Why Big Tobacco Targeted Blacks With Ads for Menthol Cigarettes
Last Updated Jan 6, 2011 1:40 PM EST
Come March, the FDA will decide whether tobacco companies can continue marketing menthol cigarettes. Thousands of advertisers who have a separate ethnic marketing strategies for any product that has health implications should be watching closely. So listen up, folks with ties to food, alcohol, soda, diet supplements and pharmaceuticals: There but for the grace of the federal government go you.
And this:
Everyone knows that Lorillard (LO) has for decades targeted its Kool and Newport menthol brands at the black community, sometimes with a comic lack of subtlety, as in this ad from the 1970s (right). But Lorillard has simply done exactly what most other major advertisers have done, regardless of the product: Segment their advertising so that some (or all of it for certain brands) focuses on minorities.
Lorillard's specific problems are that its product causes cancer and menthols are more addictive than regular cigarettes. Thus its general problem is the accusation that it targeted blacks and not whites with a more dangerous product. (In fact, this isn't quite true. Menthols aren't per se more addictive than other cigarettes. They're just tastier and easier to smoke. Thus they're harder to kick and easier to go back to.)
That subtlety is likely to get lost, however, as Lorillard lobbies to keep menthols legal. The Wall Street Journal reports that the company is pushing the line in black news media that a ban on menthols would create a large illegal trade in the cigarettes (note that the WSJ's copydesk avoided the term "black market"), and that would add an unnecessary burden to local law enforcement.
In other words, Lorillard is saying that its own best customers are criminals in waiting. For a company that already faces the accusation that it's racist because it advertised more dangerous products to blacks, that seems like exactly the worst argument it could have come up with.
But let's give Lorillard the benefit of the doubt for a second and ask whether it's true that the advertising of Lorillard and other tobacco companies created demand in the black community for menthol cigarettes. This fascinating study of historic internal company documents in the journal Nicotine & Tobacco Research shows that it's a genuine chicken-and-egg issue. Early on, companies noticed a small difference in preferences between blacks and whites, and then simply altered their targeting to adjust for it. The effort was self-reinforcing:
By 1974, the industry was fully segmented, but companies displayed little internal knowledge of why blacks liked menthols. A 76-page research brief on the topic by the William Esty Co. had only this to say about the issue:In 1953, Philip Morris commissioned the Roper organization to conduct a general survey of Americans' smoking habits. The only menthol cigarette on the survey and the only one of any importance in the early 1950s was Kool. The Roper survey showed that only 2% of White Americans preferred the Kool brand. By contrast, the survey reported that 5% of African Americans preferred Kools (Roper, 1953). This small difference in preference was successfully parlayed by Brown & Williamson executives, and later by the tobacco industry as a whole, into the 70% vs. 30% difference that we see today between Black and White menthol smokers, respectively.
And this:
In 1974, before the introduction of lights, Black-menthol smokers, to a greater degree than their White counterparts, believed menthol cigarettes were less hazardous/irritating than other cigarettes. This may help explain why lights have not done as well among Black menthol smokers as they have among the general smoking population.The false notion that menthols were healthier was not, in fact, created by tobacco companies. It was an unintended consequence of the FTC's regulation of tar content. In 1957, according to the N&TR study, consumers became concerned that tar was bad for them and began migrating to less tasty, low-tar filtered cigarettes (in industry parlance, the "Tar Derby"). In 1961, the Republican-administered FTC relaxed its tar regulations and consumers returned to more flavorful brands with filters. That played into Kool's hands:
Kool was one of the main beneficiaries of the ending of the Tar Derby in 1961; people could put down their nonfiltered cigarettes and pick up a filter-tipped Kool to get more taste, flavor, and strength.
Many people assumed that menthols had less tar; however, nothing could be further from the truth. Not only were Kools' tar and nicotine content comparable with the leading nonmenthol brands, but by the mid-1960s, Brown & Williamson's menthol offering contained more tar and nicotine than either of its main menthol rivals, Salem or NewportFrom that point on, companies increased their marketing efforts for menthols by targeting blacks, and as black smokers responded ... well, the rest is history. (As for the original reason why the black community initially showed a slight preference for menthols, it turns out Dave Chapelle was right: nobody knows.)
Which brings us back to the original point for any company with minority targeted advertising: Your intent is irrelevant, as is the notion that you merely responded to demand. If your product has negative health effects and you're advertising it to minorities, there's really no difference between Big Tobacco and you.
