The number of Indigenous heavy smokers fell from 17.3% in 1994 to 9.4% in 2008, a relative drop of 45%, a study has found.
The study, conducted by the Menzies School of Health Research and published today in the Medical Journal of Australia, analysed data on from the 1994 National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Survey, and the 2008 National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Survey. The first survey had 8565 respondents aged 15 and over, while the second survey had 7803 respondents aged 15 years and over.
The data showed that the number of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander people who smoked more than 20 cigarettes a day was in steep decline.
“That is nearly a 50% reduction and the important thing to note is that this happened before the massive increase in resources for smoking reduction in 2009,” said study author Associate Professor David Thomas.
Nearly half of Indigenous adults smoke cigarettes and a fifth of Indigenous deaths are due to smoking, he said, but the decline in heavy smoking rates showed mainstream anti-smoking messages were getting through to Indigenous people.
“There is sometimes this notion that anything that’s not specifically targeted to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people won’t have an impact on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. But that’s not entirely true,” said Assoc Prof Thomas.
Despite the drop in the number of heavy smokers, the study also found that the number of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders smoking between one and ten cigarettes per day from 16.8% in 1994 to 21.6% in 2008, a relative increase of 29%.
Elizabeth Bathory
Knowledge creator...
"Despite the drop in the number of heavy smokers, the study also found that the number of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander smoking between one and ten cigarettes per day went up 29%, from 16.8% in 1994 to 21.6% in 2008."
Really? 16.8% of 8565 is 1439, and 21.6% of 7803 is 1685; an increase of 246 people cannot possibly represent an increase of 29%, whichever way you look at it.
Elizabeth Bathory
Knowledge creator...
Also, given that the number of 'heavy smokers' has decreased, is it really surprising that rates of 'moderate smokers' have increased? Surely it is reasonable to infer that at least a proportion of that increase includes previously heavy smokers who had decreased their consumption - therefore this is a positive result?
Elizabeth Bathory
Knowledge creator...
Also, given that the number of 'heavy smokers' has decreased, is it really surprising that rates of 'moderate smokers' have increased? Surely it is reasonable to infer that at least a proportion of that increase includes previously heavy smokers who had decreased their consumption - therefore this is a positive result?
Jeff Haddrick
field manager
Hmmm, maybe not, but rearrangement of the deck chairs seems to be enough to keep some people happy.
"Tobacco control" sounds more seriously focused on the issue than Public Health and the Department of Health, both of which have researchers who are unwilling to come up with a figure for how many lives would be saved if we got rid of tobacco toot sweet. Are the control gang more game to come up with a number?
Bill Budd
Lecturer, Researcher
An interesting observation Elizabeth but your comparison of the actual number of smokers between both surveys is not really appropriate as these data are for a representative sample of the population, not the population itself. Using appropriate statistical methods, as in the reported study, you can use the survey data to infer (extrapolate) what is happening in the population.
The possible reduction in heavy smoking is promising and similar changes in smoking behaviour are also found for non-indigenous smokers, both in Australia and overseas. It is noteworthy that the media (and The Conversation) have leapt upon this figure of a 45% reduction in heavy smoking when the headline "Number of Indigenous Smokers Increases by Almost a Third!" would have been equally accurate. Certainly seems a far more important finding to publicise in the interest of indigenous health...but perhaps not the news we all want to read?
Elizabeth Bathory
Knowledge creator...
Bill - you are completely right, and I really should have paid more attention to the wording of the results.
Thankyou for so eloquently pointing out my mistake!