U.S. adult perceptions of the harmfulness of tobacco products: descriptive findings from the 2013-14 baseline wave 1 of the path study

Socioecological factors associated with multiple nicotine product use among U.S. youth: Findings from the population assessment of tobacco and health (PATH) study 2013-2018

OBJECTIVE

This study utilized a socioecological approach to prospectively identify intrapersonal, familial, and environmental factors associated with single nicotine product use (NPU) and multiple NPU among U.S. youth.

METHODS

Participants were 10,029 youths (ages 12-17 years) who had completed the Population Assessment of Tobacco Health study's Wave 1 (2013-2014) and Wave 4 (2016-2018) assessments and data on past 30-day nicotine product use. Multinomial logistic regression was fit for the 3-level outcome (no use, single NPU, multiple NPU) to estimate adjusted associations between the predictors and the outcome.

RESULTS

The current study found that intrapersonal (sex, age, race/ethnicity, internalizing symptoms, sensation seeking, harm perceptions, lifetime history of using two or more tobacco products), familial (parental discussion about not using tobacco and living with someone who uses tobacco products) and environmental factors (exposure to tobacco advertising) commonly associated with tobacco use differentiated between individuals who later reported past 30-day NPU (either multiple or single NPU) from those who did not report past 30-day NPU. One familial factor only differentiated between lifetime users who were single NPUs from those who reported no NPU: non-combustible tobacco product use allowed anywhere in the home. Intrapersonal factors differentiated multiple NPU from single NPU: older age, being male, lifetime history of using nicotine product and less harm perceptions.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified factors that may be studied to prevent any NPU, along with factors that may be studied to promote harm reduction by preventing escalation of single NPU to problematic patterns of multiple NPU.

Cigarettes and e-cigarettes use among US adults with multimorbidity

Background

Tobacco use leads to multiple illnesses. Yet, the effects of different categories of tobacco use on multimorbidity remain understudied. We investigated the associations between tobacco use categories and multimorbidity and the potential moderating effects of age, sex, or race/ethnicity among adults in the United States.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional analysis using pooled data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System for the years 2020-2022. Multimorbidity was ascertained through self-reported ≥2 chronic health conditions. We categorized tobacco use into nine derived from nonuse (did not use e-cigarettes or cigarettes), former cigarette or e-cigarette use, current (used on some days/everyday) cigarette use or e-cigarette use, or both (dual use). We used multinomial logistic regression to investigate the associations while accounting for potential confounding factors.

Results

Within the sample (N=1,080,257), 28.2% reported multimorbidity. For the categories examined (former exclusive e-cigarette, exclusive e-cigarette, former exclusive cigarette, former dual, former cigarette/current e-cigarette, exclusive cigarette, current cigarette/former e-cigarette and dual use), all reported higher odds of having multimorbidity compared to those who reported nonuse of both e-cigarettes and cigarettes. We found significant interactions for age, sex and race/ethnicity with the tobacco use categories for multimorbidity (p<0.01), where stronger associations were observed among younger adults, females and non-Hispanic Multiracial for current dual use (p<0.05).

Conclusions

The use of cigarettes, e-cigarettes, or both was associated with multimorbidity among adults, which was more pronounced among younger adults, females and non-Hispanic Multiracial. These findings underscore the importance of implementing targeted public health interventions to mitigate the health risks associated with using both products, particularly among specific demographics, to reduce the prevalence of multimorbidity.

Smokers' perception of the comparative health risks of cigarettes, e-cigarettes and heated tobacco products: a survey among the German population

BACKGROUND

Tobacco cigarettes, e-cigarettes and heated tobacco products can pose different health risks (harm continuum). As current tobacco smokers could benefit from switching to less harmful products, we aimed to assess current smokers' perceived comparative health risks of these three products and to explore associations between risk perceptions and specific user characteristics.

METHODS

We analysed data from 11 waves (2019-2021; N = 5657 current tobacco smokers) of a representative, cross-sectional household survey conducted in Germany. Associations were assessed with multivariable logistic regression models.

RESULTS

55.2% of smokers (95%CI = 53.8-56.5%) ranked cigarettes as the most harmful product. 36.1% of smokers (95%CI = 34.8-37.3%) perceived e-cigarettes and 33.8% (95%CI = 32.5-35.0%) heated tobacco products as more harmful than cigarettes. Misperceptions that e-cigarettes or heated tobacco products are more harmful to health than cigarettes increased over the 3-year study period and were more common among those with lower educational attainment.

