Cancer Causes & Control

, Volume 16, Issue 4, pp 359–371

The Healthy People 2010 smoking prevalence and tobacco control objectives: results from the SimSmoke tobacco control policy simulation model (United States)

  • David T. Levy
  • Leonid Nikolayev
  • Elizabeth Mumford
  • Christine Compton
Article

Abstract

Objectives: Healthy People 2010 (HP2010) set a goal of reducing the adult smoking prevalence to 12% by 2010. Smoking prevalence rates do not appear to be declining at or near the rate targeted in the HP2010 goals. The purpose of this paper is to examine the attainability of HP2010 smoking prevalence objectives through the stricter tobacco control policies suggested in HP2010.

Methods: A tested dynamic simulation model of smoking trends, known as SimSmoke, is applied. Smoking prevalence evolves over time through initiation and cessation, behaviors which are in turned influenced by tobacco control policies. We consider the effect of changes in taxes/prices, clean air laws, media campaigns, cessation programs and youth access policies on projected smoking prevalence over the period 2003–2020, focusing on the levels in 2010.

Results: The SimSmoke model projects that the aging of older cohorts and the impact of policies in years prior to 2004 will yield a reduction in smoking rates to 18.4% by 2010, which is substantially above the 2010 target of 12%. When policies similar to the HP2010 tobacco control policy objectives are implemented, SimSmoke projects that smoking rates could be reduced to 16.1%. Further reductions might be realized by increasing the tax rate by $1.00.

Conclusions: The SimSmoke model suggests that the HP2010 smoking prevalence objective is unlikely to be attained. Although we are unlikely to reach the goals by meeting the HP2010 policy objectives, they could get us much closer to the goal. Emphasis should be placed on meeting the tax, clean air, media/comprehensive campaigns, and cessation treatment objectives.

