Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
BACKGROUND: We compared the recognition of tobacco brands and ever-smoking rates in young children before (1991) and after (2001) the implementation of cigarette advertising restrictions in Hong Kong and identified continuing sources of tobacco promotion exposure. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of 824 primary school children aged from 8 to 11 (Primary classes 3-4) living in two Hong Kong districts was carried out using self-completed questionnaires examining smoking behaviour and recognition of names and logos from 18 tobacco, food, drink and other brands common in Hong Kong. RESULTS: Ever-smoking prevalence in 2001 was 3.8 per cent (1991, 7.8 per cent). Tobacco brand recognition rates ranged from 5.3 per cent (Viceroy name) to 72.8 per cent (Viceroy logo). Compared with 1991, in 2001 never-smoker children recognized fewer tobacco brand names and logos: Marlboro logo recognition rate fell by 55.3 per cent. Similar declines were also seen in ever-smoker children, with recognition of the Marlboro logo decreasing 48 per cent. Recognition rates declined amongst both boys and girls. Children from non-smoking families constituted 51 per cent (426) of the sample, whereas 34.5 per cent (284), 8.5 per cent (70), 1.7 per cent (14) and 4.4 per cent (36) of the children had one, two, three or more than three smoking family members at home, respectively. Tobacco brand recognition rates and ever-smoking prevalence were significantly higher among children with smoking family members compared with those without. Among 12 possible sources of exposure to cigarette brand names and logos, retail stalls (75.5 per cent; 622), indirect advertisements (71.5 per cent; 589) and magazines (65.3 per cent; 538) were ranked the most common. CONCLUSION: Advertising restrictions in Hong Kong have effectively decreased primary-age children's recognition of tobacco branding. However, these children remain vulnerable to branding, mostly through exposure from family smokers, point-of-sale tobacco advertisement and occasional promotions. Action to curb these is now required.
Fielding et al. (Mon,) studied this question.