Related:
© 2011 CBS Interactive Inc.. All Rights Reserved.https://www.cbsnews.com/news/why-big-tobacco-targeted-blacks-with-ads-for-menthol-cigarettes/
[PDF]Tobacco Company Marketing to African Americans - Campaign for ...
https://www.tobaccofreekids.org/research/factsheets/pdf/0208.pdf
The tobacco industry has a long history of going to great lengths to target the ... cigarette companies know that most African-American smokers prefer ... menthol advertising, in areas with a greater proportion of African American ... communities with large African-American populations, they also create advertising specifically
TOBACCO COMPANY MARKETING TO AFRICAN AMERICANS
“We don’t smoke that s_ _ _. We just sell it. We reserve the right to smoke for the
young, the poor, the black and stupid.”1
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company Executive
The tobacco industry has a long history of going to great lengths to target the African-American
community. Decades of research affirms patterns of strategic marketing to African Americans through
point-of-sale marketing, price discounts, branding, and traditional advertising venues, particularly for
mentholated tobacco products and cheap little cigars and cigarillos. As a result of market research, the
cigarette companies know that most African-American smokers prefer menthol cigarettes and they exploit
this preference in their marketing efforts to African Americans, in general, and to African-American kids, in
particular, as evidenced by internal industry documents:
Philip Morris: “Marlboro would probably have a very difficult time getting anywhere in the young black market. The odds against it there are heavy. Young blacks have found their thing, and it's menthol in general and Kool in particular.”2
RJ Reynolds: “Since younger adult Blacks overwhelmingly prefer menthol cigarettes,
continued emphasis on Salem within the Black market is recommended.
Salem is already positioned against younger adults. With emphasis on the
younger adult Black market, Salem may be able to provide an alternative to Newport and capitalize on Kool’s decline.”3
The industry’s “investment” in the African-American community has had a destructive impact: African
Americans suffer the greatest burden of tobacco-related mortality of any ethnic or racial group in the
United States.4 Research shows that tobacco company advertising and other marketing efforts greatly
influence tobacco use initiation among youth non-smokers and is associated with increased tobacco
consumption among youth who have already become regular smokers.
5 Nearly 80 percent of all smokers
start before the age of 18 and, not surprisingly, the vast majority of kids smoke the three most heavily
advertised brands. 6 One of these heavily advertised brands, Newport, is the cigarette brand leader
among African-American youth in the United States. Nearly two-thirds of African American youth smokers
prefer Newport cigarettes.7
Targeting African Americans at the Point of Sale
For decades, tobacco companies have specifically targeted minority communities, particularly AfricanAmericans,
with intense advertising and promotional efforts. A wealth of research indicates that African
American neighborhoods have a disproportionate number of tobacco retailers, pervasive tobacco
marketing, and in particular, more marketing of menthol products.8
Like many minority and low-income neighborhoods, African American neighborhoods tend to have more
tobacco retailers:
• Nationwide, census tracts with a greater proportion of African American residents have higher
tobacco retailer density.9
• A 2010 study of Boston tobacco retailers found that tobacco retailer density near schools is
higher in minority or lower-income communities.10 This is disturbing given that a higher density of
such retailers near schools has been found to increase experimental smoking among high school
students.11
1400 I Street NW · Suite 1200 · Washington, DC 20005
Phone (202) 296-5469 · Fax (202) 296-5427 · www.tobaccofreekids.org
Tobacco Company Marketing to African Americans / 2
likely to sell to youth, increasing accessibility of these products to minors:
• A 2015 Washington, DC study found that illicit sales to minors were more common in retailers
located closer to high schools in African American neighborhoods.12
• A 2014 California study found that stores in neighborhoods with more African Americans are less
likely to request age identification.13
In addition to having more tobacco retailers, research indicates that African American communities tend
to have more tobacco marketing:
• A 2013 study of retail outlets in Washington, DC found that exterior advertising for little cigars and
cigarillos is significantly more prevalent in African American neighborhoods.14 A 2015 study
echoed these findings for exterior advertising of all tobacco products in DC.15
• A 2013 study of tobacco retail outlets in St. Louis found more tobacco advertising, including more
menthol advertising, in areas with a greater proportion of African American residents.16 Another
2013 study found similar patterns in Ramsey County, Minnesota.17
• A 1998 study in Los Angeles found that compared with White neighborhood thoroughfares,
African American and Hispanic neighborhoods contained greater tobacco ad density, and all
minority neighborhoods contained greater tobacco ad concentration along roadsides.18
• Studies from 1990-1998 found that there were 2.6 times as many tobacco advertisements per
person in areas with an African American majority compared to white-majority areas.
