지금 금연하세요
Photo with no alt text

담배 기업 : 특정 집단을 대상으로 하는 차별과 편견

담배 기업은 흑인, 히스패닉, LGBTQ+, 저소득층과 같은 특정 지역사회를 설득하기 위해 사회 정의, 시민의 권리 그리고 문화적 문제에 관심을 두는 척합니다.15161718 실제로, 그들은 약탈적이고 교묘한 마케팅을 사용하여 치명적인 담배 제품을 지역사회에 연계하기 위해 무료로 배포하기도 합니다.19 인종차별주의, 동성애 혐오, 차별에 뿌리를 둔 이 기업의 전략은 역사적으로 배제된 인구에게 불균형적으로 해를 끼칩니다.
진실을 배우세요
Photo with no alt text
우리의 캠페인

우리는 수익이 아닙니다

담배 기업은 오랫동안 전략적으로 멘톨 담배를 이용하여 흑인 지역사회를 파괴하고 있습니다.20212223

자세히 알아보기 (영어 웹사이트)

담배 기업의 악영향

담배 기업은 지금도 죽음과 질병으로부터 이익을 얻기 위해 능수능란한 마케팅 전략1과 정치적 영향력2 확대에 수십억 달러를 투자합니다.
자세히 알아보기
심지어 담배를 흡연하지 않는 사람들에게도 치명적인 결과를 가져옵니다.3
자세히 알아보기
담배 기업은 어린이를 "대체 고객"이라고 부릅니다.4 그들은 어린이에게 평생 중독과 질병을 선고합니다.
자세히 알아보기
이 인종차별적이고 불공정한 기업은 전략적으로 치명적인 제품과 교묘한 메시지로 특정 지역사회를 겨냥해 왔습니다.5
자세히 알아보기
누구도 독성 담배 폐기물과 플라스틱 오염으로 인한 환경 피해6와 건강 위험7891011으로부터 안전하지 않습니다.12
자세히 알아보기
Photo with no alt text

담배 기업에 책임을 묻습니다

캘리포니아주는 이미 다른 유해 제품으로부터 주민을 보호해 왔으며,1314 이제 담배 기업을 같은 기준으로 판단해야 합니다.
  1. Federal Trade Commission. Federal Trade Commission Cigarette Report for 2020. Washington, D.C.: Federal Trade Commission. 2021.
  2. OpenSecrets. Industry Profile: Tobacco. Opensecrets.org. https://www.opensecrets.org/federal-lobbying/industries/summary?cycle=2021&id=A02. Accessed March 16, 2022.
  3. Office on Smoking and Health (US). The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke: A Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta (GA): Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US); 2006.
  4. R.J. Reynolds. Younger Adult Smokers: Strategies and Opportunities. https://www.industrydocuments.ucsf.edu/docs/rkvk0045. 1984 February 29.
  5. Anderson SJ. Marketing of menthol cigarettes and consumer perceptions: a review of tobacco industry documents. Tob Control. 2011;20 Suppl 2(Suppl_2):ii20-ii28. doi:10.1136/tc.2010.041939.
  6. Break Free From Plastic. Branded Vol. III: Demanding corporate accountability for plastic pollution. 2020.
  7. Poma A, Vecchiotti G, Colafarina S, et al. In Vitro Genotoxicity of Polystyrene Nanoparticles on the Human Fibroblast Hs27 Cell Line. Nanomaterials (Basel). 2019;9(9):1299. Published 2019 Sep 11. doi:10.3390/nano9091299.
  8. Zarus GM, Muianga C, Hunter CM, Pappas RS. A review of data for quantifying human exposures to micro and nanoplastics and potential health risks. Sci Total Environ. 2021;756:144010. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.144010.
  9. Jacob H, Besson M, Swarzenski PW, Lecchini D, Metian M. Effects of Virgin Micro- and Nanoplastics on Fish: Trends, Meta-Analysis, and Perspectives. Environ Sci Technol. 2020;54(8):4733-4745. doi:10.1021/acs.est.9b05995.
  10. Ziv-Gal A, Flaws JA. Evidence for bisphenol A-induced female infertility: a review (2007-2016). Fertil Steril. 2016;106(4):827-856. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.06.027.
  11. Campanale C, Massarelli C, Savino I, Locaputo V, Uricchio VF. A Detailed Review Study on Potential Effects of Microplastics and Additives of Concern on Human Health. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(4):1212. Published 2020 Feb 13. doi:10.3390/ijerph17041212.
  12. Belzagui F, Buscio V, Gutiérrez-Bouzán C, Vilaseca M. Cigarette butts as a microfiber source with a microplastic level of concern. Science of The Total Environment. 2021;762:144165. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.144165.
  13. Governor Newsom Signs Legislation Making California First in the Nation to Ban Toxic Chemicals in Cosmetics [press release]. gov.ca.gov. https://www.gov.ca.gov/2020/09/30/governor-newsom-signs-legislation-making-california-first-in-the-nation-to-ban-toxic-chemicals-in-cosmetics/. Published September 30, 2020. Accessed March 23, 2022.
  14. Landmark California law bans 'forever chemicals' in products for infants, children [press release]. ewg.org. https://www.ewg.org/news-insights/news-release/2021/10/landmark-california-law-bans-forever-chemicals-products-infants. Published October 5, 2021. Accessed March 23, 2022.
  15. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Tobacco Industry Marketing. cdc.gov. https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/tobacco_industry/marketing/index.htm. Reviewed May 14, 2021. Accessed March 15, 2022.
  16. Yerger VB, Malone RE. African American leadership groups: smoking with the enemy. Tob Control. 2002;11(4):336–345. doi:10.1136/tc.11.4.336.
  17. Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. Tobacco Use and Hispanics. tobaccofreekids.org. https://www.tobaccofreekids.org/assets/factsheets/0134.pdf. Published December 20, 2021. Accessed March 24, 2022.
  18. Truth Initiative. How tobacco companies use experiential marketing. truthinitiative.org. https://truthinitiative.org/research-resources/tobacco-industry-marketing/how-tobacco-companies-use-experiential-marketing. Published June 26, 2018. Accessed March 15, 2022.
  19. Tobacco Control Legal Consortium. Evans v. Lorillard: A Bittersweet Victory Against the Tobacco Industry. https://www.publichealthlawcenter.org/sites/default/files/resources/tclc-Evans-v-Lorillard-case-study-2016.pdf. Updated August 2016. Accessed September 17, 2020.
  20. Robinson RG, Sutton CD, James DA, Orleans CT. Pathways to Freedom: Winning the Fight against Tobacco. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Atlanta, GA; 2003.
  21. Primack BA, Bost JE, Land SR, Fine MJ. Volume of tobacco advertising in African American markets: systematic review and meta-analysis. Public Health Rep. 2007;122(5):607-15.
  22. Resnick EA, Jackson KL, Barker DC, Chaloupka FJ. Cigarette Pricing Differs by U.S. Neighborhoods—A BTG Research Brief. Chicago, IL: Bridging the Gap Program, Health Policy Center, Institute for Health Research and Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago, 2012.
  23. Lee JG, Henriksen L, Rose SW, Moreland-Russell S, Ribisl KM. A Systematic Review of Neighborhood Disparities in Point-of-Sale Tobacco Marketing. Am J Public Health. 2015;105(9):e8-18.