Rodeos and Research: Non-Traditional Tobacco Issues on Campus

1
Rodeos and Research Non-Traditional Tobacco
Issues on Campus

• 5th National Summit on Smokeless and Spit Tobacco
• September 22, 2009
• Madison, WI

2
California Youth Advocacy Network

• The California Youth Advocacy Network (CYAN) is
  dedicated to the support of youth and young adult
  tobacco control advocacy throughout California.
  By providing young people and agencies with the
  tangible tools for action, CYAN strives to
  mobilize a powerful statewide movement for
  tobacco control. CYAN offers the following to
  the tobacco prevention field
• Technical Assistance
• Trainings
• Statewide Advocacy and Policy Campaigns
• Educational Materials and Publications
• Opportunities for networking

3
The Beginning of the ProblemThe MSA

• Master Settlement Agreement (MSA) signed in 1998
• Prohibits tobacco marketing for which the primary
  purpose is to initiate, maintain, or increase
  youth (under 18) smoking
• Prohibits distribution of free samples of tobacco
  products on public property except in Adult Only
  Facilities

4
After the MSA

• Bitter Sweet Problem Without the legal ability
  to advertise to those under 18 years old, the
  tobacco industry shifted their advertising
  tactics to the youngest legal targets
• 18 24 year old
• Our natural response and solution Work with
  colleges and universities to adopt smoke-free
  policies for campus buildings, residential halls,
  and campus grounds

5
Smoke-Free Policy Campaigns All campaigns have
to start somewhere

• Following the signing of the MSA, tobacco control
  advocates were funded to address young adult
  smoking.
• Obvious place to start was college campuses.
• Colleges and universities are filled with young
  adults.
• Offer active audience.
• Numerous public health partners on campus.
• Majority of prevention efforts focused on making
  indoor and outdoor areas of college campuses
  smoke-free.

6
While we were working on Smoke-Free . . . .
Tobacco companies were working on developing
campus relationships

• Tobacco Control Advocates
• Focus HEALTH
• Health equates to smoke-free campuses
• Smoke-free campuses clean air both indoors and
  outdoors

• Tobacco Industry
• Focus
• Big Profits come from tobacco sales, investments,
  name and brand recognition
• Recognition comes from sponsorship, university
  support through contributions and funding
  research
• Positive relationships with universities
  improved corporate image

7
Tobacco on Campus

• Tobacco use
• Cigarettes
• Smokeless / Spit / Spitless
• Hookah
• Sampling
• Events
• Greek
• Area bars

• Tobacco sales
• Bookstore
• Campus stores
• Student Co-ops
• Private companies
• Hospitality Funds
• Auxiliary Organizations

8
Tobacco Companies on Campus

• Career Fairs
• Philip Morris / Altria
• Sponsorship
• Athletics
• Organizations
• Advertising / Marketing
• Campus publications
• Signage
• Portfolio
• Individual campus
• System

• Art Shows
• Music, dance, theatrical performances
• Research grants
• Graduate students
• Faculty
• Donations/Contributions
• Individual schools or programs within a
  university

9
The Problem

• Tobacco companies provide financial support to
  colleges and universities through a number of
  different channels.
• Tobacco companies sponsor events, activities, and
  organizations on campus to promote their products
  and the perceived corporate responsibilities.

10
How tobacco companies benefit from relationships
with colleges and universities

• Improved image
• Legitimate partner
• Extensive exposure to different populations
• Target Population(s)
• Product exposure

11
Funding of Academic Research
12
Tobacco Industry Funding of Academic Research

• Whats Happening
• Tobacco industry directly funds research at
  colleges and universities throughout the US and
  world
• Previously funded through the Philip Morris
  External Research Program (PMERP)
• Provides funding opportunities to graduate
  students and faculty at prestigious universities
• Many of the grants are given to scientists who
  are not looking specifically at tobacco, thus
  rewarding the tobacco industry with credibility
• Tobacco companies are able to take the reputation
  and impartiality of the scientist and the
  research to promote their own agenda (e.g.,
  Secondhand Smoke study at the University of
  California, Los Angeles)
• The industry received a major public relation
  'plus' when monies were given to Harvard Medical
  School. RICO Trial Findings of Fact

13
Problematic Research

• Academic research has shown that projects funded
  by the tobacco industry tend to favor the
  industry and unfavorable results are suppressed
• Malone, R., Bero, L. (2003). Chasing the
  dollar why scientists should decline tobacco
  industry funding. Journal Epidemiol Community
  Health, 57, 546-548.
• Industry documents reveal tobacco companies
  conducted an extensive campaign to produce
  scientific research and influence public opinion
  on health consequences associated with secondhand
  smoke exposure
• Muggli, M., Forster, J., Hurt, R., Repace, J.
  (2001). The smoke you dont see uncovering
  tobacco industry scientific strategies aimed
  against environmental tobacco smoke policies. Am
  J Public Health, 91, 1419 1423.

