Upload
others
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1 1
Cross-sectional relations between slim cigarettes and smoking
prevalence
Adam Slater
Oxford Economics Ltd, Abbey House, 121 St Aldates, Oxford, OX1 1HB, UK
David Ghosh
Philip Morris International, Rhodanie Campus, Avenue de Rhodanie 50, 1001 Lausanne, Switzerland
2015
_ST
14_S
late
r(G
hosh
).pd
fS
SP
T20
15 -
Doc
umen
t not
pee
r-re
view
ed b
y C
OR
ES
TA
2
Definition of slim cigarettes
Draft EU TPD 19.12.2012 “Cigarettes with a diameter of less than 7.5 mm shall be deemed to be misleading.”
Slim Cigarette Diameter: 6.04 mm
Standard Cigarette Diameter: 7.95 mm
2015
_ST
14_S
late
r(G
hosh
).pd
fS
SP
T20
15 -
Doc
umen
t not
pee
r-re
view
ed b
y C
OR
ES
TA
3
Slima cigarette overview
Source: PMI estimates based on AC Nielsen and in-market sales.
2014 Market Share of slim cigarettes
aIncludes slims, extra slims, super slims and micro slims. Source: PMI estimates based on AC Nielsen and in-market sales.
2015
_ST
14_S
late
r(G
hosh
).pd
fS
SP
T20
15 -
Doc
umen
t not
pee
r-re
view
ed b
y C
OR
ES
TA
4
Regulatory Status of Slim Cigarettes
• No country has banned slim cigarettes.
• In 2012 a slim cigarette ban was considered in the EU. After considerable debate among legislators and EU Member States the ban on slim cigarettes was ultimately excluded from the final version of the EU TPD.
• The COP6 mandated the WHO to “prepare a report based on
scientific evidence on specific cigarette characteristics of interest, including slim/super slim designs . . .” for the working group of articles 9&10. Based on this report, the working group for article 9&10 may develop draft guidelines.
2015
_ST
14_S
late
r(G
hosh
).pd
fS
SP
T20
15 -
Doc
umen
t not
pee
r-re
view
ed b
y C
OR
ES
TA
5
Allegations against slim cigarettes: Anti Tobacco Organizations allege that slim cigarettes: • are more attractive.
“The slims and super slims were consistently rated as most attractive.”a
• are deceptive and mislead consumers into believing that slims are less harmful. “Overall, the three slimmer cigarettes were rated weakest and least harmful because of their small diameter. The general view was that because they contain less tobacco, they must, therefore, be less harmful.”a
• target female consumers. “Connotations created by white, slim cigarette sticks help young women deal with the negative stereotypes of smokers.”b
a”Adolescent perceptions of cigarette appearance”, Allison Ford, Crawford Moodie, Anne M. MacKintosh, Gerard Hastings, European Journal of Public Health, Vol. 24, No. 3, 464–468, 2013. b”How do young adult women smokers perceive dissuasive cigarette sticks?”, Janet Hoek, Cherie Robertson, David Hammond and Lisa McNeill, Poster Presentation at the “ASPIRE2025 research at the 2012 World Conference on Tobacco or Health, Singapore”, 2012.
Source:
2015
_ST
14_S
late
r(G
hosh
).pd
fS
SP
T20
15 -
Doc
umen
t not
pee
r-re
view
ed b
y C
OR
ES
TA
Cross-sectional relations between slim cigarettes and smoking prevalence*
Oxford Economics Ltd, Abbey House, 121 St Aldates, Oxford, OX1 1HB, UK
Adam Slater, Jonathan Buss
This study has been commissioned and funded by Philip Morris International. *Manuscript submitted to “Nicotine and Tobacco Research” Journal
2015
_ST
14_S
late
r(G
hosh
).pd
fS
SP
T20
15 -
Doc
umen
t not
pee
r-re
view
ed b
y C
OR
ES
TA
Study concept Cross-country and multi year assessment of the relationship between the preference for slim cigarettes (market share) and smoking prevalence.
• Data set: • Smoking prevalencea (overall, male, female) from Ng et al. • Slim cigarettes market shareb
2012 (95 countries); 2006 (75 countries); 1996 (28 countries)
Assessment of
1. Simple correlations: slim cigarettes market share & smoking prevalence.
2. Multivariate regression: additionally considering regional and cultural variables.
3. Multivariate regression: additionally considering socio-economic variables.
aSmoking prevalence data source: Ng, M. et al. “Smoking prevalence and cigarette consumption in 187 countries, 1980-2012”, Journal of the American Medical Association 311(2), 2014, 183-92.
bSlim cigarette market share data Source: PMI estimates based on AC Nielsen and in-market sales. Includes slims, extra slims, super slims and micro slims.
Source:
2015
_ST
14_S
late
r(G
hosh
).pd
fS
SP
T20
15 -
Doc
umen
t not
pee
r-re
view
ed b
y C
OR
ES
TA
2012 slim cigarette market share vs. overall smoking prevalence
Smoking prevalence data source: Ng, M. et al. “Smoking prevalence and cigarette consumption in 187 countries, 1980-2012”, Journal of the American Medical Association 311(2), 2014, 183-92.
