Search

Aims and design The historical and economic involvement of Brazil with tobacco, as a major producer and exporter, was considered an insurmountable obstacle to controlling the consumption of this product. Nevertheless, the country was able to achieve significant progress in implementing public policies and to take an international leadership position, meeting its constitutional commitment to protect public health. In this paper we provide a brief historical overview of tobacco control ( TC) in Brazil, and analyse the factors that contributed to the major decline in tobacco consumption in the country over the last 20 years, as well as identify the challenges that had to be overcome and those still at play. Findings The Brazilian case demonstrates how cross-sectorial collaborations among health-related groups that capitalize on their respective strengths and capacities can help to influence public policy and overcome industry and population resistance to change. Although Brazil still lags behind some leading TC nations, the country has an extensive collaborative TC network that was built over time and continues to focus upon this issue. Conclusions The tobacco experience can serve as an example for other fields, such as alcoholic beverages, of how networks can be formed to influence the legislative process and the development of public policies. Brazilian statistics show that problems related to non-communicable diseases are a pressing public health issue, and advocacy groups, policy-makers and government departments can benefit from tobacco control history to fashion their own strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim This paper critically appraises relationship arrangements among three broadly conceived sectors: the government sector, the health sector (including researchers) and addictive consumption industries (particularly tobacco, alcohol and gambling). Method Three models for involvement are examined. In the ‘tripartite partnership model’ health sector agencies engage as co-equals with the government and industry sectors in order to implement public health initiatives such as host responsibility and public education. In the ‘non- association model’ the health sector engages with government agencies but not with the industry sector. In the ‘managed association model’ the health sector engages for specific purposes with the industry sector but contact is monitored and managed by government agencies. Findings Government and industry sectors commonly favour tripartite partnership arrangements. Health sector agencies that opt to engage in these partnership arrangements can encounter conflicts of interest and find their voice subsumed by dominant influences. Furthermore, their partnership compliance generates divisions within the health sector, with partnership dissenters often silenced and excluded from policy processes and funding. The non-association model is the least hazardous to the health sector because it protects against compromise and dominance. The managed association model is an option only when the government sector as a whole is committed strongly and clearly to the public health objectives. Conclusion In contexts where key parts of the government sector are conflicted over their public health responsibilities, health sector engagement in partnership arrangements entails too many risks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the author's views on the article "Reducing intoxication among bar patrons: some lessons from prevention of drinking and driving," by K. Graham and colleagues. The paper was focused on the enforcement of the laws for restricting the intoxication among bar patrons. Role of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in the formation of laws for drinking and driving is discussed.

In this article the author expresses his views regarding the importance of research funding in the alcohol industry. He thinks that research funding is a complex system of interests and dependencies with the biggest issue reflecting on societal and ethical consequences of science and technology policy as a whole. He believes it is the scientist's duty to take the role of policy advocates when their expertise and results justify.

In this article the author discusses his opinions of the article "A Question of Balance: Prioritizing Public Health Responses to Harm from Gambling" by P. J. Adams, J. Raeburn and K. De Silva. He is critical of relationships between the gambling industry and other agencies, both governmental and non-governmental, citing conflicts of interest related to the relationships. Also discussed are a lack of regulation of the gambling industry and public health problems that are generated from gambling.