Menace of surrogate advertising of Gutka-tobacco brand advertisement and resultant rampant selling bypassing Gutka ban in State of U.P
Alok Kumar 1  
 
 
More details
Hide details
1
U.P. Health Services, India
Publish date: 2018-03-01
 
Tob. Induc. Dis. 2018;16(Suppl 1):A199
KEYWORDS
WCTOH
 
TOPICS
Download abstract book (PDF)

ABSTRACT
Background and challenges to implementation:
Till 2012 Gutka was selling as different brands like Dabang, Sudh Plus, Shikhar, Kamala Pasand and many more.On 1st April 2012 U.P. govt. FDA department banned Gutka, after that manufacturers came out twin packs of the same brands mentioned above, one having Pan Masala and other one tobacco-chotu thus circumventing the Legislation. In the absence of vendor licensing and also makeshift type of Pan masala and chewable tobacco sellers, it is very difficult to stop selling of twin pack at same outlet, which consumers use either mixing both or separately.

Intervention or response:
Crackdown against surrogate advertisement at prominent traffic intersections, large shopping arcades, in the vicinity of educational establishments and around Govt. Offices/health facilities was done by Anti tobacco committee constituted in each 75 district with the help of Flying squad comprising departments of Health, FDA ,Education, Excise, Labour, Police. Advertisement Materials removed by enforcement squad. Also surrogate selling by retailers were targeted specially around Educational institutions ,Health facilities and Govt. Offices.

Results and lessons learnt:
Resulted in marked decrease in availability of twin sachet of pan masala along with tobacco sachet. Advertisement and hoarding removed from the prominent places.It is inferred, since Pan masala is also a health hazard and a menace to cleanliness also an environmental hazard, need of hour Effective legislation required for ban on availability of pan masala containing many ingredients including arecanut etc.

Conclusions and key recommendations:
There should be strict legislation for surrogate advertising and selling of twin sachet.
Section-4 of COTPA is ineffective in controlling chew able tobacco menace, requires amendment likewise.
Some effective legislation required to crackdown on surrogate advertising and resultant selling of twin sachets. It is perceived that some vendor licencing mechanism promulgated and enacted for retailers would be helpful in identification and regulation of indiscriminate and ambulatory retailers.

eISSN:1617-9625