Education-smoking gradient and upstream health policies: comparing Generation X with millennials

Abstract

PurposeOver the years, many upstream health policies have sought to reduce smoking across populations. While smoking has been substantially reduced, the effects of these policies on education-smoking gradient remain unclear. The present paper compares the education-smoking gradient among the Generation X and the millennials, who grew up with different types of upstream policies.Design/methodology/approachThe study relies on regression analysis. The data are from the Canadian Tobacco, Alcohol and Drugs Survey of 2017, with the sample restricted to those born between 1965 and 1995.FindingsAt the zero-order, the education-smoking gradient has not significantly flattened from Generation X to millennials. And, accounting for the channels of impact of education on smoking does not substantially change this pattern.Social implicationsThe implications for health inequalities associated with socioeconomic status, and tobacco consumption reduction policies, are discussed.Originality/valueThis paper is the first study of the kind using Canadian data.

The link between smoking, drinking and wages: Health, workplace social capital or discrimination?

“…Since Hamilton and Hamilton (1997) and Auld (2005), which used data from the Canadian General Social Surveys of 1985 and 1991, the scholarship on the effects of smoking and drinking on the labour market outcomes has not been updated for the Canadian context. In light of the significant cultural shifts regarding the stigma of smoking and greater health consciousness in the population (Dilmaghani, 2021a, 2021b; Glenn et al, 2017; Roulin & Bhatnagar, 2018, 2021), the present study provides a necessary update. The main findings are as follows.…”

“…Moreover, the discrimination ensuing their stigmatization can even lead to a greater engagement in the behaviour (Roulin & Bhatnagar, 2018). Adding to these concerns is the growing evidence that smoking is increasingly prevalent among those of lower socio‐economic status (Barbeau et al, 2004; Dilmaghani, 2021a, 2021b; Pampel et al, 2014; Reid et al, 2010). Taken together with the negative health effects of smoking, the presence of wage and hiring discrimination against smokers is likely to intensify the existing health disparities by socio‐economic status, which is undesirable from a social and ethical point of view (Dilmaghani, 2021a, 2021b; Pampel et al, 2010, 2014; Reid et al, 2010).…”

“…However, consistent with the past literature, smokers are less likely to be married, as it is harder to maintain a smoking habit if the spouse is a non‐smoker (Lindström, 2010; Ramsey et al, 2019). Smokers also have fewer years of completed schooling (Dilmaghani, 2021a, 2021b; Pampel et al, 2015). Immigrants and visible minorities are less likely to be regular drinkers and daily smokers.…”

“…Until well into the mid‐20th century, smoking was a status signal for men and a symbol of freedom for women (Dilmaghani, 2021a, 2021b; Roulin & Bhatnagar, 2021). Starting from the 1960s, negative health effects of smoking were identified and widely publicized.…”

“…Despite these efforts, a non‐negligible portion of populations continue to smoke, with about 16% in the United States, 11% in Canada, 18% in the United Kingdom and 27% in France (Roulin & Bhatnagar, 2021). In addition, smokers increasingly belong to the lower socio‐economic strata of populations (Dilmaghani, 2021a, 2021b; Pampel et al, 2010, 2014, 2015). Hence, discriminatory labour market practices against smokers affect a rather large and generally vulnerable group.…”