Déjalo ahora
La industria del tabaco imponiéndose a personas pequeñas y vulnerables

La industria del tabaco: discriminación selectiva y prejuicio

La industria del tabaco finge preocuparse por la justicia social, los derechos civiles y los problemas culturales para convencer a ciertas comunidades,15161718 como la negra, la latina, la LGBTQ+ y la de bajos ingresos, de que están de su lado. De hecho, utilizan tácticas manipulador de mercadeo e incluso regalan productos para enganchar a las comunidades a sus productos mortales.19 Las estrategias de la industria, que tienen sus raíces en el racismo, la homofobia y la discriminación, perjudican de forma desproporcionada a las poblaciones que han sido históricamente excluidas.

Conoce la verdad
NUESTRAS CAMPAÑAS

We Are Not Profit

Por años la industria del tabaco ha estado matando sistemáticamente a la comunidad afroamericana con cigarrillos mentolados y beneficiándose financieramente.20212223

Aprende más

El daño de la industria del tabaco

La industria del tabaco gasta miles de millones en atractivas tácticas1 de mercadeo e influencia política2 para continuar ganando dinero con nuestra muerte y enfermedades.
Aprende más
El tabaco es el único producto en el mercado que mata cuando es usado de la manera indicada. Puede ser mortal incluso para la gente que no lo usa.3
Aprende más
Para la industria del tabaco los niños son sus “clientes de reemplazo”4 y los condenan a una vida de adicción y enfermedad.
Aprende más
Esta industria racista intencionalmente (y a conciencia) ha inundado las comunidades diversas con productos mortales y mensajes manipuladores.5
Aprende más
Nadie se salva del daño ambiental6 y los riesgos a la salud causados7891011 por los desechos tóxicos de la industria del tabaco y sus plásticos contaminantes.12
Aprende más
Adolescente hispana

Hagamos responsable a la industria

California ya protege a sus comunidades de otros productos dañinos.1314 Es tiempo de hacer lo mismo con la industria del tabaco.
  1. Federal Trade Commission. Federal Trade Commission Cigarette Report for 2020. Washington, D.C.: Federal Trade Commission. 2021.
  2. OpenSecrets. Industry Profile: Tobacco. Opensecrets.org. https://www.opensecrets.org/federal-lobbying/industries/summary?cycle=2021&id=A02. Accessed March 16, 2022.
  3. Office on Smoking and Health (US). The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke: A Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta (GA): Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US); 2006.
  4. R.J. Reynolds. Younger Adult Smokers: Strategies and Opportunities. https://www.industrydocuments.ucsf.edu/docs/rkvk0045. 1984 February 29.
  5. Anderson SJ. Marketing of menthol cigarettes and consumer perceptions: a review of tobacco industry documents. Tob Control. 2011;20 Suppl 2(Suppl_2):ii20-ii28. doi:10.1136/tc.2010.041939.
  6. Break Free From Plastic. Branded Vol. III: Demanding corporate accountability for plastic pollution. 2020.
  7. Poma A, Vecchiotti G, Colafarina S, et al. In Vitro Genotoxicity of Polystyrene Nanoparticles on the Human Fibroblast Hs27 Cell Line. Nanomaterials (Basel). 2019;9(9):1299. Published 2019 Sep 11. doi:10.3390/nano9091299.
  8. Zarus GM, Muianga C, Hunter CM, Pappas RS. A review of data for quantifying human exposures to micro and nanoplastics and potential health risks. Sci Total Environ. 2021;756:144010. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.144010.
  9. Jacob H, Besson M, Swarzenski PW, Lecchini D, Metian M. Effects of Virgin Micro- and Nanoplastics on Fish: Trends, Meta-Analysis, and Perspectives. Environ Sci Technol. 2020;54(8):4733-4745. doi:10.1021/acs.est.9b05995.
  10. Ziv-Gal A, Flaws JA. Evidence for bisphenol A-induced female infertility: a review (2007-2016). Fertil Steril. 2016;106(4):827-856. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.06.027.
  11. Campanale C, Massarelli C, Savino I, Locaputo V, Uricchio VF. A Detailed Review Study on Potential Effects of Microplastics and Additives of Concern on Human Health. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(4):1212. Published 2020 Feb 13. doi:10.3390/ijerph17041212.
  12. Belzagui F, Buscio V, Gutiérrez-Bouzán C, Vilaseca M. Cigarette butts as a microfiber source with a microplastic level of concern. Science of The Total Environment. 2021;762:144165. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.144165.
  13. Governor Newsom Signs Legislation Making California First in the Nation to Ban Toxic Chemicals in Cosmetics [press release]. gov.ca.gov. https://www.gov.ca.gov/2020/09/30/governor-newsom-signs-legislation-making-california-first-in-the-nation-to-ban-toxic-chemicals-in-cosmetics/. Published September 30, 2020. Accessed March 23, 2022.
  14. Landmark California law bans 'forever chemicals' in products for infants, children [press release]. ewg.org. https://www.ewg.org/news-insights/news-release/2021/10/landmark-california-law-bans-forever-chemicals-products-infants. Published October 5, 2021. Accessed March 23, 2022.
  15. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Tobacco Industry Marketing. cdc.gov. https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/tobacco_industry/marketing/index.htm. Reviewed May 14, 2021. Accessed March 15, 2022.
  16. Yerger VB, Malone RE. African American leadership groups: smoking with the enemy. Tob Control. 2002;11(4):336–345. doi:10.1136/tc.11.4.336.
  17. Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. Tobacco Use and Hispanics. tobaccofreekids.org. https://www.tobaccofreekids.org/assets/factsheets/0134.pdf. Published December 20, 2021. Accessed March 24, 2022.
  18. Truth Initiative. How tobacco companies use experiential marketing. truthinitiative.org. https://truthinitiative.org/research-resources/tobacco-industry-marketing/how-tobacco-companies-use-experiential-marketing. Published June 26, 2018. Accessed March 15, 2022.
  19. Tobacco Control Legal Consortium. Evans v. Lorillard: A Bittersweet Victory Against the Tobacco Industry. https://www.publichealthlawcenter.org/sites/default/files/resources/tclc-Evans-v-Lorillard-case-study-2016.pdf. Updated August 2016. Accessed September 17, 2020.
  20. Robinson RG, Sutton CD, James DA, Orleans CT. Pathways to Freedom: Winning the Fight against Tobacco. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Atlanta, GA; 2003.
  21. Primack BA, Bost JE, Land SR, Fine MJ. Volume of tobacco advertising in African American markets: systematic review and meta-analysis. Public Health Rep. 2007;122(5):607-15.
  22. Resnick EA, Jackson KL, Barker DC, Chaloupka FJ. Cigarette Pricing Differs by U.S. Neighborhoods—A BTG Research Brief. Chicago, IL: Bridging the Gap Program, Health Policy Center, Institute for Health Research and Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago, 2012.
  23. Lee JG, Henriksen L, Rose SW, Moreland-Russell S, Ribisl KM. A Systematic Review of Neighborhood Disparities in Point-of-Sale Tobacco Marketing. Am J Public Health. 2015;105(9):e8-18.