The impact of the 2009/2010 enhancement of cigarette health warning labels in Uruguay: longitudinal findings from the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Uruguay Survey

Abstract

Background FCTC Article 11 Guidelines recommend that health warning labels (HWLs) should occupy at least 50% of the package, but the tobacco industry claims that increasing the size would not lead to further benefits. This article reports the first population study to examine the impact of increasing HWL size above 50%. We tested the hypothesis that the 2009/2010 enhancement of the HWLs in Uruguay would be associated with higher levels of effectiveness. Methods Data were drawn from a cohort of adult smokers (≥18 years) participating in the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Uruguay Survey. The probability sample cohort was representative of adult smokers in 5 cities. The surveys included key indicators of HWL effectiveness. Data were collected in 2008/09 (pre-policy: Wave 2) and 2010/11 (post-policy: Wave 3). Results Overall, 1746 smokers participated in the study at Wave 2 (n=1,379) and Wave 3 (n=1,411). Following the 2009/2010 HWL changes in Uruguay (from 50% to 80% in size), all indicators of HWL effectiveness increased significantly [noticing HWLs: odds ratio (OR)=1.44, p=0.015; reading HWLs: OR=1.42, p=0.002; impact of HWLs on thinking about risks of smoking: OR=1.66, p<0.001; HWLs increasing thinking about quitting: OR=1.76, p<0.001; avoiding looking at the HWLs: OR=2.35, p<.001; and reports that HWLs stopped smokers from having a cigarette “many times”: OR=3.42, p<0.001]. Conclusions The 2009/2010 changes to HWLs in Uruguay, including a substantial increment in size, led to increases of key HWL indicators, thus supporting the conclusion that enhancing HWLs beyond minimum guideline recommendations can lead to even higher levels of effectiveness.

Effectiveness of health warnings for waterpipe tobacco smoking among college students

“…The remaining participants who had smoked waterpipe at least once at some point in their lives, even one or two puffs, were classified as ever users. To assess responses to each health warning, participant were asked the question “to what extent do the following health warning labels motivate you to think about stopping or reducing your hookah smoking” (Chang et al 2011; Gravely et al 2014). Participants could choose one of the following responses: ‘not at all’, ‘somewhat’, and ‘very much’.…”

Rules about smoking and vaping in the home: findings from the 2016 International Tobacco Control Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey

“…Those who perceive a lower risk from smoking are more inclined to smoke and less likely to stop smoking . Recent studies have found that the same association holds for vaping with those who perceive a lower risk from using a VD more likely to engage in vaping compared to those who perceive a higher risk relative to smoking cigarettes . Also, where one lives might impact beliefs about the relative dangers of vaping.…”

The lower effectiveness of text-only health warnings in China compared to pictorial warnings in Malaysia: findings from the ITC project

“…6 Health warnings constitute a powerful intervention for increasing knowledge about the specific harms of tobacco use 7 and for increasing thoughts and motivations to quit smoking among smokers in many countries including Thailand, Malaysia, Uruguay, Mauritius, Mexico, Australia and Canada. [8][9][10][11][12][13][14] Health warnings also have the potential to prevent smoking initiation among nonsmokers, including youth. 15 Smokers rate health warnings on cigarette packages as a prominent and credible source of information about the harms of tobacco use.…”