<International Circulation>: It is interesting that the type of mass media campaign you would need would be country or culture specific.

　　《国际循环》：媒体项目的类型在不同国家或文化下有所不同，这很有趣。

Dr Fong: For example， the World Lung Foundation which is Bloomberg funded， did a really interesting campaign a couple of years ago on anti-gifting in China. As you know， there is a huge practice of giving cigarettes as gifts and the structure of China’s cigarette market is uniquely tailored for that gifting through the full price range of the brands available. There is a cost structure and a brand diversification on price that is ideal for the high-end gifts. A significant percentage of smokers have two brands; one that they use every day and one they use for special occasions or as a gift. WLF did a media campaign which was very effective. The tagline was ‘giving cigarettes is giving harm’. ITC is actually evaluating that mass media campaign but have not published that data yet. That is an example that is unique to China. There may be a few other countries where it is applicable， but in China it is quite significant.

　　Fong博士：例如世界肺健基金会开展了一项非常有意思的项目， 是几年前在中国开展的一项反对送礼的活动。你知道，有很多人把烟草作为礼物，中国烟草市场的结构是针对送礼的，各个品牌的所有价位的产品都有可能作为礼物。中国烟草的价格体系和价格的品牌细分使得高端产品是送礼的理想选择。很多吸烟者会抽两个牌子的烟，一个是每天抽的，一个是在特殊场合抽的或者是送人用的。世界肺健基金会开展了一项非常有效的媒体运动。这一运动的宣传语是“送烟就是送危害”。实际上，ITC正在评价公众媒体运动，但是还没有发表数据。这是中国的一个例子。其他可能只有几个国家适合这样的运动，但是对中国来讲这样的运动很有效。

　　<International Circulation>: What types of campaign also would be tolerable to the population? A Truth campaign in China would not go down well with anybody.

　　《国际循环》：哪种类型的运动会适合广大人群？像真相项目这样的项目不会适合中国的所有人？

　　Dr Fong: Media people don’t just release campaigns; they really study it. That same sentiment has been raised as to why Canada doesn’t do something as severe because it may be offensive to the Canadian mentality. But in China， if you don’t even know that smoking is harmful then getting tobacco industry denormalization is nigh impossible. A Truth campaign would not be consistent with the current level of basic knowledge in China. Of course it would not be politically feasible at all， but there needs to be significant education in China to raise awareness especially of secondhand smoke for which the associated range of diseases and causes of death is not generally known. That would promote smoke-free laws as well as， as we have shown in our work at ITC， that smoke-free laws actually promote home smoking bans. Home smoking bans are a significant predictor of quitting. So there is a chain of events that can happen. If there are smoke-free laws and people know why they exist and they are supportive of them then it is firstly， an awareness and constant reminder that tobacco smoking is dangerous and secondly， that if you have a smoke-free law especially in workplaces where you spend eight or nine hours of your day， if you are not allowed to smoke at work then it is a significant amount of time when you are not smoking. It is like a teachable moment where there is the realization that one hasn’t smoked for that number of hours， so maybe I can quit entirely. These teachable moments give opportunities for longer and longer breaks from smoking. If you believe that and are thinking about it from the workplace， then at home the question arises， why am I protecting my fellow workers but not my family and children. We have found in our studies that a smoke-free home environment is a significant precursor to thinking about quitting and ultimately quitting. So there is that chain of events. Raising peoples’ awareness about secondhand smoke could lead to policy change which would then provide the impetus either directly or by a trickle-down effect to have smoke-free environments and therefore promote quitting. China has always ranked near the bottom in terms of awareness and that is a huge take-home message with respect to heart health and the comparative data across countries can be very compelling because we ask it the same way. China is in significant need of improvement in education and awareness for its people on the harms of tobacco use and of secondhand smoke. That is the clear take-home message. What is less known and an even clearer take-home message with respect to our presence here at WCC， is that， whatever is true about cancer and the harms of cancer， it is even truer of heart health.

　　Fong博士：媒体人不止是开展运动，他们还真的对此进行研究。在加拿大也提出了同样的情绪问题，为什么加拿大不采取一些激进的举措，这是由于可能对于加拿大人的情感有所冒犯。但是，在中国，如果公众不知道吸烟有害的话，那么使烟草生产厂家正规化是不可能的。真相项目与中国当前对烟草的基本认知水平是不一致的。当然，在政治上可能不是完全可行，但是我们的确需要在中国积极开展烟草知识教育，以提升公众的认知度，尤其是对二手烟的认知度，因为人们并不知道二手烟相关的一系列疾病，也不知道吸二手烟会导致死亡。这样的教育也会促进无烟法案的制定，我们在ITC的工作证实无烟法案的确能够促进在家中不吸烟。在家中不吸烟是戒烟的一个强有力的预测因子。因此，教育可以引发一系列的事情。如果有无烟法案的话，同时人们知道无烟法案存在的原因并支持它，这样的话这就是一种认知和不断的提醒，它告诉我们吸烟是有害的。另外，如果在工作场合有特别的无烟法案的话，因为我们一天会在工作场合呆上八、九个小时，如果在工作场合禁止吸烟的话，那么就相当于有很长一段时间没有吸烟。这就像是受教育时刻，因为吸烟者可能认识到他已经几个小时没有吸烟了，那他认为自己也许可以彻底戒掉。这些受教育时刻使得吸烟者能够有机会不断延长吸烟的间隔。如果吸烟者相信这些并且在工作场合思考这一问题的话，那么当回到家里的时候，问题就来了：为什么我保护了我的同事们而没有保护我的家人和孩子。我们开展的研究显示，在家里禁烟是吸烟者考虑戒烟和最终戒烟的一个明显的先决条件。所以我们弄清了事件的链条。提升公众对二手烟的认知会导致政策的变化，随后直接或逐级地对无烟环境的建立提供动力，随后促进戒烟。中国在对吸烟危害的认知度上一直处于垫底的位置，关于吸烟对心脏健康的危害是我们要带回去的一个重要信息。不同国家间比较的数据可能是差距很大的，我们提问了相同的问题。中国特别需要改进对吸烟危害的教育，提升公众对吸烟和二手烟危害的认知度。这绝对是重要的信息。还有一个知晓度不那么高的但是却更为清楚的信息是，这是在世界心脏病大会提出的，如果说吸烟会引发癌症和癌症的危害的话，那么吸烟更会引发心血管疾病。