Skip Navigation

The European Journal of Public Health 2006 16(2):223-224; doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckl037
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (2)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hammond, D.
Right arrow Articles by Cameron, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hammond, D.
Right arrow Articles by Cameron, R.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Public Health Association. All rights reserved.

Letters to the Editor

Showing leads to doing: graphic cigarette warning labels are an effective public health policy

The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below.

Sir

Ruiter and Kok1 criticize a study we published in the American Journal of Public Health, which found that smokers who experienced greater emotional reactions in response to graphic cigarette warning labels in Canada were more likely to engage in cessation behaviour at follow-up.2 Ruiter and Kok conclude that: ‘Policy makers should...be reluctant to introduce cigarette warning labels and should instead focus on more effective interventions and policies.’ We strongly disagree. We believe that graphic labels are a vital component of a comprehensive approach to tobacco control.

Ruiter and Kok raise a number of concerns about our study. First, they question the . . . [Full Text of this Article]

David Hammond1,2, Geoffrey T. Fong3, Paul W. Mcdonald1,4, K. Stephen Brown5 and Roy Cameron2

1 Department of Health Studies, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3G1
2 Centre for Behavioural Research and Program Evaluation, Canadian Cancer Society/National Cancer Institute of Canada Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3G1
3 Centre for Behavioural Research and Program Evaluation, Canadian Cancer Society/National Cancer Institute of Canada, Canada
4 Ontario Tobacco Research Unit, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
5 Department of Statistics and Actuarial Science, University of Waterloo Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3G1

Correspondence: David Hammond, Department of Psychology, University of Waterloo, 200 University Avenue West, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3G1, tel: +1 519 888 4567 ext 6462, fax: +1 519 886 6424, e-mail: dhammond@uwaterloo.ca


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Eur J Public HealthHome page
C. I. Vardavas, G. Connolly, K. Karamanolis, and A. Kafatos
Adolescents perceived effectiveness of the proposed European graphic tobacco warning labels
Eur J Public Health, April 1, 2009; 19(2): 212 - 217.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Nicotine Tob ResHome page
A. I. Fathelrahman, M. Omar, R. Awang, R. Borland, G. T. Fong, D. Hammond, and Z. Zain
Smokers' responses toward cigarette pack warning labels in predicting quit intention, stage of change, and self-efficacy
Nicotine Tob Res, March 1, 2009; 11(3): 248 - 253.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Eur J Public HealthHome page
R. A. C. Ruiter and G. Kok
Response to Hammond et al. Showing leads to doing, but doing what? The need for experimental pilot-testing.
Eur J Public Health, April 1, 2006; 16(2): 225 - 225.
[Full Text] [PDF]