Preventing Cancer by Ending Tobacco Use

  • Neil Collishaw
  • Cynthia Callard
Part of the Statistics for Biology and Health book series (SBH, volume 79)


Tobacco use is the leading cause of cancer and many other diseases. For over 50 years, it has been known that prevention of tobacco use would prevent millions of deaths, yet tobacco use remains stubbornly persistent. Progressively more restrictive tobacco control measures that are mainly aimed at changing the smoking behaviour of individuals have slowed the progress of the tobacco epidemic somewhat. Tobacco companies have become expert in adapting to tobacco control measures and neutralizing or mitigating their effect. The profit-seeking motivation that directs corporate behaviour will likely lead to their continuing adaptive behaviour in the future. A continued focus on smokers, characteristic of many current tobacco control measures, may slow the progress of the tobacco epidemic but is unlikely to bring it to an end. In the future, in addition to more and more effective measures that will influence individual behaviour, tobacco control will need to be expanded to include measures directed at changing the ways tobacco suppliers do business.


Tobacco Control Tobacco Industry Tobacco Company Public Health Goal Tobacco Advertising 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts and Figures; 2011Google Scholar
  2. Australian Government. National Tobacco Campaign; 2011. From
  3. Australian Government, Attorney-General’s Department. Investor-State Arbitration - Tobacco Plain Packaging; 2011. From
  4. Borland R. A strategy for controlling the marketing of tobacco products: A regulated market model. Tobacco Control 2003; 12:374–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Borland R. Why not seek clever regulation? A reply to Liberman. Tobacco Control 2006; 15:339–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brandt AM. Inventing conflicts of interest: A history of tobacco industry tactics. Am J Pub Hlth 2012; 102:63–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brandt AM. The Cigarette Century: The rise, fall and deadly persistence of the product that defined America. 2007. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  8. California Department of Public Health. Tobacco Education and Research Oversight Committee (TEROC). Retrieved 2011 29-December from Saving Lives, Saving Money: Towards a Tobacco-Free California 2012-2014 - Mission, Vision, Goal, Principles, Objectives and Strategies (DRAFT):
  9. Callard C. Follow the money: How the billions of dollars that flow from smokers in poor nations to companies in rich nations greatly exceed funding for global tobacco control and what might be done about it. Tobacco Control 2010; 19:285–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Callard C, Collishaw N. Exploring vector space: Overcoming resistance to direct control of the tobacco industry. Tobacco Control 2012; (in press).Google Scholar
  11. Callard C, Thompson D, Collishaw N. Curing the Addiction to Profits: A supply-side approach to phasing out tobacco. 2005a; Ottawa, Canada: Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives.Google Scholar
  12. Callard C, Thompson D, Collishaw N. Transforming the tobacco market: why the supply of cigarettes should be transferred from for-profit corporations to non-profit enterprises with a public health mandate. Tobacco Control 2005b; 14:278–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Canadian Cancer Society. From 21,000 cancer deaths could be prevented if people had quit smoking sooner. 2003; Retrieved 2011 28-December.
  14. Canadian Tobacco Use Monitoring Survey. Unpublished tabulations prepared by Physicians for a Smoke-Free Canada 2010.Google Scholar
  15. Cancer Research UK. Smoking and Cancer. Retrieved 2011 28-December from http://info.­
  16. Collishaw N. European Conference on Tobacco or Health 2011. From Phasing out tobacco:
  17. Corporate Accountability International. Big Tobacco’s Attempts to Derail the Global Tobacco Treaty: Cases from Battleground Countries 2005.Google Scholar
  18. Doll R, Hill A B. Smoking and carcinoma of the lung: preliminary report. BMJ 1950; ii (4682): 739–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Enzi M. Bill S.1834. 110th Congress, First Session 2007.Google Scholar
  20. Euromonitor International. Passport - Legislation: The Tobacco Control Noose Tightens. 2011.Google Scholar
  21. Gerace T. The toxic tobacco law: “appropriate remedial action”. J Publ Hlth Policy 1999; 20: 394–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gilmore AB, Branston JR, Sweanor D. The case for OFSMOKE: how tobacco price regulation is needed to promote the health of markets, government revenue and the public. Tobacco Control 2010; 19: 423–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Glantz SA. Removing the incentive to sell kids tobacco: a proposal. JAMA 1993; 269: 793–794.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hall W, West R. Thinking about the unthinkable: a de facto prohibition on smoked tobacco ­products. Addiction 2008; 103: 873–874.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Imperial Tobacco Limited. 1988 Overview. Exhibit Number AG-51 (Vols. 77, page 15335). Montreal Court of Appeal, Case Numbers 500-09-001296-912 and 500-090001297-910. 1991. Joint Record, 1988.Google Scholar