CONCLUSIONS

Only half of current tobacco smokers in Germany perceive the comparative health risks of cigarettes adequately and such misperceptions have increased recently. As current smokers could benefit most from switching to less harmful products, educational campaigns are needed to inform this group about the health risks of tobacco smoking and the comparative health risks of the various nicotine and tobacco products along the harm continuum.

Does noticing cigar warnings associate with cigar harm perceptions and smoking behaviors? Analysis from Wave 5 of the population assessment of tobacco and health study

BACKGROUND

In the US, cigar warning label standards are less stringent than cigarette warning requirements and are not uniformly required; research is needed about warning efficacy in promoting cigar risk beliefs, discouraging use and supporting public health.

METHODS

Using data from the PATH Study (Wave 5), we analyzed associations between noticing cigar warnings and perceived harm from cigar use, frequency of thinking about harms, and effects of warnings labels.

RESULTS

Among adults who smoke cigars, respondents noticing warnings at least sometimes (vs. never/rarely) had higher odds of thinking about harms of their tobacco use often/very often (cigarillos 30% vs. 19%, p <.001, aOR 1.80 [1.27, 2.56]); filtered cigars: 43% vs. 16%, p <.001, aOR 3.81 [2.50, 5.82]) and of reporting that smoking cigars is very/extremely harmful (cigarillos: 59% vs. 46%, p =.001, aOR 1.45 [1.05, 1.99]). A substantial majority found cigar warnings to be very/extremely believable (cigarillos: 63%, filtered cigars: 59%, traditional cigars: 65%), with 16%, 24% and 12% respectively reporting past-30-day warning avoidance. Those noticing warnings at least sometimes (vs. rarely) had higher rates of reporting that warnings sometimes/often/very often stopped them from having a cigar in the past 30 days (cigarillos: 36% vs. 10%; filtered cigars: 50% versus 6%; traditional cigars: 30% versus 9%; p's < 0.001) and that warnings made them somewhat/a lot more likely to quit smoking (cigarillos: 55% versus 37%, p <.01; filtered cigars: 55% versus 26%, p <.001; traditional cigars: 39% vs. 24%, p <.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Results support potential public health benefits of mandating the presence and increasing salience of cigar warning labels.

Effects of Modified Risk Tobacco Product Claims on Consumer Responses

INTRODUCTION

US tobacco manufacturers can seek authorization from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to market products using modified risk tobacco product (MRTP) claims. To inform regulatory decisions, we examined the impact of MRTP claim specificity and content, including whether the claims produced halo effects (ie, inferring health benefits beyond what is stated).

AIMS AND METHODS

Participants were 3161 US adult cigarette smokers. Using a two (general vs. specific) × 2 (risk vs. exposure) plus independent control design, we randomized participants to view one message from these conditions: general risk claim (eg, "smoking-related diseases"), general exposure claim (eg, "chemicals in smoke"), specific risk claim (eg, "lung cancer"), specific exposure claim (eg, "arsenic"), or control. Claims described the benefits of completely switching from cigarettes to the heated tobacco product IQOS.

RESULTS

MRTP claims of any sort elicited a higher willingness to try IQOS relative to control (d = 0.09, p = .043). Claims also elicited lower perceived risk of disease and exposure to harmful chemicals for completely switching from cigarettes to IQOS (d = -0.32 and -0.31) and partially switching (d = -0.25 and d = -0.26; all p < .05). Relative to specific MRTP claims, general MRTP claims led to lower perceived risk and exposure for complete switching (d = -0.13 and d = -0.16) and partial switching (d = -0.14 and d = -0.12; all p < .05). Risk and exposure MRTP claims had similar effects (all p > .05).

DISCUSSION

MRTP claims led to lower perceived risk and exposure, and higher willingness to try IQOS. General claims elicited larger effects than specific claims. MRTP claims also promoted unintended halo effects (eg, lower perceived risk of disease and chemical exposure for partial switching).

IMPLICATIONS

We found evidence that MRTP claims promoted health halo effects. In light of these findings, the FDA should require research on halo effects prior to authorization. Further, if an MRTP claim is authorized, FDA should require tobacco manufacturers to conduct post-market surveillance of how the claim affects consumer understanding, including partial switching perceived risk and exposure beliefs, as well as monitoring of dual-use behaviors.

Patterns of use, perceptions, and cardiopulmonary health risks of cigar products: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

A systematic review was conducted to evaluate the use patterns, health perceptions, and cardiopulmonary health effects of cigars.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed and Google Scholar were searched for peer-reviewed articles published between June 2014 and February 2021. Search keywords included cigars, cigarillos, little cigars, and cardiopulmonary health outcomes.

