Tobacco Industry Efforts to Respond to Smoke-Free Policies in Multi-Unit Housing: An Evaluation of Tobacco Industry Documents

Associations Between Pro/Anti-Tobacco Media and Messaging Exposure and Knowledge and Support of Smoke-Free Policy Among Adults in Armenia and Georgia

CONTEXT

Despite high smoking rates, Armenia and Georgia recently adopted smoke-free policies (2022 and 2018).

OBJECTIVE

We examined associations between exposure to pro-tobacco media (news opposing smoke-free policies; cigarette, e-cigarette, heated tobacco product [HTP] advertisements) and anti-tobacco media (media, community-based action) and (1) knowledge that the policies applied to alternative tobacco products (ATPs), and (2) support for the policies applying to ATPs and various settings.

DESIGN

We analyzed 2022 survey data.

SETTING

Data were from 28 communities in Armenia and Georgia.

PARTICIPANTS

The sample comprised 1468 adults (31.6% past-month smokers).

METHODS

We conducted multivariable regressions, controlling for country and sociodemographics.

RESULTS

Participants were knowledgeable that the policy applied to ATPs (79.2%) and supportive of them applying to ATPs and various settings (means = 3.43 and 3.00; 1-4 = strongly support). Greater exposure to anti-tobacco media/community-based action correlated with more likely knowing that the policies applied to ATPs and greater support of the policies applying to various settings; HTP advertisement exposure correlated with less support of the policies applying to various settings. Less exposure to news opposing smoke-free policies and greater exposure to media supporting such policies correlated with greater support of the policies applying to ATPs.

CONCLUSIONS

Media and community-based action may promote smoke-free policy knowledge and support. HTP advertisements may uniquely undermine smoke-free policies.

Conflicts of Interest in the Assessment of Chemicals, Waste, and Pollution

Pollution by chemicals and waste impacts human and ecosystem health on regional, national, and global scales, resulting, together with climate change and biodiversity loss, in a triple planetary crisis. Consequently, in 2022, countries agreed to establish an intergovernmental science-policy panel (SPP) on chemicals, waste, and pollution prevention, complementary to the existing intergovernmental science-policy bodies on climate change and biodiversity. To ensure the SPP's success, it is imperative to protect it from conflicts of interest (COI). Here, we (i) define and review the implications of COI, and its relevance for the management of chemicals, waste, and pollution; (ii) summarize established tactics to manufacture doubt in favor of vested interests, i.e., to counter scientific evidence and/or to promote misleading narratives favorable to financial interests; and (iii) illustrate these with selected examples. This analysis leads to a review of arguments for and against chemical industry representation in the SPP's work. We further (iv) rebut an assertion voiced by some that the chemical industry should be directly involved in the panel's work because it possesses data on chemicals essential for the panel's activities. Finally, (v) we present steps that should be taken to prevent the detrimental impacts of COI in the work of the SPP. In particular, we propose to include an independent auditor's role in the SPP to ensure that participation and processes follow clear COI rules. Among others, the auditor should evaluate the content of the assessments produced to ensure unbiased representation of information that underpins the SPP's activities.

The smoke-free home study: study protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial of a smoke-free home intervention in permanent supportive housing

Background

Formerly chronically homeless adults who live in permanent supportive housing (PSH) have high prevalence of smoking. It is uncommon to find smoke-free policies in PSH because of the concern that such policies contradict PSH’s harm reduction framework and could increase homelessness should residents lose their housing because of the policy. However, in the absence of such policies, non-smoking PSH residents face the harmful effects of secondhand smoke exposure while residents who smoke see increased risks from high rates of smoking throughout their residence. Our pilot work highlighted the feasibility and acceptability of an intervention designed to promote voluntary adoption of a smoke-free home. Here we report a protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial of the smoke-free home intervention for formerly chronically homeless residents in PSH.

Methods

The smoke-free home intervention provides face-to-face counseling and instruction to PSH residents on how to adopt a smoke-free home and offers training for PSH staff on how to refer residents to tobacco cessation services. We will randomize 20 PSH sites in the San Francisco Bay Area to either the intervention or wait-list control arms. We will enroll 400 PSH residents who smoke cigarettes in their housing unit and 120 PSH staff who work at the sites. At baseline, three- and six-months follow-up, we will ask residents to report their tobacco use and cessation behaviors and adoption of smoke-free homes. We will ask staff to answer questions on their knowledge, attitudes, practices, and barriers related to supporting residents’ smoking cessation. The primary outcome for PSH residents is adoption of smoke-free homes for 90 days or more at six-months follow-up, and the secondary outcome is point prevalence tobacco abstinence. The primary outcome for PSH staff is change in Smoking Knowledge Attitudes Practices survey score.

Discussion

Voluntary adoption of smoke-free homes is a promising approach for reducing exposure to secondhand smoke and reducing tobacco use among a population facing high rates of tobacco-related disease, and is aligned with PSH’s harm reduction framework. Findings from this study have the potential to inform adoption of tobacco control policies among vulnerable populations most at risk for smoking-related harms.

Trial registration

This study was registered with the U.S. National Institute of Health Clinical Trials register on April 22, 2021: NCT04855357.