Australia argued that its objective was to reduc[e] smoking rates in Australia by reducing the appeal of tobacco products, increasing the effectiveness of graphic health warnings, and reducing the ability of packages to mislead consumers about the harms of smoking.[6] The complainants attempted to define Australias objective narrowly as reducing smoking prevalence.[7] The panel found the objective to be related to the protection of human health, in particular to improve public health by reducing the use of, and exposure to, tobacco products.[8] The panel also found that Australias objective was legitimate.[9] Viewing Australias public health objective broadly was a pivotal decision that effected the panels other findings
tuberculosis ) among controls, but was not found to be significantly different between smoking and non-smoking TB patients (who were known to be infected)
[22] Koegler, S.M., Seidler, F.J., Spencer, J.R
Archived from the original on February 22, 2020
Between 2011 and 2024, the proportion of high school students who considered it "very easy" to obtain cigarettes, alcohol, or cannabis declined significantly, reflecting the potential impact of public policies aimed at preventing and controlling access to these substances