1 / 11

Smokefree private cars: Attitudes and arguments March 2009, Mumbai

Smokefree private cars: Attitudes and arguments March 2009, Mumbai. George Thomson, Nick Wilson, Dylan Tapp Department of Public Health, University of Otago, Wellington. Introduction.

oakes
Download Presentation

Smokefree private cars: Attitudes and arguments March 2009, Mumbai

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Smokefree private cars: Attitudes and arguments March 2009, Mumbai George Thomson, Nick Wilson, Dylan Tapp Department of Public Health, University of Otago, Wellington

  2. Introduction • Dangers of smoking in cars – higher fine particulate levels than smoky bars • 11+ state/province jurisdictions that ban smoking in private vehicles containing kids

  3. Need for intervention: exposure • 22-26% of adults exposed to SHS in cars (Canada, NZ 2003-7) • Up to 48% of students in some US states (2002-6) • Over 30% of smokers smoke when others are in their car, in 7 European countries (Austria, Spain, Cyprus, Ireland, Croatia, Bulgaria, Romania)

  4. Experience and alternatives • South Australia: In first year of smokefree car law (2007-8), only 125 fined, 38 cautioned, out of 222,000 drivers pulled over (< 1:1000). • Social marketing campaigns for smokefree cars: Canada, NZ, NSW, Western Australia

  5. Aim • To review attitudes and arguments to smokefree private car laws Method • Attitudes: Medline, Google Scholar searches • Arguments: Factiva search, interviews

  6. Results: Attitudes to smokefree car laws • 15 studies found (1988-2008) • From Canada, UK, NZ, & 7 states and provinces in Australia and Nth America • Support for smokefree car laws dependant on presence of children

  7. Results: Attitudes to smokefree car laws • Increasing public and smoker support over time • Very high public support (if children present) in 6 studies since 2005 (76% to 96%) • High support from smokers (if children present) in 5 studies since 2005 (77%+)

  8. Arguments about smokefree cars • ‘Invasion of privacy’/precedents (seatbelts, mobile phone bans) • ‘Social marketing more appropriate’ • ‘Not a high priority’ compared to other tobacco interventions

  9. Arguments for smokefree car laws • Place of highest SHS hazard • For child related laws: • Children less able to avoid SHS than adults • Feasible, practical, smoker support • International treaty obligation (Convention on Rights of the Child) • Social marketing may not protect the most in need

  10. Conclusions • Precedents for laws re cars with children • High public support in some jurisdictions • Challenge: Laws to protect adults in cars

  11. Further information Thomson G, Wilson N. Public attitudes to laws for smokefree private vehicles: A brief review. Tob Control. 2008:Online publication, December 2008. george.thomson@otago.ac.nz

More Related