The New England Journal of Medicine
e-mail icon  FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |    Advanced Search
Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe
 
Special Article
PreviousPrevious
Volume 347:1080-1086 October 3, 2002 Number 14
NextNext

State Expenditures for Tobacco-Control Programs and the Tobacco Settlement
Cary P. Gross, M.D., Benny Soffer, M.D., Peter B. Bach, M.D., Rahul Rajkumar, B.A., and Howard P. Forman, M.D., M.B.A.

 Sign up for free e-toc
 

This Article
-Full Text
- PDF
-PDA Full Text

Commentary
-Editorial
 by Schroeder, S. A.
-Letters

Tools and Services
-Add to Personal Archive
-Add to Citation Manager
-Notify a Friend
-E-mail When Cited

More Information
-PubMed Citation
ABSTRACT

Background Despite controversy surrounding the use of funds arising from settlement agreements with the tobacco industry, little is known about the role of these funds in expenditures for state tobacco-control programs.

Methods We evaluated state expenditures for tobacco-control programs in fiscal year 2001 in the context of the amount of tobacco-settlement funds received and allocated to tobacco-control programs and in the context of other state-level economic and health data.

Results In 2001 the average state received $28.35 per capita from the tobacco settlement but allocated approximately 6 percent of these funds to tobacco-control programs. The average state dedicated $3.49 per capita (range, $0.10 to $15.47) to tobacco-control programs. The proportion of settlement funds allocated to tobacco-control programs varied from 0 to 100 percent and was strongly related to levels of tobacco-control funding (P<0.001). States with higher smoking rates tended to invest less per capita in tobacco-control programs (P=0.007), as did tobacco-producing states (the mean per capita expenditure was $1.20, as compared with $3.81 in non–tobacco-producing states; P<0.008). In a multivariate analysis, the proportion of the settlement revenue allocated to tobacco-control programs was the primary determinant of the level of total funding; the state tobacco-related health burden was unrelated to program funding.

Conclusions State health needs appear to have little effect on the funding of state tobacco-control programs. Because only a very small proportion of the tobacco settlement is being used for tobacco-control programs, the settlement represents an unrealized opportunity to reduce morbidity and mortality from smoking.


Source Information

From the Departments of Medicine (C.P.G., B.S., R.R.) and Radiology (H.P.F.), Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn.; and the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics and the Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York (P.B.B.).

Dr. Gross is the recipient of a Cancer Prevention, Control and Population Sciences Career Development Award (1 K07 CA90402-01) from the National Cancer Institute. Dr. Forman is a Robert Wood Johnson Health Policy Fellow.

Address reprint requests to Dr. Gross at Yale University School of Medicine, Primary Care Center, 333 Cedar St., P.O. Box 208025, New Haven, CT 06520, or at cary.gross{at}yale.edu.

Full Text of this Article


Related Letters:

State Expenditures for Tobacco-Control Programs and the Tobacco Settlement
Thompson J. W., Wilson I. D., Huckabee M., Gross C. P., Bach P. B., Forman H. P.
Extract | Full Text | PDF  
N Engl J Med 2003; 348:663-664, Feb 13, 2003. Correspondence

This article has been cited by other articles:



HOME  |  SUBSCRIBE  |  SEARCH  |  CURRENT ISSUE  |  PAST ISSUES  |  COLLECTIONS  |  PRIVACY  |  TERMS OF USE  |  HELP  |  beta.nejm.org

Comments and questions? Please contact us.

The New England Journal of Medicine is owned, published, and copyrighted © 2009 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.