14
Tobacco Racketeers

• U.S.A. et al. v. Philip Morris Inc., et al., the
  District of Columbia District Court Judge, Gladys
  Kessler, found on August 17, 2006, that
• Cigarette makers were involved in a lengthy (50
  years), unlawful conspiracy to deceive the
  American public about the health effects of
  smoking and environmental tobacco smoke, the
  addictiveness of nicotine, the health benefits
  from low tar, light cigarettes, and their
  manipulation of the design and composition of
  cigarettes in order to sustain nicotine
  addiction.
• They devised and coordinated both national and
  international strategy they directed scientists
  as to what research they should and should not
  undertake they vetted scientific research papers
  and reports as well as public relations materials
  to ensure that the interests of the Enterprise
  would be protected they identified friendly
  scientific witnesses, subsidized them with grants
  from the Center for Tobacco Research and the
  Center for Indoor Air Research, paid them
  enormous fees, and often hid the relationship
  between those witnesses and the industry.

15
Tobacco Racketeers

• The Conspiracy Continues
• Even at the time of trial Defendants continued to
  participate in the Center for Cooperation in
  Scientific Research Relative to Tobacco
  (CORESTA), a nonprofit making association with
  objectives to enhance the scientific cooperation
  for research on tobacco perceived as unique and
  very valuable because it enjoys the perception
  of being objective, technical and independent.
• DC Court of Appeals Decision, May 22, 2009

16
Why Decline Tobacco Industry Grants

• The tobacco industry has been found to suppress
  research.
• Academic units and some universities have taken a
  stand to distance themselves from tobacco
  funding.
• Tobacco companies are different.
• The tobacco industry has used its funding of
  academic research to damage and manipulate the
  research process itself.
• Tobacco industry funding diminishes the
  credibility of any research it funds.
• Academic freedom protects the right of faculty
  and students to pursue knowledge and publish
  their work freely in order to advance societys
  knowledge about public matters, no matter how
  controversial. The tobacco industry stands
  foursquare against these principles.

17
Arguments For Tobacco Funding

• Academic Freedom
• Slippery Slope
• Lack of funding for research
• Ethics who is to say PM is any better than a
  number of other companies
• Tobacco companies have changed their ways ideal
• Lack of education on tobacco issues beyond health
• Apathy towards tobacco issues
• Need for good research
• An objective scientist doesnt conduct biased
  research
• The thinking that NIH only funds research that
  promotes the governments agenda

18
The University of California Dilemma

• 2004 - University Committee on Research Policy
  (UCORP) Report limiting external and internal
  strings attached to research
• External strings outside companies,
  organizations, etc. that put limitations on
  funding and research
• Internal strings faculty units that put
  limitations on an individual faculty members
  funding
• President Dynes adopted systemwide policy
  prohibiting campuses and academic units from
  adopting research funding policies
• 2005 Academic Council and Academic Assembly
  adopt resolution that gives policy making
  authority to Regents

19
The University of California Dilemma

• Debate continued at system level for 2 years
• Leading Regents proposed a policy to decline
  tobacco industry money the President and faculty
  Senate leadership strongly opposed this proposal.
• In September 2007, the Regents adopted a
  resolution requiring
• A Regental statement to researchers expressing
  concern over tobacco industry funding
• Campus scientific peer review and Chancellor
  approval of proposals prior to submission to the
  tobacco industry
• Annual report to the Regents of tobacco funded
  grants.

