ArticleHealth policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2015
Old wine in new bottles: tobacco industry's submission to European Commission tobacco product directive public consultation.
Article in Health policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- A thematic analysis of tobacco industry responses to the Scottish Government's consultation on e-cigarette regulation.Health promotion international · 2024Article
- Awareness of Changes in E-cigarette Regulations and Behavior Before and After Implementation: A Longitudinal Survey of Smokers, Ex-smokers, and Vapers in the United Kingdom.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2020Article
- Tobacco industry and public health responses to state and local efforts to end tobacco sales from 1969-2020.PloS one · 2020Article
- The importance of continued engagement during the implementation phase of tobacco control policies in a middle-income country: the case of Costa Rica.Tobacco control · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Between September and December 2010 the European Commission Health & Consumer Protection Directorate-General (DGSANCO) held a public consultation on a possible revision of the European Union Tobacco Products Directive (2001/37/EC). We used content analysis of the tobacco industry's and related parties' 300 submissions to the public consultation to determine if tobacco industry and its allies in Europe are prepared to reduce harm of the tobacco products as their public statements assert. The industry submission resorted to traditional tobacco industry arguments where illicit trade and freedom of choice were emphasized and misrepresented the conclusions of a DGSANCO-commissioned scientific report on smokeless tobacco products. Retailers and wholesalers referred to employment and economic growth more often than respondents from other categories. The pattern of responses in the submission differed dramatically from independent public opinion polls of EU citizens' support for tobacco control policies. None of the major tobacco manufacturers or their lobbying organizations supported any of the DGSANCO's proposed evidence based interventions (pictorial health warnings, plain packaging or point-of-sale display bans) to reduce harms caused by cigarette smoking.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.