Introduction

Higher tobacco taxes reduce tobacco use. On military installations, cigarettes and other tobacco products are sold tax-free, keeping prices artificially low. Pricing regulations in the military specify that tobacco should be within 5% of the local most competitive price, but prices still average almost 13% lower than those at local Walmarts.

Methods

To gain insight into policy leaders' ideas and positions on military tobacco pricing, we interviewed members of the Department of Defense (DoD) Addictive Substances Misuse Advisory Committee and the Advisory Committee on Tobacco about tobacco pricing policies (n = 12).

Results

Participants frequently lacked specific knowledge of details of military pricing policy, and the impact higher prices might have on military tobacco use. Most participants thought tobacco should not be sold at military stores, but many also felt that this policy change was unlikely due to tobacco industry pressure, and DoD reliance on tobacco profits to support Morale, Welfare, and Recreation funds.

Conclusions

Achieving a tobacco-free military will require changing pricing policy, but this study suggests that for effective implementation, military leadership must also understand and articulate more clearly the rationale for doing so.

Implications

Previous work has found that adherence to military tobacco pricing policy is inconsistent at best. This study suggests that lack of knowledge about the policy and conflicting pressures resulting from the funding stream tobacco sales represent extend to high level military policy leaders. Without clearer information and direction, these leaders are unlikely to be able to establish and implement better tobacco pricing policy.

National military and veteran service organizations (MVSOs) have the potential to be advocates for stronger military tobacco control. This study consisted of qualitative analysis of interviews with 5 MVSO leaders (or their designees) and 6 focus groups conducted with veterans, to explore the opinions of MVSO leaders and veterans about military tobacco use and tobacco control policy, and to assess their current knowledge, attitudes, and likelihood of engaging with civilian tobacco control. Themes discussed include the impact of tobacco use on the military mission and on veterans; the possibility of stronger military tobacco control policies; and the idea that such policies would affect the rights of military personnel. Participants considered whether tobacco use impacts the military mission in the most literal sense (e.g., giving away patrol locations), ignoring larger scale effects on long term health and costs. While familiar with tobacco's impacts on veterans' health, MVSO leaders did not endorse stronger policies, although some veterans did. Participants were largely unaware of the impact of tobacco use on military readiness. Establishment of better alliances among MVSOs and civilian public health groups for mutual education about tobacco's many negative effects on the military's mission may be necessary to achieve a tobacco-free military.

Background

Tobacco pricing impacts use, yet military retailers sell discounted cigarettes. No systematic research has examined how military retail stores use internal community comparisons to set prices. We analysed data obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request on community price comparisons used by military retail to set cigarette prices.

Methods

Data on cigarette prices were obtained directly from military retailers (exchanges) from January 2013 to March 2014. Complete pricing data were obtained from exchanges on 114 military installations.

Results

The average price for a pack of Marlboro cigarettes in military exchanges was US$5.51, which was similar to the average lowest community price (US$5.45; mean difference=-0.06; p=0.104) and almost a US$1.00 lower than the average highest price (US$6.44). Military retail prices were 2.1%, 6.2% and 13.7% higher than the lowest, average and highest community comparisons, respectively, and 18.2% of exchange prices violated pricing instructions. There was a negative correlation (r=-0.21, p=0.02) between the number of community stores surveyed and exchange cigarette prices.

Conclusions

There was no significant difference between prices for cigarettes on military installations and the lowest average community comparison, and in some locations, the prices violated Department of Defense (DoD) policy. US Marine Corps exchanges had the lowest prices, which is of concern given that the Marines also have the highest rates of tobacco use in the DoD. Given the relationship between tobacco product prices and demand, a common minimum (or floor) shelf price for tobacco products should be set for all exchanges and discount coupon redemptions should be prohibited.

Tobacco use prevalence is unacceptably high in the U.S. military, and the Department of Defense and service branches have implemented tobacco control policies and cessation programs. To explore aspects of programs regarded as exemplary by their services, we visited four installations, nominated by their service's health promotion leaders, and conducted interviews, observations, and focus groups. Installations included Naval Hospital Guam, Tripler Army Medical Center, MacDill Air Force Base, and the Naval Hospital at Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center Twentynine Palms. The tobacco control managers (TCMs) at the programs studied were all civilian employees, highly motivated and enthusiastic, and had remained in their positions for approximately a decade. Other commonalities included support from command, a "culture" of health, and location in warm climates. Programs varied in their involvement in establishing designated tobacco use areas, and length and requirement of attending cessation classes; however, no evaluation of cessation programs is currently underway. TCMs should be more engaged in policy discussions for the larger installations they serve. A strong policy framework and command support for TCMs will be necessary to achieve the goal of a tobacco-free military.

Background

Tobacco use among members of the US military service is unacceptably high, resulting in substantial healthcare and personnel costs. Support of military command is critical to the success of tobacco control policies because line commanders are responsible for implementation and enforcement. This study is the first to examine US military line commanders' perspectives about current tobacco control policies and the impact of tobacco on readiness.

Methods

We conducted key-informant interviews with 20 officers at the US Army's Command and General Staff College about military tobacco use and tobacco control policy.

Results

Participants identified the long-term impact of tobacco use on military members, but were unaware of proximal effects on health and readiness other than lost productivity due to smoke breaks. Officers also discussed nicotine addiction and the logistics of ensuring that an addicted population had access to tobacco. Regarding policy, most knew about regulations governing smoke-free areas and were open to stronger restrictions, but were unaware of current policies governing prevention, intervention and product sales.

Conclusions

Findings suggest that strong policy that takes advantage of the hierarchical and disciplined nature of the military, supported by senior line and civilian leadership up to and including the secretaries of the services and the Secretary of Defense, will be critical to substantially diminishing tobacco use by military personnel.

Achieving a tobacco-free military requires rethinking current perceptions of service members' tobacco use and unmasking the forces perpetuating those perceptions. Prohibiting tobacco use would be entirely consistent with other military requirements regarding health.

Objectives

Although the United States Air Force (USAF) has been a leader in efforts to reduce tobacco use among service members, tobacco continues to be a problem and initiatives to decrease tobacco use further require buy-in from leadership. We explored line leaderships' perspectives on tobacco.

Methods

A diverse group of 10 senior commissioned and 10 non-commissioned personnel were interviewed.

Results

Respondents reported substantial changes in the culture of tobacco use during their years of service, from near ubiquity to restricted use areas. They also perceived mixed messages coming from the USAF, including simultaneous discouragement of and accommodations for tobacco use, and variability in policies and enforcement. Many respondents indicated that allowing tobacco use creates conflict and undermines military discipline and suggested that a tobacco-free policy would be the best way to eliminate these contradictions.

Conclusion

Although there has been substantial movement away from a culture of tobacco in the USAF, current policies and variable enforcement of these policies create unnecessary contradictions. Establishing a tobacco-free service would resolve these issues in addition to improving the health of service members and veterans.