STUDY SELECTION

Of 782 papers identified, we excluded non-English articles, review articles, commentaries, and those without empirical data on cigars. Three coders independently reviewed all articles and compared codes to resolve discrepancies. 93 articles met the inclusion criteria and were included.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Cigars have evolved from premium cigars to encompass little cigars and cigarillos (LCCs). LCCs are available in an array of flavors and at a price advantage, and as a result, are used by different groups compared to premium cigars. LCCs are more frequently used by youth, young adults, and those who identify as Black/African American. LCCs are often used in combination with other tobacco products, alcohol, and cannabis. Despite limited regulation, cigars generate smoke of a similar composition as cigarettes. Among the studies identified, evidence suggests that cigar use is associated with cardiovascular and pulmonary toxicity. Higher all-cause and cancer-related mortalities are associated with cigar use, particularly with more frequent and deeper inhalation, compared to non-tobacco users.

CONCLUSIONS

LCCs are used more frequently by at-risk groups compared to premium cigars. Recent studies evaluating cigar cardiopulmonary health effects are limited but suggest cigars have similar health risks as conferred by cigarette smoking. With the use of LCCs and targeted marketing on the rise among high-risk groups, there is a critical need for continued research in this area.

Cannabis Vape Product Sales in California Following CDC's Initial Advisory About Lung Injuries

Introduction: The 2019 outbreak of e-cigarette or vaping product use-associated lung injury (EVALI) is believed to have been caused by vitamin E acetate, an additive used in some cannabis vaporizer products. Previous studies have primarily focused on changes in sales of electronic nicotine delivery systems following the initial advisory issued by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on August 17, 2019. The present study is intended to examine variation by age groups in sales of regulated cannabis vape products in the state of California before, during, and after the outbreak. Methods: Weekly sales revenue of cannabis vape products (from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2020) was obtained from a sample of recreational cannabis retailers licensed in California. An interrupted time series analysis, using AutoRegressive, Integrated, Moving Average methods, was employed to estimate changes in the sales and market share of cannabis vape products in the weeks following the CDC advisory. Results: The total volume of regulated cannabis vape product sales increased substantially over the 3-year study period (2018-2020). Sales and market share of cannabis vape products, however, declined in both young and older adults immediately following the advisory, rebounding to pre-EVALI levels only for the young adults. For sales, the potential EVALI effect following the CDC's advisory equates to an 8.0% and 2.2% decline below expected levels in the older and young adults, respectively. Conclusions: The differential age effect on sales may reflect concerns regarding health effects of cannabis vaping products and greater awareness of the outbreak among older adults. Findings highlight the importance of informing consumers about health risks associated with using cannabis vape products acquired from regulated versus illicit sources.

Effects of Modified Tobacco Risk Products with Claims and Nicotine Features on Perceptions among Racial and Ethnic Groups

Research suggests consumers may misunderstand modified risk tobacco product (MRTP) claims. We examined the effects of nicotine content across four tobacco products with and without MRTP claims among a racially and ethnically diverse sample of adults who do and do not smoke. Adults (n = 1484) aged 21-65 completed an online experiment using a 2 × 2 × 4 mixed factorial design to examine the effects of tobacco product (Classic White Snus, IQOS, JUUL e-cigarette, and VLN cigarette) and nicotine content (high vs. low) stratified by MRTP claim (present vs. absent) across four outcomes: (1) likely to try (2) serious disease if used regularly, (3) least addictive, and (4) ease of quitting smoking. Not including an MRTP claim resulted in an increased likelihood of trying a product, decreased concern of serious disease, lower perceived addictiveness, and increased ease of quitting smoking. Participants selected low nicotine IQOS without a claim as the least likely to cause serious disease. Low nicotine JUUL, without a claim, was selected as least addictive and most likely to facilitate quitting. Intentions to try were highest for low nicotine JUUL. Participants selected low-nicotine products as less addictive than high nicotine products. Regulatory efforts should consider how MRTP claims interact with different product characteristics. Subtle differences exist across outcomes between racial and ethnic groups, which indicates that further research is warranted.

Effect of a 'tobacco-free nicotine' claim on intentions and perceptions of Puff Bar e-cigarette use among non-tobacco-using young adults

INTRODUCTION

Puff Bar disposable e-cigarettes are now marketed with a 'tobacco-free nicotine' claim. We assessed the effect of this claim on non-tobacco-using young adults' perceptions of and intentions of using Puff Bar.

METHODS

We conducted an online randomised between-subjects experiment among non-tobacco-using young adults (ages 18-29 years; n=1822). Participants viewed depictions of Puff Bar e-cigarettes with the claim that the product contains 'tobacco-free nicotine' (experimental group; n=909) or simply 'nicotine' (control group; n=913). Multivariable regressions were used to assess the associations between experimental conditions and Puff Bar use intentions, harm perceptions, use expectancies and perceived relative use of Puff Bar versus other e-cigarettes, controlling for participant characteristics.

