the medical literature mentioned tobacco smoking as a possible factor in causing mouth and lip cancer, there was no consensus in the medical profession. This consensus was achieved in 1950, with the publication of five studies, four in the United States and one in the United Kingdom showing the link between smoking and lung cancer (Peto and others 2000). These medical findings were echoed in the popular press in 1953 in the ‘‘Reader’s Digest’’ and in ‘‘Consumer Report’’ (United States Government 1989; Cutler and Kadiyala 2003; Viscusi 1992). In 1964, the publication of the first Surgeon General’s Report (United States Government 1964) gives the endorsement of the government and disseminates the information to a larger public. The release of this report has been ranked one the most important news event of 1964 (United States Government 2004). It marks the beginning of awareness campaigns and prevention efforts. In 1966, a first health warning was made mandatory on cigarettes packages. The wording was rather timid: ‘‘ _Caution: Cigarette Smoking May be Hazardous to Your Health’’_ . Long debates in Washington (National Conference on Smoking and Health 1970) brought in a stronger language in 1970 _:_ “ _Warning: The Surgeon General Has Determined that Cigarette Smoking is Dangerous to Your Health._ ” Given the overwhelming majority of literate smokers in 1970, the health damaging consequences of smoking can be considered as common knowledge by then. The period 1950-1970 can thus be interpreted as a period of gradual diffusion of that information and it is reasonable to expect the more educated individuals to have had access to that information earlier in that period. How did this differential access to information impact smoking behaviors? This part of the paper will address this question.

# **_2.1 Data_**

The problem in studying smoking behaviors before and after the health damaging consequences of smoking became widely public is the lack of data linking smoking prevalence and education category before 1966. The first smoking supplement included in the National Health Interview Survey dates from 1965<sup>3</sup> , and in 1966 education categories were included (United States Government 2004).<sup>4</sup> 3 Gallup surveys about tobacco use were available as soon as 1949, but do not classify the respondents by education category (Cutler and Kadiyala 2003; Viscusi 1992).

4 The only statistics taken from current surveys where some information about the relationship between smoking and education levels is available are from the United Kingdom (Wald 1988). In 1948, men from almost all ‘‘social classes’’ were smoking at a very similar and very high level (between 64 and 72 percent). Only the lower ‘‘class’’, i.e., manual workers earning less than 7£ per week were smoking significantly less (45 percent). By 1985, the situation had reversed: the education/smoking gradient was clearly negative (smoking prevalence among skilled and partly skilled manual occupations was 40 percent; 34 percent among skilled manual occupations; 28 percent for clerical and lower professional, and 20 percent for professional clerical occupations). To get information about the level of smoking prevalence in the U.S. population before 1966, most studies rely on sales data to compute the per capita number of cigarettes consumed per year (United States Government 1994). This approach does not allow disaggregating consumption of cigarettes by education categories.

3