IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

The confounding of occupation and smoking and its consequences

Listed author(s):
  • Sterling, T.
  • Weinkam, J.
Registered author(s):

    A strong pattern in smoking behavior can be demonstrated, in which smoking is much more prevalent among those occupational groups (and social strata) that are also more exposed to hazards in the workplace and much less prevalent among those groups less exposed to such hazards. As a consequence, comparing individuals with greater to those with lesser exposure to tobacco also compares groups that differ with respect to occupational exposure to dust, fumes and toxic substances and with respect to occupationally related lifestyle factors. Analyses of the U.S. National Health Interview Survey show that smoking and occupation are substantially confounded among individuals differing by (1) amount of smoking; (2) smoking cessation; (3) types of cigarettes smoked; (4) age of starting to smoke; and (5) exposure to more or less environmental tobacco smoke at home. This confounding between types of work and proximity to tobacco smoke may have masked relationships between type of employment and disease. But it is difficult to disentangle the effects of occupation and of smoking from each other without well planned further studies because (1) of the difficulty of estimating occupational effects and simultaneously adjusting for healthy worker effects, (2) satisfactory techniques for estimating relative effects of intertwined variables make demands on the quality and quantity of data that are not met by presently available data, and (3) there may be deeply rooted social and psychological attitudes toward effects of work versus effects of lifestyles that tend to bias investigative work.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Social Science & Medicine.

    Volume (Year): 30 (1990)
    Issue (Month): 4 (January)
    Pages: 457-467

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:30:y:1990:i:4:p:457-467
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    Order Information: Postal:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:30:y:1990:i:4:p:457-467. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.