19
Disparities in advertising of tobacco products are particularly evident for menthol cigarette brands, which
African Americans use more than any other racial or ethnic group:
• The 2011 California Tobacco Advertising Survey reports that there were significantly more
menthol advertisements at stores in neighborhoods with a higher proportion of African-American
residents and in low-income neighborhoods.20
• Another 2011 California study found that as the proportion of African-American high school
students in a neighborhood rose, the proportion of menthol advertising increased, the odds of a
Newport promotion were higher, and the cost of Newport cigarettes was lower.21
In addition to being heavily advertised and widely available, certain tobacco products have been found to
be priced lower in African American communities, making them more appealing, particularly to pricesensitive
youth:
• A 2011 study of cigarette prices in retail stores across the U.S. found that Newport cigarettes are
significantly less expensive in neighborhoods with higher proportions of African Americans.22
• A 2013 study of retail outlets in Washington, DC found that little cigars and cigarillos are more
available and cheaper in African American neighborhoods.23
Appealing to African Americans through Branding
There is compelling evidence that tobacco companies not only advertise disproportionately in
communities with large African-American populations, they also create advertising specifically targeted to
these communities. Cigarette ads highly prevalent in African-American communities and publications are
often characterized by slogans, relevant and specific messages, or images that have a great appeal
among those in the black community or depict African Americans in an appealing light.24 Contrary to how
https://www.tobaccofreekids.org/research/factsheets/pdf/0208.pdf
Tobacco Company Marketing to African Americans / 3
blacks are typically portrayed in the media, cigarette ads portrayimages of African Americans who are happy, confident, successful and
wealthy, in love, attractive, strong and independent.25
Targeting African Americans through Magazine Advertisements
The tobacco industry is relentless in its promotion of menthol cigarettes
to minorities. Expenditures for magazine advertising of mentholated
cigarettes, popular with African Americans, increased from 13 percent
of total ad expenditures in 1998 to 76 percent in 2006.26 During the two
years after the Master Settlement Agreement (MSA) in November
1998, the average annual expenditures for Newport in magazines with
high youth readership increased 13.2 percent (from $5.3 to $6.0
million).27 Between 1998–2002, Ebony, a magazine tailored to the
African American culture, was 9.8 times more likely than People to
contain ads for menthols.28
Targeting African Americans through Event Sponsorships
Brown & Williamson used music as a way to target African Americans
beginning in 1975 with the Kool Jazz Festival. In the 1980s, as part of
the Kool Market Development Program, vans traveled through inner-city
Houston to distribute free cigarette samples. The Kool City Jam, a free
two-day concert, was also a part of this program.29
Americans. In 2004, they started an ad campaign for their Kool brand
cigarettes clearly aimed at youth—and African-American youth, in
particular. The Kool Mixx campaign featured images of young rappers,
disc jockeys and dancers on cigarette packs and in advertising. The
campaign also included radio giveaways with cigarette purchases and a
Hip-Hop disc jockey competition in major cities around the country. The
themes, images, radio giveaways and music involved in the campaign
all clearly have tremendous appeal to youth, especially AfricanAmerican
youth. Simultaneously, Brown& Williamson promoted a new line of
cigarette flavors like Caribbean Chill,
Mocha Taboo, and Midnight Berry using
images of African-Americans and
themes attractive to African-American
youth. These cigarettes were promoted
through dance clubs and hip-hop music
venues.
