Responses

Download PDFPDF

Socioeconomically disadvantaged smokers’ ratings of plain and branded cigarette packaging: an experimental study
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • Responses are moderated before posting and publication is at the absolute discretion of BMJ, however they are not peer-reviewed
  • Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. Removal or editing of responses is at BMJ's absolute discretion
  • If patients could recognise themselves, or anyone else could recognise a patient from your description, please obtain the patient's written consent to publication and send them to the editorial office before submitting your response [Patient consent forms]
  • By submitting this response you are agreeing to our full [Response terms and requirements]

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

  • Published on:
    Response to: Socioeconomically disadvantaged smokers' ratings of plain and branded cigarette packaging
    • Andrew KB Liu, Doctor, Specialty Registrar in Public Health
    • Other Contributors:
      • Dr Alex Keenan, Dr Sherine Thomas, Dr Peter MacPherson, Andy Sullivan, Nicola Stobbart, Dr Andrew Wonham, Maria Saavedra-Campos, Dr Kemi Adeyemi, Dr Merav Kliner, Dr Sam Ghebrehewet
    Dear Editor, We read with great interest the article by Guillaumier et al [1] reporting on socioeconomically disadvantaged smokers' perceptions of plain cigarette packaging. Understanding the impact of plain packaging on smoking behaviour is a key Public Health priority. The authors reported that exposure to plain packaging was associated with significantly reduced positive ratings of pack design and preference compared to curren...
    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.