A comparison of the impact of U.S. and Canadian cigarette pack warning label requirements on tobacco industry profitability and the public health

Health Policy

Volumn 83, Issue 2-3, 2007, Pages 343-352

  Givel, Michael ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA   (United States)

Author keywords

Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act; Cigarette warnings labels; Neo liberalism; Social constructionism; Symbolic regulatory policy

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CIGARETTE SMOKING; HEALTH CARE POLICY; PACKAGING; PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE; SMOKING CESSATION; TOBACCO INDUSTRY;

CANADA; DRUG AND NARCOTIC CONTROL; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; HEALTH EDUCATION; HUMANS; POLITICS; PRODUCT LABELING; PUBLIC HEALTH; PUBLIC POLICY; SMOKING; SMOKING CESSATION; TOBACCO INDUSTRY; UNITED STATES;

EID: 34547932269     PISSN: 01688510     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2006.12.003     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. Givel M. Neoliberal and public health effects of failing to adopt OSHA's national secondhand tobacco smoke rule. International Journal of Health Services 36 1 (2006) 137-155
2. Maskovsky J. "Managing" the poor: neoliberalism, medicaid HMOs and the triumph of consumerism among the poor. Medical Anthropology 19 2 (2000) 121-146
3. Navarro V., and Neoliberalism. "Globalization," unemployment, inequalities, and the welfare state. International Journal of Health Services 28 4 (1998) 607-682
4. Shaffer E.R., and Brenner J.E. International trade agreements: hazards to health?. International Journal of Health Services 34 3 (2004) 467-481
5. Terris M. The neoliberal triad of anti-health reforms: government budget cutting, deregulation, and privatization. Journal of Public Health Policy 20 2 (1999) 149-167
6. Aalders M., and Wilthagen T. Moving beyond command-and-control: reflexibility in the regulation of occupational safety and health and the environment. Law and Policy 19 4 (1997) 415-443
7. Braithwaite J. Meta risk management and responsive regulation for tax system integrity. Law and Policy 25 1 (2003) 1-16
8. Gunningham N., and Rees J. Industry self-regualtion: an institutional perspective. Law and Policy 19 4 (1997) 363-414
9. Gunningham N., and Sinclair D. Regulatory pluralism: designing policy mixes for environmental protection. Law and Policy 21 1 (1999) 49-76
10. Sinclair D. Self-regulation versus command and control? Beyond false dichotomies. Law and Policy 19 4 (1997) 529-559
11. Edelman M. Symbols and political quiescence. American Political Science Review 54 3 (1960) 695-704
12. Edelman M. Political language and political reality. PS 18 1 (1985) 10-19
13. Schram S. Post-positivistic policy analysis and the Family Support Act of 1988: symbols at the expense of substance. Polity XXIV 4 (1992) 633-655
14. Stone D. Policy paradox: the art of political decision making (2002), W.W. Norton & Company, New York
15. Foucault M. The order of things: an archeology of the human sciences (1970), Pantheon, New York
16. Hammond D., Fong G.T., McDonald P.W., Cameron R., and Brown K.S. Impact of Canadian warning labels on adult smoking behavior. Tobacco Control 12 (2003) 391-395
17. Health Canada. Health Minister reveals new cigarette labelling measures. News Release. Ottawa: Health Canada; 2000.
18. Health Canada. Wave 9: the health effects of tobacco and health warning messages on cigarette packages, survey of adults and adult smokers and survey of youth. Health Canada; 2005.
19. Willemsen M. The new EU cigarette health warnings benefit smokers who want to quit the habit: results from the Dutch continuous survey of smoking habits. The European Journal of Public Health 15 4 (2005) 389-392
20. Joossens L., and Raw M. The tobacco control scale: a new scale to measure country activity. Tobacco Control 15 3 (2006) 247-253
21. Nimbarte A., Aghazadeh F., and Harvey C. Comparison of U.S. and Canadian cigarette pack warnings. International Quarterly of Community Health Education 24 1 (2006) 3-27
22. Koval J., Aubut J., Pederson L., O'Hegarty M., and Chan S. The potential effectiveness of warning labels on cigarette packages: the perspective of young adult Canadians. Canadian Journal of Public Health 96 5 (2005) 353-356
23. Potschke-Langer M., and Schulze A. Health warnings on cigarette packets: an overview. Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz 48 4 (2005) 464-468
24. Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act. United States Codes Annotated; 2006.
25. Alechnowicz K., and Chapman S. The Philippine tobacco industry: "the strongest tobacco lobby in Asia". Tobacco Control 13 Suppl. 2 (2004) ii71-ii78
26. Studlar D. Tobacco control: comparative politics in the United States and Canada (2002), Broadview Press Ltd., Peterborough, Ontario
27. Steacy A. A new nicotine warning. Macleans 30 (1988) 52
28. Tobacco Products Control Act. 2nd Session, 33rd Parliament, 35-36-37 Elizabeth II ed; 1987.
29. Health and Welfare Canada. Government to Ban Tobacco Advertising. News Release. Ottawa; 1987.
30. Brown B. Canada clamps down on smoking. Washington Times (1990) (Sect. A9)
31. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company Response to Inquiries Re Overturn of Canadian Tobacco Products Control Act by Quebec Superior Court. R.J. Reynolds legal document produced in the case of: State of Minnesota et. al., v. Philip Morris Inc. et. al., no. C1-94-8565, 2nd District, Minnesota, Minneapolis: Minnesota Tobacco Document Depository; February 5, 1993 (Bates no.: 51503 2244).
32. Imperial Tobacco Limited-Montreal. Quebec Superior Court Declares Federal Tobacco Products Control Act Invalid. News Release. Montreal; 1991.
