The published paper is a
valuable source of smoking prevalence data which can be used by tobacco
control advocates in the region. Discussion of the results based on
inter-country comparison, knowledge of recent transition processes in
this group of countries and international experience is also of a great
importance for understanding the situation and developing effective
measures to change it.
However, it is necessary to state that
tobacco related situation in the FSU region is definitely understudied and much
additional research is needed to create an adequate model leading to the
effective control of tobacco related problems.
So we would like to express
alternative views on some of the ideas expressed in the article.
1. Authors state that the former Soviet Union’s tobacco epidemic may have developed differently than Lopez et al.
outlined in their 4-stage model. They find no evidence of the male smoking
prevalence stabilizing and decline.
Though we have to agree that there is no
survey data confirming this trend (as regular and comparable surveys are absent)
we have indirect indications at least for Ukraine that male smoking prevalence
is declining while female smoking prevalence is on the rise. This can be seen
through different smoking rates in educational groups (see Table 1). While among
most educated males we have more former smokers and nonsmokers and less current
smokers than in less educated, the picture is the opposite for females.
Table 1. Percentage of daily smokers,
experimenters, ex-smokers and never smokers among Ukrainian males and females
with different level of education (national representative survey in Ukraine,
2000)
|
Gender
|
Education
|
Daily
smokers |
Experimenters
|
Ex-smokers |
Never
smokers |
|
Males
|
primary |
53,2 |
11,7 |
12,8 |
13,8 |
|
|
college |
40,0 |
8,2 |
21,2 |
23,5 |
|
Females
|
primary |
6,5 |
8,3 |
3,2 |
76,5 |
|
|
secondary |
14,8 |
14,0 |
3,1 |
60,8 |
|
|
college |
21,2 |
17,3 |
7,7 |
45,2 |
So though the authors state that tobacco
epidemic among females in the FSU countries is in its initial stage we can
expect that it will grow soon especially in those countries where several
transnational tobacco companies are represented.
2. Another issue about the stages of
smoking epidemic is related to the following authors’ statement: “In this model,
such an epidemic is described as involving an initial rise in male
smoking followed by a rise in female smoking 1 to 2 decades later,
after which each plateaus and then falls as a result of
tobacco-related mortality, finally rising to a peak decades later.”
Thorough reviewing of the referred paper did not reveal any mentioning of
mortality as a reason for smoking prevalence decline. Quite the opposite Lopez
et al. write about quitting smoking as the main cause for smoking decline and
attract attention to the fact that tobacco control measures become especially
timely at the stage with high prevalence and mortality where our countries are.
So we hope that these findings will serve further development of tobacco control
in the region.
At the same time we can support the
authors’ explanation of lower smoking prevalence among males in older age groups
by higher premature deaths among smokers. Data from Ukraine based on 2000
national representative smoking prevalence survey extrapolated to the whole
population is shown in table 2. We see that though numbers of nonsmokers and
former smokers do not differ much in different age groups, smokers are less
represented in every older age group.
Table 2. Numbers (million persons) of
nonsmokers, ex-smokers and daily smokers among Ukrainian males according to 2000
smoking prevalence survey extrapolated to the whole population
|
Age
|
29-39 |
40-49 |
50-59 |
60-69 |
70-79 |
|
Nonsmokers
|
1.1 |
0.4 |
0.3 |
0.3 |
0.3 |
|
Ex-smokers
|
0.4 |
0.3 |
0.4 |
0.6 |
0.4 |
|
Daily
smokers |
4.5 |
2.4 |
1.4 |
1.1 |
0.4 |
3. Authors discuss the age differences of
smoking rates among males and cite cohort effect to be the cause of smoking
prevalence decline in the older age groups. They write: “However, a cohort
effect has been shown in the former Soviet Union, with those who were
teenagers between 1945 and 1953 carrying forward lower smoking rates
because cigarettes, like other consumer goods, were in short supply
in the period of postwar austerity under Stalin.
This cohort effect is also thought to account for the unexpected
current decline in male lung cancer deaths.”
Though it is true that lung cancer
mortality declines in all the countries of the former Soviet Union, we cannot
agree that it is connected with lower tobacco consumption in any certain period.
First objection is that this mortality rates decrease not only for those men who
were teenagers in the specified period but for the younger ones, who started
smoking much later, too. Second objection is that this mortality decreases not
only among men but also among women both in older and middle age groups.
Besides, there are no indications of
tobacco use decline in 1960s or 1970s, which could account for lung cancer
decline nowadays.
We consider a more probable hypothesis
of lung cancer mortality decline to be related to numerous premature deaths due
to other reasons which actually do not let smokers live longer and die of lung
cancer in their 70s or 80s as they die in their middle age because of alcohol or
other reasons.