Myths and misconceptions about tobacco control

Evidence shows that a comprehensive policy commitment and sustained campaign funding can reduce smoking rates in Australia to less than 5%. None of the required measures would involve banning tobacco products.

While Australia should be acknowledged as a world leader in tobacco control policy, more than 17% of Australians smoke every day – that is almost one in five people, half of whom will die as a result of smoking. Despite substantial reductions in smoking rates over the past 30 years, tobacco use continues to generate a significantly higher disease burden than any other preventable cause. Around 19,000 Australians die from diseases caused by smoking each year; and lung cancer rates in women continue to rise.

Tobacco is a commercial and regulatory anomaly. Smoking causes a higher disease burden than the combined use or misuse of all other “legal products” that are rigorously regulated for safety reasons, including over-the-counter drugs, prescription medicines, pesticides, alcohol and motor vehicles. On the basis of demonstrated harm, tobacco products are also under-regulated in comparison with other environmental carcinogens and hazardous consumer products.

Major tobacco companies have cited the tax-raising and business benefits associated with smoking in their submissions to government reviews of tobacco marketing; these alleged benefits of tobacco use have also been cited in newspaper opinion pages. A leaked internal memo from one tobacco company even suggested that the premature death caused by smoking was beneficial to the economy. However, independent economic analyses clearly demonstrate that smoking has a high net social and economic cost to the community. Similar analysis has also shown that reduction in smoking rates would not harm the economy.

Objective evidence also shows the strong return on investment in tobacco control. The most recent Commonwealth Department of Health and Ageing analysis on this issue found that every $1 spent on tobacco control yields $2 in savings; and the consultancy firm Applied Economics concludes that tobacco control yields better gains than any other public health program expenditure, with a benefit to cost ratio of 50:1. (1)

Research shows that that the major risk period for people to take up smoking is in mid to late adolescence. Studies also show that around 60% of smokers would prefer to quit, but struggle with an addiction developed before they were mature enough to make an adult decision and fully understand the consequences of nicotine addiction and the harms of smoking. (2,3)

Evidence also shows that most adult smokers are not fully aware of the dangers of smoking, with a recent survey finding that while two thirds identified lung cancer as smoking-related, only one-quarter knew smoking caused heart disease and fewer than 10% understood the risk of emphysema, stroke and vascular problems. (4)

The myth that proactively reducing smoking rates is the mark of a “nanny state” – i.e. a government that restricts personal freedoms with risk-averse, patronising public policy – is debunked by the evidence outlined against the five myths discussed above. In addition, a number of tobacco control measures are recommended as a way of supporting decisions that people are already making. Every year, 30-40% of smokers attempt to quit, but only one in 10 quit attempts is successful. Tobacco control measures reduce relapse rates and help intending quitters to break their addiction. Governments also have a responsibility to protect non-smokers from the increasingly evident harms of environmental tobacco smoke and to reduce the economic burden, borne by the wider community. (5)