Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Highlights in this Issue

Highlights in this Issue The Public Health Association of Australia has always supported the fierce battle against tobacco smoking. This Journal has regularly published evidence supporting moves against tobacco products and the tobacco industry. These have included arguments for a range of evidence‐based policies, one of which is plain packaging. While we celebrate the recent Australian Federal Government win on plain packaging, in this issue we continue with the analysis of the best way of dealing with this major source of chronic disease in our community and worldwide. We draw attention, in particular to two articles: Coral Gartner and colleagues argue that there is little evidence to support increased pressure on individual smokers, and Louise Marsh and colleagues focus on young smokers who readily become addicted to smoking. Their study in New Zealand shows that, despite legislation making it illegal to sell cigarettes to those under 18 years, many young smokers still purchase cigarettes from retail outlets without being asked for identification. Of course legislation is not the only route to health Policy . Much of what is published in this Journal is directly or indirectly relevant to health policy making, although perhaps not in the short term. In the case of tobacco smoking, the evidence of harm has been clear for a very long time and there have been clear policy directions – even though they proved difficult to implement. Could the lessons learned in that campaign be useful against other health risks? The evidence for harm from certain foodstuffs is much more nuanced than the case of tobacco and the evidence for interventions like food labelling is therefore the subject of vigorous debate. John White and Louise Signal show that there is selective citation of existing evidence in submissions to the Review of Food Labelling Law and Policy in Australia and New Zealand. One source of difference is the use of front‐of‐pack nutrition labelling. Despite some evidence questioning the effectiveness of ‘traffic light labelling’ on food products, the authors argue that it has value, especially in helping those at most risk of diet‐related chronic illness, but we need to have this confirmed with further analysis. In setting health policy, positive as well as negative effects on Wellbeing are important. In the past few years, Australia has suffered a series of extreme adverse weather events, including severe droughts, floods and devastating fires. Such weather extremes have been linked directly to mortality but also indirectly through increased infectious disease, distress and loss of income and stability. Drawing on data from the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women's Health, Jennifer Powers and colleagues compared health and wellbeing in women living in areas classified as experiencing exceptional disruption from weather events with women living in other areas. They argue that high income countries like Australia can mobilise government resources and social supports that reduce the likelihood of harm even among vulnerable people. Mike Daube: Life member of the Public Health Association of Australia Mike Daube has been a thorn in the tobacco industry's side for longer than some of us care to remember – about four decades. His name appears in numerous tobacco industry reports and internal documents, and not positively! He started his activist career with ASH (Action on Smoking and Health) which had the aim of translating and transforming research on the harm caused by tobacco into evidence‐based advocacy. Over time a number of these advocacy organisations, all with Mike at the helm, helped to create the necessary atmosphere for change on tobacco. Over the same time, Mike occupied multiple important official appointments. He was Director General of Health for Western Australia before becoming Professor of Public Policy at Curtin University and has served on a number of important public health committees, including the Cancer Council, the National Heart Foundation and, more recently, the Australian National Preventive Health Taskforce. He was President of the Public Health Association of Australia from 2007 to 2010. In all these positions he has made his views known and persuaded all and sundry that those views are the right and proper ones! We appreciate him for the person he is and are pleased to report that he is now involved in mentoring others to create an army of like‐minded troublemakers. The Public Health Association of Australia publically recognised Mike's commitment to public health at the Population Health Congress in Adelaide in early September when he was awarded Life Membership. Professor Mike Daube http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health Wiley

Highlights in this Issue

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health , Volume 36 (5) – Oct 1, 2012
Download PDF
1 page

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/highlights-in-this-issue-xazCgXPTHi

References (4)

Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
© 2012 The Authors. ANZJPH © 2012 Public Health Association of Australia
ISSN
1326-0200
eISSN
1753-6405
DOI
10.1111/j.1753-6405.2012.00906.x
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

The Public Health Association of Australia has always supported the fierce battle against tobacco smoking. This Journal has regularly published evidence supporting moves against tobacco products and the tobacco industry. These have included arguments for a range of evidence‐based policies, one of which is plain packaging. While we celebrate the recent Australian Federal Government win on plain packaging, in this issue we continue with the analysis of the best way of dealing with this major source of chronic disease in our community and worldwide. We draw attention, in particular to two articles: Coral Gartner and colleagues argue that there is little evidence to support increased pressure on individual smokers, and Louise Marsh and colleagues focus on young smokers who readily become addicted to smoking. Their study in New Zealand shows that, despite legislation making it illegal to sell cigarettes to those under 18 years, many young smokers still purchase cigarettes from retail outlets without being asked for identification. Of course legislation is not the only route to health Policy . Much of what is published in this Journal is directly or indirectly relevant to health policy making, although perhaps not in the short term. In the case of tobacco smoking, the evidence of harm has been clear for a very long time and there have been clear policy directions – even though they proved difficult to implement. Could the lessons learned in that campaign be useful against other health risks? The evidence for harm from certain foodstuffs is much more nuanced than the case of tobacco and the evidence for interventions like food labelling is therefore the subject of vigorous debate. John White and Louise Signal show that there is selective citation of existing evidence in submissions to the Review of Food Labelling Law and Policy in Australia and New Zealand. One source of difference is the use of front‐of‐pack nutrition labelling. Despite some evidence questioning the effectiveness of ‘traffic light labelling’ on food products, the authors argue that it has value, especially in helping those at most risk of diet‐related chronic illness, but we need to have this confirmed with further analysis. In setting health policy, positive as well as negative effects on Wellbeing are important. In the past few years, Australia has suffered a series of extreme adverse weather events, including severe droughts, floods and devastating fires. Such weather extremes have been linked directly to mortality but also indirectly through increased infectious disease, distress and loss of income and stability. Drawing on data from the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women's Health, Jennifer Powers and colleagues compared health and wellbeing in women living in areas classified as experiencing exceptional disruption from weather events with women living in other areas. They argue that high income countries like Australia can mobilise government resources and social supports that reduce the likelihood of harm even among vulnerable people. Mike Daube: Life member of the Public Health Association of Australia Mike Daube has been a thorn in the tobacco industry's side for longer than some of us care to remember – about four decades. His name appears in numerous tobacco industry reports and internal documents, and not positively! He started his activist career with ASH (Action on Smoking and Health) which had the aim of translating and transforming research on the harm caused by tobacco into evidence‐based advocacy. Over time a number of these advocacy organisations, all with Mike at the helm, helped to create the necessary atmosphere for change on tobacco. Over the same time, Mike occupied multiple important official appointments. He was Director General of Health for Western Australia before becoming Professor of Public Policy at Curtin University and has served on a number of important public health committees, including the Cancer Council, the National Heart Foundation and, more recently, the Australian National Preventive Health Taskforce. He was President of the Public Health Association of Australia from 2007 to 2010. In all these positions he has made his views known and persuaded all and sundry that those views are the right and proper ones! We appreciate him for the person he is and are pleased to report that he is now involved in mentoring others to create an army of like‐minded troublemakers. The Public Health Association of Australia publically recognised Mike's commitment to public health at the Population Health Congress in Adelaide in early September when he was awarded Life Membership. Professor Mike Daube

Journal

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health – Wiley

Published: Oct 1, 2012

There are no references for this article.