  26. Kessler G. United States of America v. Philip Morris USA et al., Civil Action No. 99-2496 (GK). Amended Final Opinion. 2006. Retrieved 2010 йил 01-June from
  27. Khoo D, Koong HN, Berrick A J. Phaisng out tobacco: proposal to deny access to tobacco for those born from 2000. Tobacco Control 2010; 19: 355–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Liberman J. The future of tobacco regulation: a response to a proposal for fundamental institutional change. Tobacco Control 2006; 15:333–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Liberman J. Where to for tobacco regulation: time for new approaches? Drug and Alcohol Review 2003; 22: 461–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lopez A, Collishaw N, Piha T. A descriptive model of the cigarette epidemic in developed ­countries. Tobacco Control 1994; 3:242–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Malone RA. Imagining thngs otherwise: new endgame ideas for tobacco control. Tobacco Control 2010; 19:349–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Michaels D. Doubt is their product: How industry’s assault on science threatens your health. 2008. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Ministry of Social Affairs and Health of Finland. The aim of the Tobacco Act is to put an end to smoking in Finland [Finnish government media release]. 2010. Retrieved 2011 21-December from
  34. New Zealand Government. Government response to the Report of the Maori Affairs Committee on its Inquiry into the tobacco industry in Aotearoa and the consequences of tobacco use for Maori (Final Response). 2010. Retrieved 2011 21-December from
  35. Oreskes N, Conway EM. Merchants of Doubt: How a handful of scientists obscured the truth on issues ranging from tobacco smoke to global warming. 2010. New York: Bloomsbury Press.Google Scholar
  36. Parkin D. Tobacco-attributable cancer burden in the UK in 2010. Br J Cancer 2011;105: S6–S13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Physicians for a Smoke-Free Canada. Smoking in Canada. 2011. From
  38. Physicians for a Smoke-Free Canada. Future options for tobacco control: Performance-based regulation of tobacco. 2010.Google Scholar
  39. Rand Europe. Assessing the impacts from revising the Tobacco Products Directive: Study to support a DG SANCO impact assessment. Final Report. 2010.Google Scholar
  40. Royal College of Physicians of London, Committee on Smoking and Atmospheric Pollution. A report of the Royal College of Physicians of London on smoking in relation to cancer of the lung and other diseases. 1962. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart.Google Scholar
  41. Sugarman SD. Performance-based regulation: Enterprise responsibility for reducing death, injury and disease caused by consumer products. (D. U. Press, Ed.) Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law 2009; 34: 1035–1077.Google Scholar
  42. Surgeon General. The health consequences of smoking: a report of the Surgeon General. 2004. Atlanta: Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office of Smoking and Health.Google Scholar
  43. The Health Officers Council of British Columbia. Public Health Perspectives for Regulating Psychoactive Substances: What we can do about alcohol, tobacco and other drugs. 2011.Google Scholar
  44. Thomson G, Wilson N, Blakely T, Edwards R. Ending appreciable tobacco use in a nation: using a sinking lid on supply. Tobacco Control 2010; 19: 431–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Tobacco Strategy Advisory Group. Building on our gains, taking action now: Ontario’s Tobacco Control Strategy for 2011–2016. Ontario Ministry of Health Promotion and Sport, Toronto, 2010. From Google Scholar
  46. Ugen S. Bhutan: the world’s most advanced tobacco control nation? Tobacco Control 2003; 12:431–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. United States Public Health Service. Smoking and Health. Report of the Advisory Committee to the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service. 1964. Centre for Disease Control.Google Scholar
  48. Webster PC. Tobacco control measures under industry assault. CMAJ 2011; 183: E1233–E1234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. World Bank. Curbing the Epidemic: Governments and the Economics of Tobacco Control. Washington, 1999.Google Scholar
  50. World Health Organization. WHO Report on the Global Tobacco Epidemic. Geneva, 2011.Google Scholar
  51. Wynder EL, Graham EA. Tobacco smoking as a possible etiologic factor in bronchiogenic ­carcinoma; a study of 684 proved cases. JAMA 1950; 143: 329–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Physicians for a Smoke-Free CanadaOttawaCanada

Personalised recommendations