Tobacco Industry Support of African American Organizations
Industry documents reveal that as early as the 1950s, the tobacco
industry has made concerted efforts to forge ties with the African
American community in an effort to build a positive brand identity. Since
the 1950s, Phillip Morris and Brown & Williamson have been engaged
with the National Urban League, the National Association for the
Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), and the United Negro College
Fund, and have provided funding and organizational support to a
laundry list of African American organizations. 30 In addition, the tobacco
Tobacco Company Marketing to African Americans / 4
when RJ Reynolds helped to finance the founding of Winston Salem State University.31 However, industry
documents reveal the companies’ true intentions in forming these relationships:
Brown & Williamson: “Clearly the sole reason for B&W’s interest in the black and Hispanic communities is the actual and potential sales of B&W products within
these communities and the profitability of these sales…this relatively
small and often tightly knit [minority] community can work to B&W’s
marketing advantage, if exploited properly.”32
Lorillard: “Tie-in with any company who help black[s] – ‘we help them, they help
us.’ Target group age 16+.”33
Impact of Tobacco Advertising on the African American Community
The aggressive advertising of mentholated cigarettes by the major cigarette companies has paid off in
terms of brand recognition and preference. A California study found that African American students are
three times more likely to recognize the Newport brand than their peers, and students of all races who
recognize the Newport brand are more likely to start smoking.34 Newport is the leading brand of cigarettes
among African American youth ages 12-17 (64.3%) and young adults ages 18-25 (73.6%).
35 Preference
for Camel menthol and Marlboro menthol cigarettes has increased in recent years, too, particularly
among adolescents and young adults.
36 Overall, 85 percent of all African-American smokers smoke
menthol cigarettes, compared to 29 percent of all Caucasian smokers.37 Seven out of ten AfricanAmerican
youth smokers ages 12-17 smoke menthol cigarettes.38
In 2013, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released a report that found menthol cigarettes
lead to increased smoking initiation among youth and young adults, greater addiction, and decreased
success in quitting smoking. The agency concluded that, “these findings, combined with the evidence
indicating that menthol’s cooling and anesthetic properties can reduce the harshness of cigarette smoke
and the evidence indicating that menthol cigarettes are marketed as a smoother alternative to
nonmenthol cigarettes, make it likely that menthol cigarettes pose a public health risk above that seen
with nonmenthol cigarettes.”39
Consequently, while smoking rates among African Americans are lower than national levels, this ethnic
group suffers disproportionately from smoking-caused chronic and preventable diseases.40 Each year,
approximately 45,000 African Americans die from a smoking-caused illness. An estimated 1.6 million
African Americans alive today, who are now under the age of 18, will become regular smokers; and about
500,000 of these will die prematurely from a tobacco-related disease.41
Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, April 5, 2017 / Laura Bach
Related Campaign Fact Sheets
• Tobacco Company Marketing to Kids, http://www.tobaccofreekids.org/research/factsheets/pdf/0008.pdf
_______________________________
1 Giovanni, J, “Come to Cancer Country; USA; Focus,” The Times of London, August 2, 1992 [quoting Dave Goerlitz, RJ Reynolds’ lead
Winston model for seven years, re what an R.J. Reynolds executive replied to him when Goerlitz asked why the executive did not smoke].
2 The Roper Organization, Inc., A Study of Smoking Habits Among Young Smokers, Philip Morris, July 1974, Bates No. 2024921279/1313.
3 RJR, “Consumer Research Report,” May 9, 1984, Bates No. 501254820-4850, http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/cit49d00.
4 HHS, “Tobacco Use Among US Racial/Ethnic Minority Groups—African Americans, American Indians and Alaskan Natives, Asian Americans
and Pacific Islanders, and Hispanics: A Report of the Surgeon General,” 1998,
http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/sgr/1998/complete_report/pdfs/complete_report.pdf.
5 HHS, Preventing Tobacco Use Among Youth and Young Adults: A Report of the Surgeon General, 2012,
http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/sgr/2012/. See also, National Cancer Institute, The Role of the Media in Promoting and Reducing
Tobacco Use, Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 19, NIH Pub. No. 07-6242, June 2008,
http://cancercontrol.cancer.gov/tcrb/monographs/19/m19_complete.pdf. Pucci, LG & Siegel, M, “Exposure to brand-specific cigarette
advertising in magazines and its impact on youth smoking,” Preventive Medicine 29(5):313-20, November 1999; Sargent, JD, et al., “Effect of
Tobacco Company Marketing to African Americans / 5
______________________________________________________________________________
seeing tobacco use in films on trying smoking among adolescents: a cross sectional study,” British Medical Journal 323(7326):1394-7,December 15, 2001.