20
Tobacco Industry Funding Continues

• Virginia Commonwealth University (2006 grant)
• University scientists are studying how to
  identify early warning signs of pulmonary disease
  and how to reduce nitrogen and phosphorus drained
  into rivers from processing tobacco leaves
• Research believed to help Philip Morris develop
  new reduced risk product which is why there is a
  great need for secrecy
• Contract prohibits researcher from publishing
  results of study or publishing without the
  approval of Philip Morris
• University officials must decline to comment on
  contract if asked by a third party
• All patent and intellectual property rights go to
  Philip Morris

21
Tobacco Industry Funding Continues

• UCLA (2006 grant)
• Adolescent Smoking Cessation Center
• Largest tobacco-funded project at the University
  of California
• The contract was negotiated between UCLA and the
  Philip Morris Youth Smoking Prevention and
  Corporate Responsibility Office
• The grant appears similar to past industry
  special projects that did not go through a
  formal peer review process

22
UCLA ASCC

• 6 million contract for 3 years
• The Center is modeled after the Duke Center for
  Nicotine and Smoking Cessation Research
  (financially supported by Philip Morris)
• Research focused on 14 21 year olds
• Project initiated by the Philip Morris Youth
  Prevention Office
• The grant has three projects all designed to
  learn more about how youth get addicted and stay
  addicted to tobacco.
• A stepped approach to adolescent smoking
  cessation treatment (human subjects)
• Neural systems and risk for adolescent smoking
  (human subjects)
• Adolescent primate-focused research (animal
  subjects)

23
Why We Are Concerned

• The Center gives Philip Morris direct access to
  understanding the addiction process in youth
• Such information could be very useful in
  designing more addictive cigarettes
• It is unlikely that Philip Morris could conduct
  brain scans on youth in their own research center
  without facing political and/or legal
  consequences
• There is no transparency with the grant,
  therefore, we know very little about the research

24
Duke University

• Seeking paid expert consultants to evaluate the
  QuitAssist website
• Two year project given to the Director of the
  Duke Center for Nicotine and Smoking Cessation
  Research (Center funded by Philip Morris)
• Consultants will not be associated with grant
• Your name would not be associated in any way
  with your commentary, and you would not be
  mentioned in any way in any correspondence or
  reports of findings from the study. Once you
  have been paid, your name would be removed from
  our records.

25
USSTC Funding

• Researchers from USSTC
• There is one scientific fact that smokers and
  smokeless tobacco users in the Corps should
  learn smokeless tobacco use is 98 percent safer
  than smoking.
• Letter to the Editor, Marine Corps Times, January
  2009
• You characterized Camel dissolvables as
  "...still addictive and risky like cigarettes..."
  This is patently untrue. Scientific research has
  established that smokeless tobacco products are
  at least 98 safer than smoking. You have
  repeated the misinformation from government
  agencies and by anti-tobacco extremists about the
  relative safety of smokeless products.
• Letter to the Editor, Oregon Live, December 2008

26
College Rodeos
27
What is a Collegiate Rodeo?

• A NIRA-sanctioned event
• NIRA National Intercollegiate Rodeo Association
• Club sport (NOT a NCAA sport)
• College event
• Community event
• Family event
• Students compete in events like bull riding,
  steer wrestling, and team roping

28
NIRA

• Governing body for college rodeos
• Promotes intercollegiate rodeo on a national
  scale by bringing national recognition as an
  organized and standard collegiate sport and to
  promote interest, understanding, and
  appreciation, and vigilance over Western life and
  culture.
• NIRA is divided into 11 regions with over 135
  colleges and universities having a recognized
  rodeo organization on their campus.
• www.collegerodeo.com

29
Organizational Structure of College Rodeos

• National Intercollegiate Rodeo Association (NIRA)
• 11 regions throughout the U.S.
• All colleges in a region host rodeos throughout
  the year.
• In June, all collegiate rodeo teams in America
  compete at the Collegiate National Finals Rodeo
  (CNFR) held in Casper, Wyoming.

30
U.S. Smokeless Tobacco Sponsorship of Collegiate
Rodeos

• In 1974, USSTC became the first sponsor of
  college rodeo
• USSTC sponsorship of rodeo gives the company
• Brand name recognition
• The ability to associate their deadly product
  with healthy athletes
• In return, collegiate rodeo athletes are awarded
  a total of 200,000 per year in scholarships

31
USSTC NIRA Sponsorship Agreement

• General sponsorship agreement written into NIRA
  handbook
• USSTC required form for all regional rodeos
• Used to alert USSTC to time, location, etc. of
  event
• Distributes free smokeless products at events
• In CA, sampling of products is not an issue if
  the rodeo is held on public grounds
• However, sampling presents a problem on private
  CA grounds and in other states

32
Sponsorship/Scholarship

• In a college setting, scholarship and sponsorship
  are two separate things
• USSTC has engaged in a sponsorship program by
  requiring advertisements at collegiate rodeos in
  order for athletes to be eligible for scholarship
  money
• However, if USSTC allows a school to take down
  USSTC signs and still provides the scholarship
  money, the university views it as a scholarship
  program

