The Czech Republic SimSmoke: The Effect of Tobacco Control Policies on Smoking Prevalence and Smoking Attributable Deaths in the Czech Republic

Table 2

(a) SimSmoke projections of male smoking prevalence for ages 15 and older, Czech Republic, 2010–2040. (b) SimSmoke projections of female smoking prevalence for ages 15 and older, Czech Republic, 2010–2040.

(a)

Policy/year	2010	2011	2020	2030	2040
Status quo policies	34.6%	34.4%	32.4%	29.9%	27.5%
Policies implemented in 2011
Tax at 70% of retail price	34.6%	32.7%	30.3%	27.4%	24.7%
Complete smoke free and enforcement	34.6%	32.1%	30.1%	27.5%	25.1%
Comprehensive Ad Ban and Enforcement	34.6%	33.6%	31.6%	29.0%	26.5%
High Intensity Tobacco Control Campaign	34.6%	32.5%	30.4%	27.8%	25.4%
Strong health warnings	34.6%	34.3%	32.3%	29.6%	27.2%
Strong youth access enforcement	34.6%	34.2%	31.5%	28.2%	25.3%
Cessation treatment policies	34.6%	33.6%	31.0%	28.2%	25.7%
All of the above	34.6%	26.9%	23.1%	19.4%	16.4%
% Change in smoking prevalence from status quo
Tax at 70% of retail price		−5.1%	−6.6%	−8.3%	−9.9%
Complete smoke free and enforcement		−6.7%	−7.3%	−7.9%	−8.5%
Comprehensive Ad ban and enforcement		−2.4%	−2.7%	−3.0%	−3.4%
High intensity tobacco control campaign		−5.6%	−6.3%	−7.1%	−7.7%
Strong health warnings		−0.2%	−0.6%	−0.8%	−1.0%
Strong youth access enforcement		−0.5%	−2.8%	−5.4%	−8.0%
Cessation treatment policies		−2.3%	−4.4%	−5.7%	−6.4%
Combined policy effects
All of the above		−21.7%	−28.9%	−35.1%	−40.1%

*Measured relative to the status quo in the same year, that is, (SR_𝑝,𝑡−SR_{Statusquo,𝑡})/SR_{Statusquo,𝑡}, where SR_𝑝,𝑡 is the smoking rate in year 𝑡 with policy 𝑝 and SR_{Statusquo,𝑡} is the smoking rate in year 𝑡 under the status quo.

(b)

Policy/year	2010	2011	2020	2030	2040
Status quo policies	23.1%	23.2%	22.7%	21.4%	19.8%
Independent policies implemented in 2011
Tax at 70% of retail price	23.1%	22.1%	21.4%	19.8%	18.0%
Complete smoke free and enforcement	23.1%	21.6%	21.1%	19.7%	18.1%
Comprehensive Ad ban and enforcement	23.1%	22.6%	22.1%	20.7%	19.1%
High intensity tobacco control campaign	23.1%	21.9%	21.3%	19.9%	18.3%
Strong health warnings	23.1%	23.1%	22.6%	21.2%	19.5%
Strong youth access enforcement	23.1%	23.1%	22.2%	20.4%	18.5%
Cessation treatment policies	23.1%	22.6%	21.7%	20.1%	18.4%
All of the above	23.1%	18.2%	16.3%	14.2%	12.2%
% Change in smoking prevalence from status quo
Independent policy effects
Tax at 70% of retail price		−4.8%	−6.0%	−7.4%	−8.7%
Complete smoke free and enforcement		−6.7%	−7.3%	−7.9%	−8.4%
Comprehensive Ad ban and enforcement		−2.4%	−2.7%	−3.0%	−3.3%
High intensity tobacco control campaign		−5.6%	−6.4%	−7.0%	−7.6%
Strong health warnings		−0.2%	−0.6%	−0.9%	−1.1%
Strong youth access enforcement		−0.4%	−2.2%	−4.3%	−6.3%
Cessation treatment policies		−2.3%	−4.6%	−6.0%	−6.8%
Combined policy effects
All of the above		−21.4%	−28.1%	−33.8%	−38.1%

*Measured relative to the status quo in the same year, that is, (SR_𝑝,𝑡−SR_{Statusquo,𝑡})/SR_{Statusquo,𝑡}, where SR_𝑝,𝑡 is the smoking rate in year 𝑡 with policy 𝑝 and SR_{Statusquo,𝑡} is the smoking rate in year 𝑡 under the status quo.