6 HHS. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality. National Survey on
Drug Use and Health, 2014. ICPSR36361-v1. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2016-
03-22. http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR36361.v1. See also, HHS, “Preventing Tobacco Use Among Young People: A Report of the Surgeon
General,” 1994, http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/sgr/sgr_1994/index.htm. CDC, “Cigarette Brand Preference Among Middle and
High School Students Who Are Established Smokers – United States, 2004 and 2006,” MMWR, 58(No.5); 112-115, February 13, 2009,
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5805a3.htm.
7 HHS. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality. National Survey on
Drug Use and Health, 2014. ICPSR36361-v1. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2016-
03-22. http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR36361.v1. See also, CDC, “Cigarette Brand Preference Among Middle and High School Students Who Are
Established Smokers – United States, 2004 and 2006,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) 58(5), February 13, 2009
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/PDF/wk/mm5805.pdf; Sutton, CD, “Newport: ‘Fastest Growing Cigarette in the Country,’” The Onyx Group, [updated]
January 30, 2002, http://www.onyx-group.com/Newport.htm.
8 Lee, JGL, et al., “A Systematic Review of Neighborhood Disparities in Point-of-Sale Tobacco Marketing,” American Journal of Public Health,
published online ahead of print July 16, 2015.
9 Rodriguez, D, et al., “Predictors of tobacco outlet density nationwide: a geographic analysis,” Tobacco Control, published online first on April
4, 2012. See also Lee, JGL, et al., “Inequalities in tobacco outlet density by race, ethnicity and socioeconomic status, 2012, USA: results from
the ASPIRE Study,” Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, published online March 1, 2017.
10 Seidenberg, A, et al., “Storefront cigarette advertising differs by community demographic profile,” American Journal of Health Promotion
24(6): e26-231, 2010. 11 McCarthy, WJ, et al., “Density of Tobacco Retailers Near Schools: Effects on Tobacco Use Among Students,” American Journal of Public
Health 99(11):2006-13, 2009. Henriksen, L, et al., “Is Adolescent Smoking Related to the Density and Proximity of Tobacco Outlets and Retail
Cigarette Advertising Near Schools,” Preventive Medicine 47(2):210-14, August 2008. Leatherdale, ST, et al., “Tobacco Retailer Density
Surrounding Schools and Cigarette Access Behaviors Among Underage Smoking Students,” Annals of Behavioral Medicine 33(1):105-11,
February 2007. Feighery, EC, et al., “An examination of trends in amount and type of cigarette advertising and sales promotions in California
stores, 2002-2005,” Tobacco Control (published online), February 26, 2008. Laws, MB, et al., “Tobacco availability and point of sale marketing
in demographically contrasting districts of Massachusetts,” Tobacco Control 11:71-73, 2002. 12 Kirchner, T, et al., “Tobacco retail outlet advertising practices and proximity to schools, parks and public housing affect Synar underage sales
violations in Washington, DC,” Tobacco Control 24: e52-e58, 2015. 13 Lipperman-Kreda, S. “Contextual and community factors associated with youth access to cigarettes through commercial sources,” Tobacco
Control 23: 39-44, 2014. 14 Cantrell, J, et al., “Marketing Little Cigars and Cigarillos: Advertising, Price, and Associations with Neighborhood Demographics,” American
Journal of Public Health, published online ahead of print August 15, 2013. 15 Kirchner, T, et al., “Tobacco retail outlet advertising practices and proximity to schools, parks and public housing affect Synar underage sales
violations in Washington, DC,” Tobacco Control 24: e52-e58, 2015. 16 Moreland-Russell, S. “Disparities and Menthol Marketing: Additional Evidence in Support of Point of Sale Policies,” International Journal of
Environmental Research and Public Health, 10: 4571-4583, 2013. 17 Widome, R, et al., “The relationship of neighborhood demographic characteristics to point-of-sale tobacco advertising and marketing,”
Ethnicity & Disease 18(2): 136-151, 2013. 18 Stoddard, JL, et al., “Tailoring outdoor tobacco advertising to minorities in Los Angeles County,” Journal of Health Communication 3(2), AprilJune
1998.
19 Primack, BA, et al., “Volume of Tobacco Advertising in African American Markets: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis,” Public Health
Reports 122(5):607-615, September/October 2007. 20 Schleicher, N, et al., “Tobacco Marketing in California’s Retail Environment (2008-2011), Final report for the California Tobacco Advertising
Survey. Stanford, CA: Stanford Prevention Research Center, July 2013.
