AJPH
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (13)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Dearlove, J. V.
Right arrow Articles by Glantz, S. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Dearlove, J. V.
Right arrow Articles by Glantz, S. A.
Related Collections
Right arrow Other Respiratory Health
Right arrow Tobacco Control
Right arrow Environmental Tobacco Smoke
Right arrow Community Health
Right arrow Health Law
Right arrow Health Policy
February 2002, Vol 92, No. 2 | American Journal of Public Health 257-265
© 2002 American Public Health Association

RESEARCH AND PRACTICE

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's strategies for opposing health board actions and to identify elements necessary for public health to prevail.

Methods. Newspaper articles, personal interviews, and tobacco industry documents released through litigation were reviewed.

Results. Twenty-five instances in which the tobacco industry opposed health board regulations were identified. It was shown that the tobacco industry uses 3 strategies against health boards: "accommodation" (tobacco industry public relations campaigns to accommodate smokers in public places), legislative intervention, and litigation. These strategies are often executed with the help of tobacco industry front groups or allies in the hospitality industry.

Conclusions. Although many tobacco control advocates believe that passing health board regulations is easier than the legislative route, this is generally not the case. The industry will often attempt to involve the legislature in fighting the regulations, forcing advocates to fight a battle on 2 fronts. It is important for health boards to verify their authority over smoking restrictions and refrain from considering nonhealth factors (including industry claims of adverse economic impacts) so as to withstand court challenges.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Tobacco ControlHome page
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]

Home page
 Am. J. Public HealthHome page
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]

Home page
 Int J EpidemiolHome page
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]

Home page
 Tobacco ControlHome page
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]

Home page
 Tobacco ControlHome page
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]

Home page
 Tobacco ControlHome page
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]

Home page
 Tobacco ControlHome page
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]

Home page
 Am. J. Public HealthHome page
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]

Home page
 Tobacco ControlHome page
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]

Home page
 Tobacco ControlHome page
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]

Home page
 Am. J. Public HealthHome page
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]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2002 by the American Public Health Association