Article

Youth and tobacco.

Center for Child Health Research, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY 14620, USA.
Minerva pediatrica (Impact Factor: 0.72). 01/2005; 56(6):553-65.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Youth around the world take up smoking and use tobacco products at high rates. Young people may not grasp the long-term consequences of tobacco use, although tobacco consumption and exposure has been shown to have significant negative health effects. Youth use a variety of tobacco products that are smoked, chewed, or sniffed, including machine-manufactured cigarettes, cigars, bidis, kreteks, sticks, and snuff. Prevention efforts have focused on countering those aspects that are believed to contribute to smoking uptake, such as tobacco industry advertising and promotion, and access to tobacco. There are many aspects of tobacco promotion through the media that have been more difficult to control, however, such as product placement within popular cinema movies. Once a youth has taken up tobacco, he or she is more likely than an adult to become addicted and should be offered treatment for tobacco cessation. Although there is not yet sufficient evidence to prove efficacy, the same treatments are suggested for youth as are recommended for adults, including nicotine replacement products. Given the severity of the tobacco epidemic worldwide and the devastating health effects on an individual and population basis, there are currently many efforts to curtail the tobacco problem, including the World Health Organization (WHO) sponsored Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. It is through comprehensive and collaborative efforts such as this that the global hazard of tobacco is most likely to be overcome.

1 Bookmark
 · 
40 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: RATIONALE: Exercise appears to be a promising non-pharmacological treatment for nicotine addiction that may be useful for the vulnerable adolescent population. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to determine if wheel-running, an animal model of aerobic exercise, during an abstinence period would decrease subsequent nicotine-seeking in rats that had extended access to nicotine self-administration during adolescence. METHODS: Male adolescent rats (n = 55) were trained to self-administer saline or nicotine infusions (5 or 10 μg/kg) under a fixed ratio 1 schedule with a maximum of 20 infusions/day beginning on postnatal day 30. After 5 days, access was extended to 23 h/day with unlimited infusions for a total of 10 days. After the last self-administration session, rats were moved to polycarbonate cages for a 10-day abstinence period where they either had access to a locked or unlocked running wheel for 2 h/day. Nicotine-seeking was examined following the 10th day of abstinence under a within-session extinction/cue-induced reinstatement paradigm. RESULTS: Intake was higher at the 10 μg/kg dose as compared to the 5 μg/kg dose; however, intake did not differ within doses prior to wheel assignment. Compared to saline controls, rats that self-administered nicotine at either dose showed a significant increase in drug-seeking during extinction, and consistent with our hypothesis, exercise during abstinence attenuated this effect. Nicotine led to modest but significant levels of cue-induced reinstatement; however, in this adolescent-onset model, levels were variable and not affected by exercise. CONCLUSIONS: Exercise may effectively reduce relapse vulnerability for adolescent-onset nicotine addiction.
    Psychopharmacology 01/2013; 227(3). DOI:10.1007/s00213-012-2964-x · 3.99 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Otitis media (OM) is one of the most frequent diseases in young children, causing to visit a physician, and also the most common indication for antibiotic prescription. The peak incidence and prevalence of OM is 6 to 18 months of age. In children, second-hand smoke (SHS) exposure is associated with upper and lower respiratory tract infections, such as acute otitis media (AOM), pneumonia, and bronchitis. Despite the overwhelming evidence of the role of SHS exposure on infant health, a very high proportion of children still continue to be exposed. This important relationship between all kinds of smoking and poor health may not be appreciated universally. With this article, we aim to review tobacco smoke exposure and OM connection. How this exposure may cause OM especially in young children? What can be done to prevent and to reduce the harmfull effects of tobacco smoking?
    Current Infectious Disease Reports 02/2012; 14(2). DOI:10.1007/s11908-012-0239-7
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Bidis are hand-rolled cigarettes commonly smoked in South Asia and are marketed to Western populations as a safer alternative to conventional cigarettes. This study examined the association between bidis and other forms of tobacco use and cancer incidence in an urban developing country population. Using data from the large, well-characterized Mumbai cohort study, adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed from Cox proportional hazards regression models in order to compare the relative effect of various forms of tobacco use on cancer incidence. During 649,228 person-years of follow-up 1,267 incident cancers occurred in 87,222 male cohort members. Incident oral cancer in bidi smokers (HR = 3.55; 95% CI = 2.40,5.24) was 42% higher than in cigarette smokers (HR = 2.50;95% CI = 1.65,3.78). For all respiratory and intrathoracic organs combined, the increase was 69% (HR = 5.54; 95% CI = 3.46,8.87 vs. HR = 3.28; 95% CI = 1.99,5.39); for lung and larynx, the increases were 35 and 112%, respectively. Smokeless tobacco use was associated with cancers of the lip, oral cavity, pharynx, digestive, respiratory, and intrathoracic organs. Despite marketing claims to the contrary, we found that smokeless tobacco use and bidi smoking are at least as harmful as cigarette smoking for all incident cancers and are associated with increased risk of oral and respiratory/intrathoracic cancers.
    Cancer Causes and Control 03/2011; 22(6):859-68. DOI:10.1007/s10552-011-9756-1 · 3.20 Impact Factor