21 Henriksen, L., et al., “Targeted Advertising, Promotion, and Price for Menthol Cigarettes in California High School Neighborhoods,” Nicotine
& Tobacco Research, June 24, 2011.
22 Resnick, EA, et al., Cigarette Pricing Differs by U.S. Neighborhoods—A BTG Research Brief. Chicago, IL: Bridging the Gap Program, Health
Policy Center, Institute for Health Resarch and Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago, 2012, www.bridgingthegapresearch.org. 23 Cantrell, J, et al., “Marketing Little Cigars and Cigarillos: Advertising, Price, and Associations with Neighborhood Demographics,” American
Journal of Public Health, published online ahead of print August 15, 2013. 24 Hutchinson, EO, “Joe Camel Dominants More Than Billboards in Black America,” June 23, 1997,
http://www.pacificnews.org/jinn/stories/3.13/970623-cigarettes.html 25 Villarosa, L, “Body and Soul,” Women’s Review of Books 11(10-11):13-4, 1994. 26 Alpert, H, Koh, HK, & Connolly, GN, “After the Master Settlement Agreement: Targeting and exposure of youth to magazine tobacco
advertising,” Health Affairs 27(6):w503-w512, 2008. 27 King, C, et al., “The Master Settlement Agreement with the tobacco industry and cigarette advertising in magazines,” New England Journal of
Medicine 345(7):504-11, August 2001. 28 Landrine, H, et al., “Cigarette advertising in Black, Latino and White magazines, 1998-2002: An exploratory investigation,” Ethnic Disparities
15(1):63-7, 2005. 29 Hafez, N. & Ling, P.M. “Finding the Kool Mixx: how Brown & Williamson used music marketing to sell cigarettes,” Tobacco Control 15: 359-
366, 2006.
Tobacco Company Marketing to African Americans / 6
______________________________________________________________________________
30 Yerger, V.B. & Malone, R.E. “African American leadership groups: smoking with the enemy,” Tobacco Control, 11: 335-345, 2002. 31 Gardiner, P.S. “The African Americanization of menthol cigarette use in the United States,” Nicotine & Tobacco Research 6(S1): S55-S65,2004.
32 Yerger, V.B. & Malone, R.E. “African American leadership groups: smoking with the enemy,” Tobacco Control, 11: 335-345, 2002. Quote
from Bateman, M. [Total Minority Marketing Plan]. Brown and Williamson. September 7, 1984. Bates No. 531000141-0144.
http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/eph40f00.
33 Davis, R, Black Marketing Research - Findings & Recommended Actions to Date, Lorillard, June 9, 1978, Bates No. 84274935/4944. 34 Dauphinee, A, et al., “Racial differences in cigarette brand recognition and impact on youth smoking,” BMC Public Health, 13:170, 2013. 35 HHS. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality. National Survey on
Drug Use and Health, 2014. ICPSR36361-v1. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2016-
03-22. http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR36361.v1. 36 Giovino, GA, et al., “Differential trends in cigarette smoking in the USA: is menthol slowing progress?” Tobacco Control, doi:10.1136/tobaccocontrol2013-051159,
published online first August 30, 2013. 37Villanti, A., et al., “Changes in the prevalence and correlates of menthol cigarette use in the USA, 2004–2014,” Tobacco Control, published
online October 20, 2016. 38 Villanti, A., et al., “Changes in the prevalence and correlates of menthol cigarette use in the USA, 2004–2014,” Tobacco Control, published
online October 20, 2016. 39 FDA, “Preliminary Scientific Evaluation of the Possible Public Health Effects of Menthol Versus Nonmenthol Cigarettes,”
http://www.fda.gov/downloads/ScienceResearch/SpecialTopics/PeerReviewofScientificInformationandAssessments/UCM361598.pdf, 2013. 40 HHS, “Tobacco Use Among US Racial/Ethnic Minority Groups—African Americans, American Indians and Alaskan Natives, Asian Americans
and Pacific Islanders, and Hispanics: A Report of the Surgeon General,” 1998,
http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/sgr/1998/complete_report/pdfs/complete_report.pdf. 41 HHS, “Tobacco Use Among US Racial/Ethnic Minority Groups—African Americans, American Indians and Alaskan Natives, Asian Americans
and Pacific Islanders, and Hispanics: A Report of the Surgeon General,” 1998,
http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/sgr/1998/complete_report/pdfs/complete_report.pdf.