Brighton News RSS Feed


Misleading anti-smoking leaflets withdrawn by Sussex NHS chiefs


Health chiefs have been rapped on the knuckles for making unfounded claims about tobacco companies.

The Advertising Standards Agency (ASA) upheld a complaint about an NHS West Sussex leaflet which said cigarette firms targeted children.

The leaflet also counted smokers who had given up for four weeks as being permanent quitters.

The ASA concluded the claims were “likely to mislead” and asked the health service to withdraw the advert.

The body received a complaint about a leaflet entitled Don’t Run With The Pack, published as part of NHS West Sussex’s Well Fit campaign.

It was left at GP surgeries to advertise nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) to help people give up smoking.

It read: “Did you know that tobacco companies actively target young people to replace older smokers as they die off?

“Did you know that in some developing countries tobacco companies give out free cigarettes to children and young people to get them hooked?

“Did you know that you are twice as likely to succeed at stopping if you use NRT? Did you know that you are four times as likely to succeed if you use NRT and see a specialist advisor?”

The ASA concluded there was not enough evidence to demonstrate tobacco companies were targeting younger people in the UK.

It did find there was enough evidence for a claim that tobacco companies were distributing free cigarettes to children and young people in Africa, South America and the Caribbean to get them addicted.

The ASA decided the claim about people stopping smoking was misleading because “stopping” meant going only four weeks without smoking.

Its report said: “We considered that readers were likely to expect that the references to stopping smoking were based on more permanent cessation and not merely the four-week period used under the NHS definition.

“We therefore concluded that the ad was likely to mislead.”

Anna Kirk, the health improvement practitioner for substance misuse at NHS West Sussex said: “We note the findings of the ASA and take them on board for all future resources.

“We continue to be committed to reducing the harm caused to our community by tobacco.

”We do this by supporting more than 4,000 people to stop smoking every year, working with schools and others to prevent children starting to smoke, and reducing the harms of second-hand smoke by promoting smoke-free environments.”


Your Say YourArgus

D Merrett, East Sussex says...
6:02pm Thu 11 Feb 10

So NHS money wasted by people that develop an ad campaign which has had to be withdrawn. That's the trouble when you let people who are one sided in their view take control. Their biased view has over-stepped the mark. Remove them from their office now.

TheInsider, Brighton says...
7:37pm Thu 11 Feb 10

I lived in Malaysia for a few years and a leading tobacco company put its branding all over children's school bags, clothes, equipment in the same way that the branding used to be plastered all over sports and tv here (remember Embassy snooker etc)
I was a smoker and noted it at the time as quite unusual.
I don't know if it's the same today as that was about 20 years ago.

flytipper, Eastbourne says...
7:56pm Thu 11 Feb 10

Give a heroin addict an alternative way to continue his heroin addiction without needles, and he’ll stop using them. He’ll still be a heroin addict, of course, just like a nicotine addict will still be a nicotine addict after providing him an alternative method to get his fix without smoking. The addiction stays with the person, and he gets no help to quit it. The government then takes credit for simply changing the addict’s source, and without a single care for how much he is then forced to pay for this new source. In some cases nicotine replacement can be more expensive than smoking, and that’s exactly what the government wants; a new generation of nicotine addicts who pay ten quid for a pack of nicotine gum and the same again for patches when his NRT inevitably stops. NR is free to start with, just like those cigarettes given to young children to get them hooked, but it’s hellishly expensive when the pushers start making you pay for it.

Txa, B&H says...
8:09pm Thu 11 Feb 10

They did the same here TheInsider, with playboy accessories/school stationery targeting schools children and it was removed from the market afterwards. I would like to see smoking or other kind of advertisement removed from family movies (In Avatar the scientist woman was smoking and it looked so out of place ).

puddingandpi, Brighton says...
8:29pm Thu 11 Feb 10

What I don't understand is why they had to do this. Smoking is so bad, it's effects don't need to be embellished.
Silly.

Frankie's Post, Worthing says...
9:28pm Thu 11 Feb 10

flytipper wrote:
Give a heroin addict an alternative way to continue his heroin addiction without needles, and he’ll stop using them. He’ll still be a heroin addict, of course, just like a nicotine addict will still be a nicotine addict after providing him an alternative method to get his fix without smoking. The addiction stays with the person, and he gets no help to quit it. The government then takes credit for simply changing the addict’s source, and without a single care for how much he is then forced to pay for this new source. In some cases nicotine replacement can be more expensive than smoking, and that’s exactly what the government wants; a new generation of nicotine addicts who pay ten quid for a pack of nicotine gum and the same again for patches when his NRT inevitably stops. NR is free to start with, just like those cigarettes given to young children to get them hooked, but it’s hellishly expensive when the pushers start making you pay for it.
Nicotine is not the main problem here. In pharmacolocical fact Nicotine is not that harmful despite being addictive. The carcinogenic problems are caused by the 4,000+ chemicals in the tar in tobacco. So NRT products have an important role to play in getting people of tobacco. I wonder if flytipper is a smoker and his/her argument is just a weak justification for carrying on with the fags?

chas, suffolk says...
10:51pm Thu 11 Feb 10

ASH Scotland stated: 'An essay published in PLOS Medicine critiques the medicalisation of smoking cessation and argues that health authorities should emphasise that the most successful method used by most ex-smokers is unassisted cessation'.

chroma, hove says...
10:04am Fri 12 Feb 10

I've no time for the Advertising Standards Agency, some of their decisions have been incredible to say the least.
Take for example, the Home Pride Ad - which showed a man cleaning an oven while his pregnant wife looked on. The voice over concluded that it was 'so easy even a man could do it..'
Cue, lots of complaints from viewers who said that the claims were unfounded.
The company behind the ad couldn't substantiate the claim that it was so easy, even a man could do it. Neither could the substantiate the fact that complainants who'd tried the product, hadn't found it so easy and efficient as made out during the telly ad.
The Advertising Standards ruled that - no breach had taken place and no further action necessary.
Double standards.

Wiggsy, Hove says...
12:47pm Fri 12 Feb 10

If there was sufficient evidence that tobacco companies were distributing free cigarettes to children and young people in Africa, South America and the Caribbean to get them addicted, then it'd be hardly surprising that they are also targeting younger people in this country albeit in a clearly less obvious way

Gaz the great, Brighton says...
7:06pm Fri 12 Feb 10

Lets ban smoking, once & for all. I'm sure the £14 billion this country would need, every year, to replace the profit & NHS treatment, could easily be covered by other/or new taxes, you decide?

Comments are closed on this article.


Local Advertisers

Local Information

Enter your postcode, town or place name

House prices »   Schools »   Crime »   Hospitals »