3) The 16% of pupils who had ever smoked consisted of regular #smokers (2% of pupils), occasional smokers (3%), those who used to smoke (3%), and those who have tried smoking (8%).
4) The proportion of pupils who had ever #smoked increased with age from 2% of 11 year olds, to 31% of 15 year olds.
5) In 2018, 5% (confidence interval 4-6%) of pupils were classified as current #smokers. Though not significantly different from the surveys in 2014 and 2016 (6%), the proportion has generally declined over time since 1996, when 22% of pupils were current smokers.
6) Not only are fewer kids smoking, but those who do, smoke less. In 2018, mean consumption of #cigarettes in the last week by regular smokers was 24.7, which has fallen gradually since 2007 when it was 44.1.
7) Current and regular #eCigarette(/#vaping) prevalence have remained at 6% and 2% respectively.
8) Current #eCigarette use increased with age; from less than 1% of 11 year olds, to 11% of 15 year olds.
9) Pupils who had ever #smoked were much more likely to also have ever used an #eCigarette(/#vape), than those who had never smoked. Most regular smokers (92%) reported having ever used e-cigarettes. This compares to just 14% of pupils who had never smoked.
10) Regular #smokers are more likely to be regular #eCigarette users (/#vapers); 29% in 2018. This falls to 9% for ex-smokers, 4% for pupils who had tried smoking once, and less than 1% of pupils who had never smoked.
@TGAgovau ran an inquiry into #nicotine#vaping. One of the questions was:
"In your opinion, will a requirement for a prescription help reduce uptake of nicotine delivery products such as nicotine e-cigarettes among youth?"
The phrase 'black market' .. consultations.tga.gov.au/tga/copy-of-co…
.. was mentioned in 194 of those submissions.
Herein is a thread of some of those submissions warning of a #BlackMarket willing to sell to anyone.
No age checks there!
Sigh.. Got caught up investigating and debunking the lies in this @truthinitiative ('Truth' 🙄) misinfographic.
A 🧵
The infographic provides the 'sciencese' of providing references to fool the unwary. Their case falls apart though, if those references are actually examined.
Starting with the first three:
Reference 1 (refs listed towards bottom of misinfographic) is: "Nicotine modulation of fear memories and anxiety: Implications for learning and anxiety disorders"
Conclusion: Invalid ref. Modulate ≠ Amplify. Lying by omission. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26231942/
That represents about 2 days and three hours (51 hours) of the annual supply of #BlackMarket#tobacco, a lot of which is imported rather than locally grown.
"But.." squeal ANTZ types in a #ScreamTest ".. you presume just one bust per year. HA! We. Own. You."
Good point. That same page at the ABC links three related stories - dating back to 2017. Here we are nearly 5 years later, with 4 busts to show for it.
Less than 1 per year.
Researchers at the University of South Carolina have been looking at Twitter again and decided harm reduction advocates are Big Tobacco shills or automated bots.
By @_Dave_Cross_ via @PVapes
Att: @UofSC 1/ (a thread ⬇️) planetofthevapes.co.uk/news/health-st…
The abstract of this paper reports that "Nearly 42% of tweets showed a bot score greater than .43" and does so immediately following a sentence referring to 'pro-MRTP'(1) tweets. 1) Modified Risk Tobacco Product
2/
While not explicitly stating these 'high bot rating' accounts are #BigTobacco shills, putting that note immediately after a sentence referring to the Pro-MRTP accounts would lead most readers to assume that those were the accounts with the high bot rating.
3/