They're bad when the tobacco industry presents itself as doing something about youth smoking when in fact industry documents show the programs are part of a strategy to avoid regulation.

Why are you saying the programs are ineffetive?

Reducing youth acess to tobacco industry products is a component of the most comprehensive tobacco control programs, but, after a decade of study, there is considerable doubt whether reducing acess in fact reduces consumption.

Is it really fair to say the tobacco companies are deliberately engaging in progarms they know have litle effect?

Over the years, tobacco industry documents make it clear that their youth access programs have little or nothing to do with reducing youth smoking. Documents made public in the U.S show that the industry hopes to counteract federal state and local restrictions on advertising by:

*providing persuasive evidence that the industry is actively discouraging youth smoking;

re-inforcing the belief that peer pressure- not advertisng- is the cause of youth smoking;

*seizing the political centre and forcing anti-smokers to appear extreme.

Plus, even if there are no ulterior motives, our analysis of the effort and the volume of materials suggest that the programs just can't be effective.

What's wrong with the community groups supporting these benevolent efforts by the tobacco companies?

Compresensive tobacco control programs must include community involvememt among other things. It's not surprising that community groups with an interest in the welfare of young people would see a program ostensibly designed to reduce youth access to tobacco as laudable.