Keywords

Healthy People 2010 simulation model smoking tobacco control policies. 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    National Center for Health Statistics2001Healthy People 2000: A final reviewPublic Health ServiceHyattsville MDGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    U.S. DHHS2000Healthy People 2010Centers for Disease Control, Office of Disease Prevention and Health PromotionAtlantaGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    U.S. DHHS (1989) Reducing the health consequences of smoking: 25 years of progress: a report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    CDC2002Annual smoking-attributable mortality, years of potential life lost, and economic costs–United States, 1995–1999MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep51300303Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    CDC (2002) www.cdc.gov/tobacco/research_data/adults_prev/adstat3.htm and www.cdc.gov/tobacco/research_data/adults_ prev/tab_3.htm, CDC website.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    CDC2004Cigarette smoking among adults – United States, 2002MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep53427431Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mendez, D, Warner, KE 2000Smoking prevalence in 2010: why the healthy people goal is unattainableAm J Public Health90401403PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Green, LW, Eriksen, MP, Bailey, L, Husten, C 2000Achieving the implausible in the next decade’s tobacco control objectivesAm J Public Health90337339PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Levy, DT, Nikolayev, N, Mumford, EA 2004A validation of the SimSmoke Simulation Model: The Role of Tobacco Control Policies in Recent YearsPIRE Working PaperCalverton, MDGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Levy, DT, Cummings, KM, Hyland, A 2000A simulation of the effects of youth initiation policies on overall cigarette useAm J Public Health9013111314PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Levy, DT, Chaloupka, F, Gitchell, J, Mendez, D, Warner, KE 2002The use of simulation models for the surveillance, justification and understanding of tobacco control policiesHealth Care Manag Sci5113120PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    U.S. DHHS (1992) Smoking and Health in the Americas: a Report of the Surgeon General, in Collaboration with the Pan American Health Organization. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    U.S. DHHS (1990) The Health Benefits of Smoking Cessation: A Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta Georgia: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control, Office on Smoking and Health.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Levy, DT, Friend, K 2002Examining the effects of tobacco treatment policies on smoking rates and smoking related deaths using the SimSmoke computer simulation modelTob Control114754PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Levy, DT, Friend, K 2002A simulation model of policies directed at treating tobacco use and dependenceMed Decis Making22617PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    McWhorter, WP, Boyd, GM, Mattson, ME 1990Predictors of quitting smoking: the NHANES I followup experienceJ Clin Epidemiol4313991405PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gilpin, EA, Pierce, JP, Farkas, AJ 1997Duration of smoking abstinence and success in quittingJ Natl Cancer Inst89572576PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    National Cancer Institute2000State and Local Legislative Action to Reduce Tobacco UseU.S. DHHS, National Institutes of Health, National Cancer InstituteBethesda MDGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wakefield, M, Chaloupka, F 2000Effectiveness of comprehensive tobacco control programmes in reducing teenage smoking in the USATob Control9177186PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Levy, DT, Cummings, KM, Hyland, A 2000Increasing taxes as a strategy to reduce cigarette use and deaths: results of a simulation modelPrev Med31279286PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Levy, DT, Mumford, EA 2004The Healthy People 2000 and 2010 Tobacco Control Policies Objectives: A Review of the Policies Implemented in 1990–2004Pacific InsitituteCalverton MDGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Levy, DT, Gitchell, JG, Chaloupka, F 2004The effects of tobacco control policies on smoking rates: a tobacco control scorecardJ Public Health Manag Pract10338351PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Levy, DT, Friend, K, Holder, H, Carmona, M 2001Effect of policies directed at youth access to smoking: results from the SimSmoke computer simulation modelTob Control10108116PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Farrelly, M, Bray, J 1998Responses to increases in cigarette prices by race/ethnicity, income, and age groups – United States, 1976–1993Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report47605609PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Levy, DT, Friend, K, Polishchuk, E 2001Effect of clean indoor air laws on smokers: the clean air module of the SimSmoke computer simulation modelTob Control10345351PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Levy, DT, Friend, K 2001A computer simulation model of mass media interventions directed at tobacco usePrev Med32284294PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    CDC2004State medicaid coverage for tobacco-dependence treatments – United States, 1994–2002MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep535457Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    McPhillips-Tangum, C, Cahill, A, Bocchino, C, Cutler, CM 2002Addressing tobacco in managed care: results from the 2000 surveyPrevent Med Managed Care38595Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Levy, DT, Friend, KB 2000A simulation model of tobacco youth access policiesJ Health Polit Policy Law2510231050PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Levy, DT, Mumford, E, Pesin, B 2003Tobacco control policies, and reductions in smoking rates and smoking-related deaths: results from the SimSmoke modelExpert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research3457468Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    U.S. DHHS (2000) Reducing Tobacco Use: a Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Hopkins, DP, Briss, PA, Ricard, CJ,  et al. 2001Reviews of evidence regarding interventions to reduce tobacco use and exposure to environmental tobacco smokeAm J Prev Med201666PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Levy, D, Romano, E, Mumford, E 2004Recent trends in home and work smoking bansTobacco control13258263PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Friend K, Levy D (2002) Reductions in smoking prevalence and cigarette consumption associated with mass-media campaigns. Health Educ Res 17: 1, 85–98Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Pierce, JP, Gilpin, EA 2002Impact of over-the-counter sales on effectiveness of pharmaceutical aids for smoking cessationJAMA28812601264PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Thorndike, AN, Biener, L, Rigotti, NA 2002Effect on smoking cessation of switching nicotine replacement therapy to over-the-counter statusAm J Public Health92437442PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Jha, P, Chaloupka, F 2000Tobacco Control in Developing CountriesOxford University PressNew YorkGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Hughes, JR 2000Reduced smoking: an introduction and review of the evidenceAddiction95S3S7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Stratton, K, Shetty, P, Wallace, R, Bondurant, S 2001Clearing the smoke: the science base for tobacco harm reduction – executive summaryTob Control10189195PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Gilpin EA, Emery SL, Farkas AJ, et al. (2003) Tobacco Control Successes in California: A focus on the Young People, Results from the California Tobacco Control Surveys, 1990–2002. La Jolla, CA: University of California, San Diego.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    CDC2003Cigarette smoking among adults – United States, 2001MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep52953956Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • David T. Levy
    • 1
  • Leonid Nikolayev
    • 2
  • Elizabeth Mumford
    • 3
  • Christine Compton
    • 2
  1. 1.Senior Scientist, Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation ProfessorUniversity of BaltimorePotomacUSA
  2. 2.Computer Programmer, Pacific Institute for Research and EvaluationUniversity of BaltimoreMarylandUSA
  3. 3.Associate Research Scientist, Pacific Institute for Research and EvaluationUniversity of BaltimoreMarylandUSA

Personalised recommendations