Lidmaatschap Forums Contact Nieuwsselectie:
Hoofdmenu
 Startpagina
 Nieuws
 Nieuws
 Onderwerpen
 Stuur Nieuws
 Nieuws Archief
 Discussies
 Forums
 Privť Boodschappen
 ChatBox
 Documentatie
 Achtergrondinformatie
 Documenten
 Top 10
 Woordenlijst
 Web Links
 FAQ
 Gebruikers
 Beveel ons aan
 Statistiek
 Ledenlijst
 Je mening
 EnquÍtes
 Feedback
 Zoeken
 Lokale zoekmachine
 Via Google
 Contact

Wie is Online?
Er zijn op dit moment, 38 gast(en) en 0 lid(leden) die online zijn.

U bent een gast. U kunt gratis een account aanvragen door hier te klikken

Aanbevolen links
  • Big Pharmaís Gaming of Medical Studies: Twisted Statistics and How to Spot Them
  • Audrey Silk bij Metropolis (VPRO)
  • Rokersvriendelijke horeca
  • Sigarenliefhebber
  • Rampant Antismoking Signifies Grave Danger: Materialism Out of Control
  • Anti-Smoking Stats-Scam
  • Joe Jackson: Smoke, Lies and the Nanny State
  • Schadelijkheid meeroken onbewezen
  • De feiten rond meeroken (Dave Hitt)
  • Internationale sigarettenprijzen
  • Bureau Voorlichting Tabak
  • Europese Consumenten-organisatie Tabak
  • Junkscience, All the Junk that''s fit to Debunk (alle onzin van onzin ontdaan)
  • Meervrijheid.nl
  • Uitgerookt (Intermediair)
  • Nazi posters tegen roken
  • De vrijspreker
  • Roken en de Wet
  • Rokers actie posters!
  • The United Pro Choice Smokers Rights Newsletter
  • TobaccoAnalysis Blog (Michael Siegel)
  • Dissecting Antismokers` Brains
  • Welke restaurants moet je beslist niet naar toe?
  • Wie wordt betaald door de farmaceuten?
  • Meer linksNieuws archief

  • De waarschuwingen

    Diversen

    Meldpunt Rokersdiscriminatie:
    020-4167632


    Slachtoffers rookverbod New York
    The Evidence archive What you think you know about tobacco may surprise you

    Zyban Dossier

    Server Hosted By
    Logo transparent

    Zoeken
    Google


    Statistieken NL
    • Nederlandse productie van sigaretten (2004): 115,2 miljard stuks
    • Werkgelegenheid tabaksindustrie: 25.000 personen
    • Waarde binnenlandse tabaksverkoop: 3,87 miljard euro
    • Waarde Nederlandse tabaksexport: 2,87 miljard euro
    • Belastinginkomen (2008): 2,4 miljard euro
    • Aandeel in totale belastinginkomsten rijk: 2 procent

    Donaties
    Acceptatie-indicatie

    of via een
    bankoverboeking

    Boeken


    Overheid: Accijnsverhogingen tabak alleen nog ongunstig voor lagere inkomens
    Posted on Monday 10 September 2007 @ 17:45:00 GMT+1 by webmaster

    Wetenschap

    Zowel door anti-rokenorganisaties als door de overheid wordt het uitgangspunt gehanteerd dat een verhoging van de accijns op tabak het aantal rokers zal verminderen. Uit een nieuw onderzoek, dat de mechanismen achter dit soort maatregelen wat beter analyseerde, is dat al tijden niet meer zo. Enkele decennia geleden werkte het wel zo, maar het effect was er met name op het stoppen bij volwassenen binnen de hogere inkomensgroepen. In de lagere inkomensgroepen was er nauwelijks een vermindering van roken te bespeuren.

    Nu de meeste volwassenen die 'stopbereid' zijn gestopt zijn, werken accijnsverhogingen niet meer maar hebben ze alleen maar een sterk negatief effect op de bestedingsruimte van de armeren in de samenleving.



    A new study published online ahead of print in the American Journal of Public Health concludes that contrary to the popular wisdom in tobacco control, cigarette price increases are no longer an effective strategy to reduce adult smoking prevalence. In addition, the study concludes that cigarette price increases impose a disproportionate burden on poor smokers (see: Franks P, Jerant AF, Leigh P, et al. Cigarette prices, smoking, and the poor: implications of recent trends. Am J Public Health 2007; 97).

    The study examined the relationship between cigarette price and smoking participation (not cigarette consumption) during the period 1984-2004. Overall, the study found that the increasing price of cigarettes over time was associated with a marked decline in smoking only for higher-income individuals, not for lower-income persons.