33
Scholarship Money

• Awards are dependent on athletes performance at
  the CNFR
• Amount varies from year to year
• In CA, the USSTC check undergoes the same process
  as other financial aid
• 100 of the money goes to the student

34
Collegiate National Finals Rodeo

• Until 1998, the CNFR was held at Montana State
  University (MSU)
• In 1998, MSU asked USSTC not to distribute
  products at the CNFR
• MSU was promptly dropped as the site of the CNFR,
  breaking a 25 year tradition of hosting the
  biggest collegiate rodeo event!
• CNFR is now held in Casper, WY

35
Californias College Rodeos

• 7 colleges have rodeos
• 3 California State Universities
• 4-year public institutions
• 4 Community Colleges
• 2-year public institutions
• All advocacy efforts began locally
• Majority of work done at CSU Fresno and Cal Poly
  San Luis Obispo

36
Cal Poly San Luis Obispo Rodeo

• Cal Poly is a public 4-year institution in
  Central California
• Campus of 18,000 students
• Local advocacy project funded through Buck
  Tobacco
• Objectives
• Work with Dept. of Agriculture to reject USSTC
  funding
• Eliminate USSTC ads at college rodeo
• Advocate for the adoption of a campus-wide
  sponsorship or advertising policy.

37
Cal Poly San Luis Obispo Rodeo

• Objectives 1 2
• Initial focus on the Rodeo Coach and the
  Associate Dean of the College of Agriculture
• Asked to remove USSTC banners from the rodeo
  grounds during rodeos
• Coach and Associate Dean voluntarily agreed to
  take the signs down
• Would not end relationship with USSTC until
  alternative scholarship funds were available

38
Cal Poly San Luis Obispo Rodeo

• Objective 3
• Students and community advocates worked with
  administration for two years to get a formal
  policy prohibiting tobacco advertising and
  sponsorship
• Policy adopted in June 2005
• In the interest of promoting a safe and healthy
  environment for members of the University and
  wider community, the University prohibits
  advertising of tobacco products at all Cal Poly
  events.

39
Key Points

• Advocates worked with campus to find alternative
  funding but no middle ground could be found
• Project offered 20,000 endowment
• Campus wanted 1 million endowment
• Campus was not willing to address
  sponsorshipsjust advertising and marketing
• In the end, Cal Poly took down the signs and
  USSTC continued to awarded the students
  scholarship money, even though Cal Poly violated
  the NIRA agreement

40
Statewide Advocacy Efforts

• Statewide advocacy project funded through the
  Regional Tobacco-Free Rodeo Project
• Objectives
• Work with Cal Poly SLO and Cal Poly Pomona to
  enforce existing policies
• Advocate for the adoption of a systemwide
  sponsorship policy at CSU
• Work with Feather River College to adopt a policy
  eliminating tobacco advertising, marketing, and
  sponsorship

41
Statewide Advocacy Efforts

• Began working with the CSU Board of Trustees in
  2004 to adopt a comprehensive sponsorship policy
  for the entire CSU system (23 campuses)
• Gained support from the CSSA the statewide CSU
  student association
• 2007 CSU Board of Trustees and the Chancellors
  Office adopted a systemwide policy prohibiting
  tobacco industry sponsorship.
• The policy is a verbal policy.
• 2008 CSU system leaders comment they are
  continuing to actively enforce the policy and
  monitor industry presence on campus

42
Statewide Advocacy Efforts

• Campaign Activities
• Meetings with decision makers (local and
  statewide)
• Hired local students
• Building partnerships
• Hosting campus events
• Attending local rodeos
• Media campaign
• Documented problem
• Made issue bigger than rodeos

43
(No Transcript)
44
The South Dakota State Experience

• South Dakota passed a similar advertising policy
  but were denied scholarship money
• Adopted in 2004 Publicity (including but not
  limited to fliers, advertisements, commercials,
  or any other promotional material.) can NOT have
  any of the following Any promotion of alcohol,
  tobacco, or other drugs.
• SDSU now has a Steers for State program to raise
  replacement money for scholarships
• www.sdsurodeo.org

45
For more information . . .

• Contact
• Kim Homer Vagadori, MPH
• CYAN
• [phone] x22
• kim_at_cyanonline.org
• Resources Available
• Rodeo Publication
• Final Reports
• Advertisements
• Organizing Guide
• Websites
• www.cyanonline.org
• www.researchintegrityproject.org
• www.academic-integrity.com