Slim cigarette market share data Source: PMI estimates based on AC Nielsen and in-market sales
Source:
2015
_ST
14_S
late
r(G
hosh
).pd
fS
SP
T20
15 -
Doc
umen
t not
pee
r-re
view
ed b
y C
OR
ES
TA
2012 Overall smoking prevalence statistical analysis
Regression (1) univariate regression; Regression (2) includes also additionally regional & cultural dummies; Regression (3) includes also additionally socio-economic control variables.
* Significance level at 10%; ** Significance level at 5%; *** Significance level at 1%
+ positive association; - negative association
LOG(GDPCAP): natural log of real GDP per capita at purchasing power parity exchange rates
LOG(GDPCAP)2: natural log of squared GDP per capita at purchasing power parity exchange rates
Source: International Monetary Fund / Oxford Economics
Overall(1) (2) (3)
CONSTANT 19.66 (23.10) *** 22.01 (23.76) *** – 67.61 (-1.57)
SLIM 0.19 (3.21) ** 0.01 (0.24) 0.004 (0.08)
CEE .. 6.23 (3.87) *** 5.56 (3.36) **LATAM .. – 7.23 (-3.81) *** – 8.12 (-3.82) ***AFRICA .. – 8.28 (-6.29) *** – 6.79 (-4.18) ***ASIA .. .. ..MUSLIM .. – 3.47 (-2.63) ** – 3.39 (-2.48) *LOG(GDPCAP) .. .. 19.43 (2.07) *
LOG(GDPCAP)2 .. .. – 1.04 (-2.06) *
R2 0.10 0.48 0.49Observations 95 95 95
Regression Regression Regression
Cent. & East. Eur.
Latin America
2015
_ST
14_S
late
r(G
hosh
).pd
fS
SP
T20
15 -
Doc
umen
t not
pee
r-re
view
ed b
y C
OR
ES
TA
2006 slim cigarette market share vs. overall smoking prevalence
Smoking prevalence data source: Ng, M. et al. “Smoking prevalence and cigarette consumption in 187 countries, 1980-2012”, Journal of the American Medical Association 311(2), 2014, 183-92.
Slim cigarette market share data Source: PMI estimates based on AC Nielsen and in-market sales
Source:
2015
_ST
14_S
late
r(G
hosh
).pd
fS
SP
T20
15 -
Doc
umen
t not
pee
r-re
view
ed b
y C
OR
ES
TA
1996 slim cigarette market share vs. overall smoking prevalence
Smoking prevalence data source: Ng, M. et al. “Smoking prevalence and cigarette consumption in 187 countries, 1980-2012”, Journal of the American Medical Association 311(2), 2014, 183-92.
Slim cigarette market share data Source: PMI estimates based on AC Nielsen and in-market sales
Source:
2015
_ST
14_S
late
r(G
hosh
).pd
fS
SP
T20
15 -
Doc
umen
t not
pee
r-re
view
ed b
y C
OR
ES
TA
Summary of statistical results
Results for statistical association between slim cigarette market share and smoking prevalence.
Regression (1) univariate regression; Regression (2) includes also additionally regional & cultural dummies; Regression (3) includes also additionally socio-economic control variables.
* Significance level at 10%; ** Significance level at 5%; *** Significance level at 1%
+ positive association; - negative association
Year Analysis Overall Male Female Sign Sig. Sign Sig. Sign Sig.
2012
Regression (1) + ** + *** -
Regression (2) + + ** -
Regression (3) + + -
2006
Regression (1) + + *** -
Regression (2) + + -
Regression (3) - + -
1996
Regression (1) + + -
Regression (2) - + -
Regression (3) NA NA + NA NA
2015
_ST
14_S
late
r(G
hosh
).pd
fS
SP
T20
15 -
Doc
umen
t not
pee
r-re
view
ed b
y C
OR
ES
TA
Conclusion • “In conclusion, this study shows that once potential confounding
factors are controlled for, there is no indication that the preference for slim cigarettes (measured as the market share of slim cigarettes) is associated with smoking prevalence across countries. This was the case both for overall smoking prevalence and for male and female prevalence considered separately.”*
• “The cross-country variation in smoking prevalence can instead be explained by regional and cultural factors, as well as socio-economic variables such as income.”*
*Manuscript submitted to “Nicotine and Tobacco Research” Journal “Cross sectional relations between slim cigarettes and smoking prevalence” by Adam Slator and Jonathan Buss.
2015
_ST
14_S
late
r(G
hosh
).pd
fS
SP
T20
15 -
Doc
umen
t not
pee
r-re
view
ed b
y C
OR
ES
TA
Implications
• “Our results suggest that policy measures aimed at restricting slim cigarette sales are unlikely to have an effect on smoking prevalence rates.”*
*Manuscript submitted to “Nicotine and Tobacco Research” Journal “Cross sectional relations between slim cigarettes and smoking prevalence” by Adam Slator and Jonathan Buss.
2015
_ST
14_S
late
r(G
hosh
).pd
fS
SP
T20
15 -
Doc
umen
t not
pee
r-re
view
ed b
y C
OR
ES
TA
15
Thank you.
2015
_ST
14_S
late
r(G
hosh
).pd
fS
SP
T20
15 -
Doc
umen
t not
pee
r-re
view
ed b
y C
OR
ES
TA