    Prior to the Master Settlement Agreement (MSA), there was a strong association between increasing cigarette price and reduced smoking participation, with the price elasticity being significantly larger among lower-income (-0.45) versus higher-income (-0.22) persons. After the MSA, there was no significant association between cigarette price and smoking participation in either income group.

    The authors conclude: "Despite cigarette price increases after the MSA, income-related smoking disparities have increased. Increasing cigarette prices may no longer be an effective policy tool and may impose a disproportionate burden on poor smokers."

    The Rest of the Story


    This is an important study because it challenges the popular wisdom in tobacco control that increasing cigarette excise taxes is an effective strategy to promote smoking cessation. That assumption is a key one that is being used by anti-smoking groups to support state and federal cigarette tax increases -- in particular, the proposed 61 cents per pack increase in the federal cigarette excise tax to provide revenues for the expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP).

    For example, the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids has estimated that a 61 cents per pack tax increase will result in
    171,000 adult smokers quitting. This estimate is based on a price elasticity of -0.2 for smoking participation among adults.

    While the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids' assumption is supported by this new study using data for prior to the MSA, it is not supported by the post-MSA data. The post-MSA data suggest that smoking participation is no longer price sensitive, which would render the Campaign's estimate invalid.

    It is important to note that according to these authors, the prevailing wisdom that there is a significantly negative price elasticity for smoking participation is based on data that were obtained prior to the MSA. The authors report that their study is only the second to use post-MSA data and that their results are in concordance with the
    one prior study that examined the more recent data (see: Colman G, Remler DK. Vertical equity consequences of very high cigarette tax increases: if the poor are the ones smoking, how could cigarette tax increases be progressive? Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research; 2004. NBER Working Paper 10906).

    The
    prior study concluded as follows: "We find that the price elasticity of smoking participation is -.14 for the lowest income tercile, -.05 for the middle income, and -.21 for the high income. We find that the price sensitivity of conditional consumption, cigarettes smoked by smokers, shows no robust pattern with income and is frequently insignificant. Thus, our results challenge the conventional view that price sensitivity falls monotonically with income. Our predictions of the equity consequences of tax increases show that using all traditional measures of progressivity, whether based on tax expenditures or welfare, cigarette tax increases are not close to progressive."

    There are two important limitations to this study. First, it pertains only to smoking participation, not to cigarette consumption. Thus, it is still possible that smokers cut down on the amount they smoke in response to price increases.

    Second, the study pertains only to adult smoking, not to youths.

    In light of these limitations, I think there are two important implications of this research.

    First, the research suggests that cigarette tax increases may no longer be effective in stimulating adult smoking cessation. It is possible that previous tax increases have "skimmed off" the less addicted smokers who were more motivated to quit smoking and thus left a population of smokers which is more addicted and less interested in quitting -- and thus much less price sensitive.

    Second, the research suggests that cigarette tax increases are now increasing, not decreasing, income-related disparities in smoking prevalence. Combined with the Colman and Remler study, this new paper provides evidence that cigarette tax increases now do impose a disproportionate economic burden on the poor.

    These are important considerations in light of the proposed use of an increased federal cigarette tax to fund an expansion of the SCHIP program. They add to the strength of
    my argument against this approach.

    New Research Suggests that Cigarette Price Increases No Longer Stimulate Smoking Cessation (Michael Siegel)


    Share

     
    Inloggen
    Loginnaam

    Wachtwoord

    Nog geen lid? U kunt een account aanvragen. Als geregistreerde gebruiker krijgt u voordelen zoals de Thema-manager, opmerkingsconfiguratie en kunt u opmerkingen plaatsen onder uw eigen naam.

    Gerelateerde links
    · Forces Evidence Archive
    · Meer over Wetenschap
    · Nieuws door webmaster


    Meest gelezen verhaal over Wetenschap:
    Hormese door massaal onderzoek bevestigd


    Score Artikel
    Gemiddelde score: 4.66
    Stemmen: 3


    Neem even tijd om dit artikel te beoordelen:

    Uitstekend
    Zeer Goed
    Goed
    Gewoon
    Slecht


    Opties

     Printervriendelijke pagina Printervriendelijke pagina


    "Login" | Login/CreŽer een profiel | 0 opmerkingen
    De schrijver is verantwoordelijk voor de inhoud van zijn berichten.


    Gasten mogen geen opmerkingen plaatsen, registreer a.u.b.

    Contact Uw banner op onze site? Forces banner op uw site?

    PHP-Nuke Copyright © 2005 by Francisco Burzi. This is free software, and you may redistribute it under the GPL. PHP-Nuke comes with absolutely no warranty, for details, see the license.
    Pagina Rendering: 0.09 Seconden