33. York G. Ottawa toughens cigarette labels. Globe and Mail (1993) (Sect. A1-A2)
34. Brent P. Tobacco firms win right to appeal advertising ban. The Financial Post (1993)
35. Vienneau D. Blunt cigarette warnings win top court's blessing. Toronto Star (1994) (Sect. A1)
36. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company. Canadian Supreme Court Overturns Ban on Tobacco Advertising. R.J. Reynolds legal document produced in the case of: State of Minnesota et. al., v. Philip Morris Inc. et. al., NO. C1-94-8565, 2nd District, Minnesota, Minneapolis: Minnesota Tobacco Document Depository; September 21, 1995. 6915-8 (Bates no.: 51140).
37. Vienneau D. Ottawa studying tobacco warnings after court ruling. Toronto Star (1995) (Sect. A14)
38. Non-Smokers' Rights Association, Physicians for a smoke free Canada. Health groups urge tobacco to be placed under the Hazardous Products Act and condemn planned "closed door" negotiations. In: News release. Ottawa; 1995.
39. The Canadian Tobacco Manufacturers' Council. A sensible solution to the issue of tobacco advertising. R.J. Reynolds legal document produced in the case of: State of Minnesota et. al., v. Philip Morris Inc. et. al., no. C1-94-8565, 2nd District, Minnesota, Minneapolis: Minnesota Tobacco Document Depository; December 20, 1995 (Bates no.: 52252 9775).
40. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company. Regulatory impact analysis statement. R.J. Reynolds legal document produced in the case of: State of Minnesota et. al., v. Philip Morris Inc. et. al., no. C1-94-8565, 2nd District, Minnesota, Minneapolis: Minnesota Tobacco Document Depository; April 3, 1997 (Bates no.: 51726 9442-51726 9445).
41. Health Canada. Proposed new labelling requirements for tobacco products. Ottawa: Office of Tobacco Control; 1999.
42. U.S. Newswire. New study finds large, graphic cigarette warning labels increase smokers' knowledge of health risks and motivate quitting. U.S. Newswire; 2006.
43. Hammond D., Fong G.T., McNeill A., Borland R., and Cummings K.M. Effectiveness of cigarette warning labels in informing smokers about the risks of smoking: findings from the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Four Country Survey. Tobacco Control 15 Suppl. III (2006) iii19-iii25
44. Canadian Press. Tobacco sues for "free speech". Canadian Press; 2000 (Sect. A37).
45. The Canadian Press. Court sides with public health over cigarette advertising. The Canadian Press; 2002 (Sect. C3).
46. Fortin K. Court upholds tobacco ad law. Brockville Recorder and Times (2005) (Sect. A8)
47. United States Surgeon General. Smoking and health, report of the Advisory Committee to the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service. Washington, D.C.: United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service; 1964 (Public Health Service Publication no. 1103).
48. United States Surgeon General. Reducing consequences of smoking. Atlanta: United States Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health; 1989. p. 89-8411.
49. Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act. Title 15, Chapter 36; 1965.
50. Federal Trade Commission. Report to Congress Pursuant to the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act. Washington, D.C.: Federal Trade Commission; 1967.
51. Tobaccodocuments.org. Federal Trade Commission. In: Tobaccodocuments.org; 2006.
52. Federal Trade Commission. Report to Congress Pursuant to the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act. Washington, D.C.: Federal Trade Commission; 1969.
53. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Company. Chronological List of Warning Labels. Brown & Williamson legal document produced in the case of: State of Minnesota et. al., v. Philip Morris Inc. et. al., no. C1-94-8565, 2nd District, Minnesota, Minneapolis: Minnesota Tobacco Document Depository; 1982 (Bates no.: 521056813-521056827).
54. Federal Trade Commission. Report to Congress Pursuant ot the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act. Washington, D.C.; 1986.
55. Pepples E. Letter to Honorable Charles Rose. Brown & Williamson legal document produced in the case of: State of Minnesota et. al., v. Philip Morris Inc. et. al., no. C1-94-8565, 2nd District, Minnesota, Minneapolis: Minnesota Tobacco Document Depository; 1984 (Bates 521052386-521052392).
56. Lowe R. Justices let smokers sue cigarette makers in spite of labeling. Columbus Dispatch (1992) (Sect. 3A)
57. Chapman S., and Carter S.M. Avoid health warnings on all tobacco products for just as long as we can: a history of Australian tobacco industry efforts to avoid, delay, and dilute health warnings on cigarettes. Tobacco Control 12 Suppl. III (2003) iii13-iii22
58. World Health Organization. WHO framework convention on tobacco control (WHO FCTC). World Health Organization; 2005.
59. Whitman J. Of corporatism, fascism, and the first new deal. The American Journal of Comparative Law 39 4 (1991) 747-778
60. Farazmand A. Globalization and public administration. Public Administration Review 59 6 (1999) 509-522
61. Waldo D. The enterprise of public administration (1980/1990), Chandler & Sharp Publisher, Navota, California
62. National Cancer Policy Board. State programs can reduce tobacco use. Washington, D.C.: Institute of Medicine, National Research Council; 2000.
63. United States Department of Health and Human Services. Reducing tobacco use: a report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Health Prevention and Health Promotion, Office of Smoking and Health; 2000.
64. Givel M., and Glantz S. State tobacco settlement funds not being spent on vigorous tobacco control efforts. Oncology 16 2 (2002) 155-157 and 152