Kentucky youth (14.3%) smoke more cigarettes as compared to the U.S. average (8.8%), and Appalachian communities suffer disproportionately from tobacco-related diseases such as lung cancer. Training youth to become advocates is an effective strategy to improve health equity. This article describes the development and impact of a youth advocacy program to promote tobacco control policies in Appalachian Kentucky. Phase I (2017-2018): two ½-day trainings followed by monthly meetings with one high school ( n = 20 youth). Trainings provided information on tobacco use, consequences, industry tactics, evidence-based tobacco control, and advocacy skills. Results provided support for expansion to Phase II (2018-20119): A 1-day training followed by monthly information sharing implemented in three counties ( N = 80). Youth were surveyed before and 6-months posttraining during both phases. Phase I: At posttraining, 85% of youth believed they could reduce the amount of tobacco use in their community versus 66% at baseline. More students tried at least once to convince school or government officials to be more concerned about tobacco use (77% vs. 47%). Phase II: More students supported tobacco policies at posttraining survey and realized policies are an effective strategy to reduce tobacco use. At posttraining survey, students reported greater interpersonal confidence talking with others about tobacco-related issues, with a 24% increase in confidence talking with adults in their communities, as well as greater advocacy self-efficacy. Youth in Appalachia demonstrate desire to influence tobacco use and policy to improve health equity. Findings reinforce the need for collaborative public health interventions to promote ongoing training and support for youth living in high-risk communities.
In their paper "Defining 'Intrinsic"' Rae Langton and David Lewis propose a definition of intrinsicality in terms of modality and naturalness. Their key idea, drawing on earlier work by Jaegwon Kim, was that an intrinsic property is one that is independent of accompaniment, which is to say that P is intrinsic iff the following four conditions are all met:1. It is possible for a lonely object to have PI 2. It is possible for an accompanied object to have P.
3.It is possible for a lonely object to lack P .
4.It is possible for an accompanied object to lack P .Langton and Lewis say that an object is "accompanied" iff it coexists "with some contingent object wholly distinct from itself." (Langton and Lewis 1998, p. 333) A "lonely" or "unaccompanied" object is one that is not accompanied. We will also speak of an object being "accompanied by an F' iff it coexists with some F wholly distinct from itself.This works very nicely for the obvious examples. It works for being cubical, being 50 km from a capital city, and being lonely (intrinsic, extrinsic, extrinsic, respectively). But it doesn't work for every property. Langton and Lewis note that disjunctive properties cause trouble: they give the example of being cubical and lonely, or else non-cubical and accompanied. This property is independent of accompaniment, but intuitively is extrinsic. Other disjunctive properties are intuitively intrinsic (the property of being cubical or spherical, for example), so a new test must be prescribed for them.Thanks for comments on and discussion of this paper go to Toby Handfield,
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.