![]()
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Recent changes in cigarette packaging in New Zealand
may continue to mislead smokers
The New Zealand Commerce Commission is currently undertaking
an enquiry into the terms “light” and “mild” on tobacco
products. This is an important issue from a public health and a consumer rights
perspective. However, we fear that focusing only on the descriptor as a
potentially misleading method of communicating about the product to consumers is
inadequate, and that the review should encompass other communication methods
including pack colouring.
Epidemiological evidence suggests that the health outcomes
from smoking light or mild cigarettes are as grave and as common as those from
smoking other cigarettes.1 International
research however, has shown that many smokers do not understand that light
cigarettes are just as hazardous as regular cigarettes, and many believe that
smoking “light” or “mild” cigarettes has a much lower
health risk.2–6
In countries where these misleading descriptors have already
been banned, the tobacco companies have side-stepped the legislation by using
colour-coding to create different pack colours for different versions within the
same brand family. This is apparent in Europe with “Lucky Strike
Silver”, and in Australia with “Winfield Green”. Research we
have conducted in New Zealand has shown that there is a strong relationship
between the dominant colour of the pack and the brand labelling and type of
cigarette. For example, red is associated with ‘regular’ cigarettes;
white, silver, and blue with ‘light’ and ‘mild’
variants; and green with menthol
cigarettes.7
In New Zealand, where misleading tobacco descriptors have
been common,8 there are signs that tobacco
companies are anticipating the banning of mild and light descriptors by the
increasing use of such colour coding and removal of descriptors. We have
conducted monthly surveillance of brands for sale in an on-line supermarket
website and in other settings. In July 2007, British American Tobacco (BAT)
introduced “Dunhill Fine Cut Navy” (in blue packaging) and
“Dunhill Fine Cut White” (in white packaging). BAT also introduced
“Kent Blue”, “Kent Silver”, and “Kent Gold”
in August 2007; and in November 2007, BAT re-labelled all their
“Holiday” brand variants from “Filter”,
“Mild”, “Menthol”, and “Menthol Mild” to
Holiday “Red”, “Blue”, “Dark Green”, and
“Green” respectively.
Given that there is New Zealand evidence that cigarette pack
colour communicates information about the cigarettes that may be misleading
(such as implying they are lighter or milder7),
then these recent changes in labelling are of concern.
In order to minimise potential deception, it is highly
desirable that all aspects of pack design (including colour, shape, and wording)
are considered when recommending legislation banning “mild” and
“light” descriptors.
Nick Wilson
Senior Lecturer George Thomson
Senior Research Fellow Richard Edwards
Senior Lecturer Department of Public Health
University of Otago, Wellington Acknowledgements: This work was part
of background work for the ITC Project (the International Tobacco Control Policy
Evaluation Survey) which is supported by the Health Research Council of New
Zealand and the NZ Ministry of Health. However, the views expressed here do not
necessarily represent those of these agencies.
Competing interests: Three of the
authors (NW, GT, RE) have previous undertaken work for the Ministry of Health or
non-governmental agencies working to improve tobacco control.
References:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Current
issue | Search journal |
Archived issues | Classifieds
| Hotline (free ads) Subscribe | Contribute | Advertise | Contact Us | Copyright | Other Journals |