Abstract:Health ministers of the European Community are due to vote next week on the community's draft directive to ban cigarette advertising. Each year smoking kills some 431 000 people in the community,' 110 000 of them in Britain.2 The prevalence of smoking in Europe may have fallen since the 1960s, but young Europeans are smoking more than young Americans. Among young women smoking is probably increasing in most European countries. Despite this Britain's new secretary of state for health is expected to line up with her opposite numbers in Germany, the Netherlands, and Greece to vote against the ban, thereby scuppering it. Apparently Mrs Bottomley believes that matters should be left to individual countries to decide. Her government favours voluntary controls, whose intentions advertisers can circumvent. Yet The Health of the Nation, which Mrs Bottomley will be trying to get through the cabinet soon, singles out cigarette smoking as the largest single preventable cause of death.3 Hers is, to say the least, a curious position to maintain. Less curiously, the tobacco industry has thrown its weight against the ban. It claims that such a ban would unjustifiably curtail commercial freedom. If selling a product is legal, it asserts, then advertising it should not be made illegal. Both these propositions are based on shakier foundations than the government is currently willing to concede. Supporters of the status quo argue that cigarette advertising simply enables manufacturers to compete effectively for bigger market shares for their brands. As the prevalence of smoking is falling slowly in the United Kingdom they argue that advertising cannot be blamed for the catalogue of death and disease that follows in smoking's wake. But there is more to it than that. Five out of six adult smokers began smoking by the age of 164-at a time when people are poorly equipped to judge its health risks and to resist its alluring image. Within a few years three out of four smokers are trying to give up but failing.5 No wonder: according to the United States Surgeon General giving up tobacco is as hard as giving up heroin.6 If advertising starts children on the road to addiction then a strong case exists for banning it. How strong is the evidence? Studies suggest that, whatever tobacco companies' intentions and the current voluntary advertising restrictions, children are exposed to and notice cigarette advertisements. Posters and magazine advertisements are everywhere and visible to all. A recent Scottish survey of 11 to 14 year olds found that they could recognise on average five cigarette advertisements.7 Indeed, more than half this age group claim to have seen advertisements for cigarettes on television, which reflects the exposure given to sports events sponsored by tobacco companies.8 Children are influenced by cigarette advertising. Studies show that those who pay attention to cigarette advertisements are likely to change their views in favour of smoking79 10; those who approve of the advertisements are twice as likely to become smokers. Children who smoke more readily recall, recognise, and identify cigarette advertisements. Advertising therefore seems likely to encourage them to continue the habit. The most compelling evidence comes from a recent survey that showed that the four most heavily advertised cigarette brands-Benson and Hedges, Silk Cut, Embassy, and Marlboro-are the brands most smoked by 11 to 14 year olds.8 Undoubtedly, stronger influences than advertising encourage children to take up or continue smoking. These include smoking by other family members and peer pressure. Nevertheless, a recent study for the Department of Health concluded that "There is some support for the view that tobacco advertising promotes smoking among young people."" Showing that advertising is one of the influences encouraging young people to take up smoking is not evidence-that its absence would have the opposite effect. Examining the effect of advertising bans in other countries may help us here. This has been done by the Department of Health's economic advisers, who recently concluded that evidence from New Zealand and elsewhere showed that advertising bans led to significant falls in consumption.'2 Particularly relevant is the change in the prevalence of smoking in young Norwegians. Among 13 to 15 year olds it fell from 17% in 1975, when a ban on advertising was imposed, to 10% in 1990.'3 Studies therefore strongly suggest that cigarette advertising and sponsorship are reaching and influencing young people and that banning advertising would reduce the numbers taking up smoking. It is in this light that the tobacco industry's demands for commercial freedom should be considered. With freedom come responsibilities; increasing the numbers of people who will suffer the ravages of tobacco induced ill health and premature death is a responsibility that sits uncomfortably with claims for the freedom to advertise. Furthermore, the argument that businesses should be free to advertise what they are free to sell is seriously flawed in the case of tobacco. It is illegal to sell tobacco to people under 16.

Checkpoint Nano-degrader to Transiently Promote Efferocytosis in Acute Myocardial Infarction

Why cigarette advertising should be banned.

Genetically Engineered Macrophages Co-Loaded with CD47 Inhibitors Synergistically Reconstruct Efferocytosis and Improve Cardiac Remodeling Post Myocardial Ischemia Reperfusion Injury

A Biomimetic Nanocarrier Strategy Targets Ferroptosis and Efferocytosis During Myocardial Infarction

Engineered neutrophil apoptotic bodies ameliorate myocardial infarction by promoting macrophage efferocytosis and inflammation resolution

A note on inverse-orthogonal Toeplitz matrices

Tamoxifen inhibits CDK5 kinase activity by interacting with p35/p25 and modulates the pattern of tau phosphorylation.

Enhancing CAR Macrophage Efferocytosis via Surface Engineered Lipid Nanoparticles Targeting LXR Signaling

Targeted Treatment of Myocardial Infarction by Macrophage Membrane Coated with Resveratrol Nanoparticles

Enhanced Macrophages Engulfment by Peptide‐Templated Nanoassemblies Targeting SIRPα and Suppressing Oxidative Stress for Atherosclerosis Pro‐Efferocytotic Therapy

3-mercaptolactate cysteine disulfiduria: biochemical studies on affected and unaffected members of a family.

Enhancing Cardioprotection Through Neutrophil‐Mediated Delivery of 18β‐Glycyrrhetinic Acid in Myocardial Ischemia/Reperfusion Injury

Macrophage-targeting gene silencing orchestrates myocardial microenvironment remodeling toward the anti-inflammatory treatment of ischemia-reperfusion (IR) injury

Development of the type II cell in the fetal rat lung.

Abstract 18536: Nanoparticle-mediated Simultaneous Targeting to Mitochondria and Inflammatory Monocytes Confers Additive Cardioprotection Against Myocardial Ischemia-reperfusion Injury

Targeted Delivery of Apoptotic Cell‐Derived Nanovesicles prevents Cardiac Remodeling and Attenuates Cardiac Function Exacerbation

Reprogramming monocytes into M2 macrophages as living drug depots to enhance treatment of myocardial ischemia-reperfusion injury

Targeting Cardiac Resident CCR2+ Macrophage-Secreted MCP-1 to Attenuate Inflammation After Myocardial Infarction

Platelet-Like Fusogenic Liposome-Mediated Targeting Delivery of Mir-21 Improves Myocardial Remodeling by Reprogramming Macrophages Post Myocardial Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury

Cardiac resident macrophages: key regulatory mediators in the aftermath of myocardial infarction

Pro-efferocytosis biomimetic nanocomplexes for targeted atherosclerosis therapy through promoting macrophage re-polarization and inhibiting senescence