: EuropeanUnion policy on smokeless tobacco: A statement in favor of evidence based regulation for public health; Tob. Control 12 (2003) 360–367.
202. Levy, D.T., E.A. Mumford, K.M. Cummings, E.A. Gilpin, G. Giovino, A. Hyland, D. Sweanor, and K.E. Warner: The relative risk of a low-nitrosamine smokeless tobacco product compared with smoking cigarettes: estimates of a panel of experts; Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prevent. 13 (2004) 2035–2042.
203. Rodu, B. and P. Cole: T.: The burden of mortality from smoking: Comparing
F Gadani, G Bindler, H Pijenburg, L Rossi and J Zuber
Analytical methods based on the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) technology are increasingly used for the detection of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) sequences associated with genetically modified organisms (GMOs). In the European Union and Switzerland, mandatory labeling of novel foods and food ingredients consisting of, or containing GMOs is required according to food regulations and is triggered by the presence of newly introduced foreign DNA sequences, or newly expressed proteins. In order to meet regulatory and consumer demand, numerous PCR-based methods have been developed which can detect, identify and quantify GMOs in agricultural crops, food and feed. Moreover, the determination of genetic identity allows for segregation and traceability (identity preservation) throughout the supply chain of GM crops that have been enhanced with value-added quality traits. Prerequisites for GMO detection include a minimum amount of the target gene and prior knowledge of the type of genetic modification, such as virus or insect resistance traits, including controlling elements (promoters and terminators). Moreover, DNA extraction and purification is a critical step for the preparation of PCR-quality samples, particularly for processed agricultural crops such as tobacco. This paper reviews the state-of-the-art of PCR-based method development for the qualitative and quantitative determination and identification of GMOs, and includes a short summary of official and validated GMO detection methods.
Slim cigarettes were defined in the 2012 draft European Union-Tobacco Product Directive (EU-TPD) as cigarettes with a diameter of less than 7.5mm. Allegations that slim cigarettes may negatively impact tobacco control efforts led the European Commission to propose a ban on them in 2012, which was ultimately rejected. This study investigated whether there is any association between slim cigarettes and smoking prevalence rates, in order to see if these allegations are justified. Data was compiled on the market share of slim cigarettes and smoking prevalence rates from the years 2012, 2006 and 1996. The core 2012 sample (once data limitations were accounted for) consisted of 95 countries. Raw correlations between market shares of slim cigarettes and smoking prevalence rates were first examined, followed by multivariate cross-country regressions where various factors were controlled for. This was done for overall smoking prevalence, as well as for male and female prevalence separately.
Although raw correlations between the slim cigarette market share and smoking prevalence were sometimes positive and statistically significant, this result disappeared in all cases except for one when potential confounding factors were fully controlled for. The correlation between slim cigarette market share and smoking prevalence remained significant only for males in 2012 at levels of statistical significance of 10% or above when cultural and socio-economic factors were fully controlled for. Importantly, for females no positive statistically significant correlations between the slim cigarette market share and smoking prevalence were found for any year. The cross-country variation in smoking prevalence was substantially explained by a number of regional and cultural dummies, as well as socio-economic factors.
This study has found no indication that a higher market share of slim cigarettes was associated with greater smoking prevalence among females, and has failed to find a strong indication among males, once confounding factors were controlled for. [Beitr. Tabakforsch. Int. 27 (2016) 75-99]
Zheng Sponsiello-Wang, Guillaume de La Bourdonnaye, Morgane David, Frank Lüdicke and Rolf Weitkunat
1. Delnevo, C.D. and U.E. Bauer: Monitoring the Tobacco Use Epidemic III: The Host: Data Sources and Methodological Challenges; Prev. Med. 48 (2009) 16–23. DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2008.09.008
2. Bogdanovica, I., F. Godfrey, A. McNeill, and J. Britton: Smoking Prevalence in the EuropeanUnion: A Comparison of National and Transnational Prevalence Survey Methods and Results; Tob. Control 20 (2011) e4. DOI: 10.1136/tc.2010.036103
3. Zatonski, W., K. Przewozniak, U. Sulkowska, R. West, and A. Wojtyla: Tobacco Smoking in Countries of the
: implication for the forthcoming EuropeanUnion Directive; Tobacco Control 8 (1999) 225–235.
7. Wilkenfeld, J., J. Henningfield, J. Slade, D. Burns, and J. Pinney: It's time for a change: cigarette smokers deserve meaningful information about their cigarettes; J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 92 (2000) 90–92.
8. World Health Organisation: Monograph: Advancing knowledge on regulating tobacco products: World Health Organization, Geneva, 2001.
9. Ashton, H. and D.W. Watson: Puffing frequency and nicotine intake
R Weitkunat, CRE Coggins, Z Sponsiello-Wang, G Kallischnigg and R Dempsey
, France, 2007.
10. Delnevo, C.D. and U.E. Bauer: Monitoring the Tobacco Use Epidemic III: The Host: Data Sources and Method-ological Challenges; Prev. Med. 48 (1 Suppl.) (2009) S16–S23.
11. Bogdanovica, I., F. Godfrey, A. McNeill, and J. Britton: Smoking Prevalence in the EuropeanUnion: A Com-parison of National and Transnational Prevalence Survey Methods and Results; Tob. Control 20 (2011) e4.
12. Okoli, C.T., P.A. Ratner, R.J. Haines, K.M. Sullivan, S.E. Guo, and J.L. Johnson: Do Researcher
Hubert Klus, Barbara Boenke-Nimphius and Lutz Müller
. Baker, R.R.: The Development and Significance of Standards for Smoking-Machine Methodology; Beitr. Tabakforsch. Int. 20 (2002) 23–41. DOI: 10.2478/cttr-2013-0728
176. Council of the EuropeanUnion: Council Directive 90/239 EEC 17 May 1990 on the Approximation of the Laws, Regulations and Administrative Provisions of the Member States Concerning the Maximum Tar Yield of Cigarettes; Off. J. L 137 (1990) 36–37.
177. European Parliament, Council of the EuropeanUnion: Directive 2001/37/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 June 2001 on the
A. Costamagna, M. Drigo, M. Martini, B. Sona and E. Venturino
all sectors of pig industry if not submitted to effective control strategies. These include application of strict biosecurity measures, marker vaccination, selective removal of infected pigs and final depopulation of residual infected herds. Based on these principles, the EuropeanUnion has implemented AD eradication programmes. As a consequence in several member states the disease has been eradicated. In Italy the eradication programe has been established in 1997, when the infection was endemic with prevalences ranging from 8% in Trentino Alto-Adige Region to 81
Council and Publication of the References of Standard EN 16156:2010 ‘Cigarettes - Assessment of the Ignition Propensity - Safety Requirement’ and of Standard EN ISO 12863:2010 ‘Standard Test Method for Assessing the Ignition Propensity of Cigarettes’ in the Official Journal of the EuropeanUnion (notified under document C(2011) 5626); Off J. Europ. Union L 205 (10.08.2011) 31-32.
86. The State of New York: Amended Notice of Adoption. Fire Safety Standards for Cigarettes; The New York State Register 26 (April 21, 2004) 19