According to a Ministry of Health (Malaysia) survey carried out in 1996, there were 2.4 million smokers in Malaysia. This was a rise of 41% over the number of smokers in 1986. Today the country has about 5 million smokers.
By 2001, more than 10,000 Malaysians were dying from smoking related diseases annually, or about 25% of all deaths in Malaysia. As of 2003, approximately 49% of all adult males and 5% of all adult females are smokers. With the population expected to grow to 29million by 2010, this means there will be approximately 15million smokers in Malaysia.
Of most concern is the prevalence of smoking among young Malaysians. 30% of teenage boys aged 12–18 years smoke while smoking among girls doubled from 4.8% in 1996 to 8% in 1999. The prevalence of smokers aged 15 and above has increased from 21% in 1985 to 31% in 2000. This compares with about 21% of the population in the UK who smoke in 2009, down from 45% in 1974.
No data is available on what smoking costs the country but we do know it costs the Canadian government around RM10.5 billion in direct health care and another RM38 billion in lost productivity. Meanwhile revenue from taxes on cigarettes totaled around RM9 billion. Canada is a good benchmark for Malaysia because in 2001 approximately 5.7 million Canadians smoked, about the same as Malaysia.
To combat the rising number of smokers in the country, a number of initiatives have been put into place. These include a rapid rise in the taxation collected on cigarettes and a number of health ministry driven initiatives.
The first of these initiatives was an anti smoking campaign launched in 1991, in conjunction with the National Healthy Life Style Campaign. This extensive campaign that ran for over 10 years raised the level of awareness of the hazards of smoking among the general public, both smokers and non-smokers.
The “Tak Nak” campaign was initially launched in 2003 and consisted of TVCs, Radio, print and Outdoor (including school notice boards). Costing almost RM18 million (US$5 million) for the first year, and rumoured to cost in total RM100 million for the 5 year campaign, it was widely lambasted in the media.
Although the campaign raised the awareness of the effects of smoking, it did little to reduce the number of smokers. Even the Health Minister Datuk Dr Chua Soi Lek said in 2005 that there was no indication that the number of smokers had gone down since the campaign began.
Despite the ineffectiveness of this campaign, in August 2009, The Malaysia Ministry of Health launched the latest (and most harrowing) installment (see video) of its anti-smoking “Tak Nak” campaign via TVCs. This follows the legislation, earlier this year that all cigarette packets sold in Malaysia must carry graphic images related to smoking. These include images of the results of neck cancer and a dead foetus. Displaying these graphic images on cigarette packets is a requirement of the World Health Organisation Framework Convention on Tobacco control of which Malaysia is a signatory.
It’s not clear if the latest series of graphic commercials that are obviously designed to shock, and the images on cigarette packets are part of a strategic plan or two independent tactical campaigns.
I’m not sure what the goals of the strategy are but I am sure they do not want to simply raise awareness of the effects of smoking. I would imagine the goals include reducing the numbers of smokers in Malaysia and discouraging young adults of both sexes from taking up the habit.
If this is the goal then one has to question whether or not this is the best tactic. Certainly evidence from previous campaigns and other countries suggests that these tactics are ineffective.
In the UK, after extensive research of more than 8,500 smokers over a ten-year period, the Institute for Social and Economic research found that the warnings on cigarette packets that smoking kills or maims are ineffective in reducing the number of smokers.
Likewise, chilling commercials or emotionally disturbing programs are ineffective. The study also discovered that even when a close family member become ill from the effects of smoking, the smoker takes no notice. In fact, according to the study, smokers only reduce the number of cigarettes or sometimes quit when their own personal health is at stake.
The same study discovered that even failing health may not persuade a smoker to reduce or even stop smoking because smoking is linked to a lack of psychological wellbeing and often failing health results in psychological decline.
I have a hunch that this campaign will not work. What is required is a data driven approach to the issue. This will include:
Specific qualitative research with relevant targeted questions related to each segment (and each segment will be specific and demographic based) that are designed to deliver actionable data
A comprehensive strategy to communicate with all segments with specific emphasis on dynamic, preventative programmes for schools.
Existing smokers will be targetted individually through interviews with doctors, rather than one-size-fits all shock and awe campaigns.
There is more but I don’t want to give the whole game away! We are standing by for a call from the Ministry of Health!
No comments:
Post a Comment