Boards of Health as Venues for Clean Indoor Air Policy Making
Joanna V. Dearlove, BA and
Stanton A. Glantz, PhD
The authors are with the Institute for Health Policy Studies, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco.
Correspondence: Requests for reprints should be sent to Stanton A. Glantz, PhD, Box 0130, University of California, San Francisco, CA 94143-0130 (e-mail: glantz{at}medicine.ucsf.edu).
Objectives. This study sought to determine the tobacco industry'sstrategies for opposing health board actions and to identifyelements necessary for public health to prevail.
Methods. Newspaper articles, personal interviews, and tobaccoindustry documents released through litigation were reviewed.
Results. Twenty-five instances in which the tobacco industryopposed health board regulations were identified. It was shownthat the tobacco industry uses 3 strategies against health boards:"accommodation" (tobacco industry public relations campaignsto accommodate smokers in public places), legislative intervention,and litigation. These strategies are often executed with thehelp of tobacco industry front groups or allies in the hospitalityindustry.
Conclusions. Although many tobacco control advocates believethat passing health board regulations is easier than the legislativeroute, this is generally not the case. The industry will oftenattempt to involve the legislature in fighting the regulations,forcing advocates to fight a battle on 2 fronts. It is importantfor health boards to verify their authority over smoking restrictionsand refrain from considering nonhealth factors (including industryclaims of adverse economic impacts) so as to withstand courtchallenges.
This article has been cited by other articles:
C A Pritsos, K L Pritsos, and K E Spears Smoking rates among gamblers at Nevada casinos mirror US smoking rate
Tob. Control,
April 1, 2008;
17(2):
82 - 85.
[Abstract][Full Text][PDF]
J. K. Ibrahim and S. A. Glantz The Rise and Fall of Tobacco Control Media Campaigns, 1967 2006
Am J Public Health,
August 1, 2007;
97(8):
1383 - 1396.
[Abstract][Full Text][PDF]
M. Huisman, J. Brug, and J. Mackenbach Absinthe is its history relevant for current public health?
Int. J. Epidemiol.,
August 1, 2007;
36(4):
738 - 744.
[Abstract][Full Text][PDF]
J K Ibrahim, T H Tsoukalas, and S A Glantz Public health foundations and the tobacco industry: lessons from Minnesota
Tob. Control,
September 1, 2004;
13(3):
228 - 236.
[Abstract][Full Text][PDF]
L L Mandel and S A Glantz Hedging their bets: tobacco and gambling industries work against smoke-free policies
Tob. Control,
September 1, 2004;
13(3):
268 - 276.
[Abstract][Full Text][PDF]
M L Nixon, L Mahmoud, and S A Glantz Tobacco industry litigation to deter local public health ordinances: the industry usually loses in court
Tob. Control,
March 1, 2004;
13(1):
65 - 73.
[Abstract][Full Text][PDF]
K Neilsen and S A Glantz A tobacco industry study of airline cabin air quality: dropping inconvenient findings
Tob. Control,
March 1, 2004;
13(90001):
i20 - 29.
[Abstract][Full Text][PDF]
B. S. Andersen, M. E. Begay, and C. B. Lawson Breaking the Alliance: Defeating the Tobacco Industry's Allies and Enacting Youth Access Restrictions in Massachusetts
Am J Public Health,
November 1, 2003;
93(11):
1922 - 1928.
[Abstract][Full Text][PDF]
J Drope and S Glantz British Columbia capital regional district 100% smokefree bylaw: a successful public health campaign despite industry opposition
Tob. Control,
September 1, 2003;
12(3):
264 - 268.
[Abstract][Full Text][PDF]
M Skeer and M Siegel The descriptive epidemiology of local restaurant smoking regulations in Massachusetts: an analysis of the protection of restaurant customers and workers
Tob. Control,
June 1, 2003;
12(2):
221 - 226.
[Abstract][Full Text][PDF]
M. K. Ong and S. A. Glantz Free Nicotine Replacement Therapy Programs vs Implementing Smoke-Free Workplaces: A Cost-Effectiveness Comparison
Am J Public Health,
June 1, 2005;
95(6):
969 - 975.
[Abstract][Full Text][PDF]