Science Publishers; 2001. pp. 175–98. [Google Scholar]
- 17.Beltramini RF. Perceived believability of warning label information presented in cigarette advertising. J Advertising. 1988;17(2):26–32. doi: 10.1080/00913367.1988.10673110. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Crawford MA, Balch GI, Mermelstein R. Responses to tobacco control policies among youth. Tob Control. 2002;11:14–19. doi: 10.1136/tc.11.1.14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Tandemar Research Inc. Cigarette Packaging Study: The Evaluation of New Health Warning Messages. 1996. pp. 1–80. [Google Scholar]
- 20.Fischer PM, Richards JW, Jr, Berman EJ, Krugman DM. Recall and eye tracking study of adolescents viewing tobacco advertisements. JAMA. 1989;261(1):84–89. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Mahood G. Warnings that tell the truth: Breaking new ground in Canada. Tob Control. 1999;84:356–61. doi: 10.1136/tc.8.4.356. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Malouff J, Gabrilowitz D, Schutte N. Readability of health warnings on alcohol and tobacco products. Am J Public Health. 1992;82(3):464. doi: 10.2105/ajph.82.3.464-a. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Environics Research Group Limited. Health Canada — Office for Tobacco Control Focus Group Report Regarding Messages on Cigarette Package Sides and Flip-Tops. Health Canada. 1999. [Google Scholar]
- 24.Environics Research Group Limited. Health Warning Messages on the Flip/Side and Inserts of Cigarette Packaging-A survey of smokers. Health Canada. 2000;4617:1–14. [Google Scholar]
- 25.Aftab M, Kolben D, Lurie P. International cigarette labeling practices. Tob Control. 1999;8(4):368–72. doi: 10.1136/tc.8.4.368. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Borland R, Hill D. Initial impact of the new Australian tobacco health warnings on knowledge and beliefs. Tob Control. 1997;6(4):317–25. doi: 10.1136/tc.6.4.317. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Government of Canada. Tobacco Products Information Regulations-Tobacco Act. 2000. [Google Scholar]
- 28.Environics Research Group Limited. Health Canada. 1999. Canadian Adult and Youth Opinions of the Sizing of Health Warning Messages. [Google Scholar]
- 29.Liefeld JP. The relative importance of the size, content & pictures on cigarette package warning messages. Health Canada — Office for Tobacco Control [On-line] 1999. [Google Scholar]
- 30.Hammond D, Fong GT, McDonald PW, Cameron R, Brown KS. Impact of the graphic Canadian warning labels on adult smoking behaviour. Tob Control. 2003;12(4):391–95. doi: 10.1136/tc.12.4.391. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.O’Hegarty M, Yenokyan G, Pederson LL, Wortley P. Young adults perceptions of warning labels. 2005. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Sepe E, Ling PM, Glantz SA. Smooth moves: Bar and nightclub tobacco promotions that target young adults. Am J Public Health. 2002;92(3):414–19. doi: 10.2105/ajph.92.3.414. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]