It would, on the contrary, create a situation much like the one after the last.
war, when "in spite of the shortages "the number of smokers increased.
There would certainly develop a black market, and the use of all sorts of.
ersatz substances would only raise the risks to the health of the users. Prohi-.
bition, therefore, is no solution. (Hess 1996, 55).
.
Page 3.
V.
OLUME.
III, N.
UMBER.
3, W.
INTER.
1999.
F.
O R B I D D E N.
F.
R U I T ✦.
443.
More recently, the focus in the United States has shifted to warnings, restrictions,.
and high taxes rather than prohibition. The decline in cigarette use in the United.
States since 1965, noted earlier, may point to a more effective alternative to prohibi-.
tion in reducing harmful behavior.
A notable exception to the abandonment of prohibition of cigarettes has been.
the prohibition of the sale of cigarettes to minors. The conventional wisdom, of course,.
holds that such prohibition will reduce teen smoking. All fifty states prohibit cigarette.
sales to minors, but a study reported in the New England Journal of Medicine (Rigotti.
and others 1997) finds that such laws are rarely enforced.
To determine whether stronger enforcement efforts would reduce teen smoking,.
the researchers compared six Massachusetts towns, three with increased enforcement.
measures and three as controls. They concluded, "The rate of current tobacco use.
[among teens] rose in the intervention communities but remained stable in controls,.
the reverse of what would have been expected; however this difference was of border-.
line significance (P = .05)- (Rigotti and others 1997, 1048). The researchers speculate.
that teens found it easy to find vendors willing to sell to them in spite of the increased.
enforcement, and that teens found it easy to get cigarettes from adults or to buy them.
in neighboring towns where enforcement was not so strict. Vending machines offered.
another obvious source.
Two previous studies (Jason, Anes, and Birkhead 1991; DiFranza, Carlson, and.