American Indian
How Big Tobacco Targets American Indian Communities
Some American Indian traditional use of tobacco is for ceremonial or religious reasons, which creates an important distinction between traditional and commercial use. The tobacco industry preys on these traditions, funding powwows and promoting brands like Natural American Spirit.1 They appropriate American Indian cultures to sell their deadly products, not to show meaningful support for American Indian communities.2
Big Tobacco also sees American Indian-owned casinos as an avenue to distribute their products. The Industry funds these businesses in exchange for carrying an endless supply of cigarettes, preying on concerns that allowing indoor smoking is key to their casino’s success,3 despite evidence that a smoke-free environment would actually increase patronage.4
This kind of cultural exploitation contributes to American Indian communities having the highest rate of smoking prevalence in California, and the only group where smoking is on the rise.5 Nearly one in three native adults in California smoke. However, tobacco’s harm goes beyond those that use it – native populations also report more exposure to secondhand smoke at home.6
It’s time to break Big Tobacco’s grip on American Indian communities.
The proof is in the data
Indicator | American Indian | General population |
|---|---|---|
Adult tobacco use | ||
1. Adult cigarette use: Adult cigarette smoking prevalence | 8.9% | 6.7% |
| ||
2. Change in adult cigarette use: Rate of change in adult cigarette smoking, 2014 to 2020 | -72.3% The 2020 estimate is significantly lower than the 2014 estimate. | -46.4% |
| ||
3. Adult tobacco use: Adult tobacco use prevalence (e.g. cigarettes, e-cigarettes and other vaping products, other tobacco products) | 18.9% | 11.3% |
| ||
Youth tobacco use | ||
4. Youth cigarette use: Youth cigarette smoking prevalence | 2.4% | 1.2% |
| ||
5. Change in youth cigarette use: Rate of change in youth cigarette smoking, 2016 to 2020 | -57.9% | -72.1% |
| ||
6. Youth tobacco use: Youth tobacco use prevalence (e.g. cigarettes, e-cigarettes and other vaping products, other tobacco products) | 13.9% The estimate is significantly higher than the California general population. | 9.7% |
| ||
Availability of tobacco & tobacco industry influence | ||
7. Cheapest cigarettes: Average price for the cheapest pack of cigarettes | $7.02 | $7.11 |
| ||
8. Flavored little cigar price: Average price for a single flavored little cigar/cigarillo | $0.98 | $0.97 |
| ||
9. Tobacco retail licensing: Proportion of population protected by a strong tobacco retail licensing law | 49.8% | 59.5% |
| ||
10. Tobacco stores: Density of stores selling tobacco per 100,000 residents | 98.4 The estimate is 10.0 stores per 100,000 higher than the California general population. | 77 |
| ||
11. Flavored tobacco: Proportion of stores that sell flavored non-cigarette tobacco products | 86.5% The estimate is significantly higher than the California general population. | 81.8% |
| ||
12. Menthol cigarettes: Proportion of stores that sell menthol cigarettes | 90.9% | 88.3% |
| ||
13. Tobacco advertising: Proportion of stores that keep 90% of their storefront free from any advertising | 39.4% | 40.1% |
| ||
Secondhand smoke | ||
14. Adult secondhand tobacco exposure: Proportion of adults exposed to secondhand smoke or vape | 54.8% The estimate is significantly higher than the California general population. | 35.2% |
| ||
15. Youth secondhand tobacco exposure: Proportion of youth exposed to secondhand smoke or vape | 33.8% | 33.1% |
| ||
16. Smoke-free multi-unit housing: Proportion of population protected by a smoke-free multi-unit housing law | 60% | 66.7% |
| ||
17. Smoke-free homes: Proportion of adults with smoke-free homes | 82.4% | 91.8% |
| ||
Kick It California | Percent of enrollees | Percent of smokers |
18. Kick It California enrollees: Proportion of Kick It California enrollees | 1.3% | 0.5% of smokers are American Indian |
| ||
A Story of Inequity
Tobacco’s impact on health disparities in California
For decades, the tobacco industry has aggressively targeted California’s diverse communities with predatory practices. Internal documents from Big Tobacco outline their strategies – many of which are shocking attempts to peddle deadly products by way of product discounts and manipulative advertising. They even gave away free products to youth in the past. These tactics masquerade as support for communities under the guise of cultural celebration.
Unfortunately, the tactics have worked. Big Tobacco aggressively targeted communities and, as a result, some populations have higher rates of tobacco use, experience greater secondhand smoke exposure at work and at home, and have higher rates of tobacco-related disease than the general population.1
Addressing tobacco-related health inequities is key to California’s efforts to fight tobacco, our state’s number one cause of preventable death and disease.2 Tobacco use, pricing, and its impact across California were analyzed where significant disparities were found across various populations. See how Big Tobacco affects each community in the nation’s most diverse state.