RESULTS

Compared with the control group, the experimental group who saw the 'tobacco-free nicotine' claim reported higher intentions of using Puff Bar (coefficient=0.17, p<0.001). The experimental group had a lower likelihood of perceiving Puff Bar use as 'extremely or very harmful' (OR=0.63, p<0.001) and 'strongly or somewhat' agreeing with the negative expectancy of using Puff Bar (OR=0.67, p<0.001). Additionally, the experimental group reported being 'much more or more likely' to use Puff Bar over other e-cigarettes (OR=1.67, p<0.001).

DISCUSSION

Puff Bar's tobacco-free nicotine claim may increase non-tobacco-using young adults' intentions of using Puff Bar and reduce harm perceptions and negative expectancy towards using Puff Bar. The claim may also prompt the use of Puff Bar over other e-cigarette brands and types. These findings are concerning given the health effects and regulations for tobacco-free nicotine products are not immediately clear.

Associations of recreational cannabis dispensaries' availability, storefront signage and health benefit signs with cannabis use: findings from a representative adult sample in California, United States

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

There are concerns that availability of recreational cannabis dispensaries (RCDs) and point-of-sale marketing may lead to increased cannabis use in jurisdictions where cannabis retail sale is legal. This paper examined whether the availability RCDs and the presence of storefront signage indicative of cannabis and signs promoting health benefits in RCDs were associated with cannabis use and risk perceptions.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional, secondary data analysis.

SETTING

California, USA.

PARTICIPANTS

A representative sample of 3385 adults in California who participated in the 2020 probability-based Marijuana Use and Environment Survey.

MEASUREMENTS

Binary outcomes included past-month overall cannabis use, perceiving cannabis smoking as harmful and past-month cannabis use by purpose (medical only, recreational only and dual). The objectively assessed predictors included proximity and density of RCDs and presence of storefront signage indicative of cannabis and signs promoting health benefits in RCDs.

FINDINGS

In terms of proximity, thepresence of storefront signage in the nearest RCD was associated with smaller odds of perceiving cannabis smoking as harmful [odds ratio (OR) = 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.39, 0.99] if the RCD was located within 2 miles of home. Presence of health benefit signs in the nearest RCD was associated with greater odds of overall cannabis use (OR = 2.45, 95% CI = 1.17, 5.16) and recreational use (OR = 3.50, 95% CI = 1.027, 11.91) if the RCD was located within 2-4 miles of home. In terms of density, count of RCDs, count of RCDs with storefront signage and count of RCDs with health benefit signs within 2 miles of home were each separately associated with greater odds of overall cannabis use and cannabis use for dual purposes.

CONCLUSIONS

The availability of recreational cannabis dispensaries within 2 miles of one's home and the presence of storefront signage indicating the availability of cannabis and signs promoting health benefits of cannabis appear to be associated with increased cannabis use and reduced risk perceptions among adults in California, USA.

Public Perceptions and Discussions of Premium Cigars on Reddit

Introduction

While premium cigars have similar addictive, toxic, and carcinogenic constituents as other cigars and cigarettes, about 1% of the US adults reported premium cigar use from 2010 to 2019. This study aimed to understand public perceptions and discussions of premium cigars on Reddit, one of the most popular social media platforms.

Methods

Using keywords such as "premium cigar", we extracted 2,238 Reddit posts from Reddit Archive between July 2019 and June 2021. Among them, 1,626 posts were related to premium cigars. By employing the inductive approach, we manually coded each Reddit post on premium cigars to understand public perceptions and discussions of premium cigars by summarizing them into different topics and subtopics.

Results

Longitudinal analysis showed that the number of Reddit posts on premium cigars increased since June 2020. Content analysis showed that among Reddit posts related to premium cigars, the most popular topic is "Information sharing" (75.72%), in which Reddit users shared their perceptions about premium cigars, asked for advice, and provided some recommendations about premium cigars. Over one-quarter of posts (27.17%) are sharing user experiences of premium cigars (such as taste). Nearly one-fifth (18.99%) of posts are discussing the affordability of premium cigars. In addition, 7.87% of posts are discussing legal/policy issues related to premium cigars, and 6.82% of posts are related to the health risks of premium cigars compared to cigarettes.

Conclusions

Public perceptions including misperceptions, user experiences, and affordability related to premium cigars have been actively discussed on Reddit.

Youths' Perceptions of Nicotine Harm and Associations With Product Use

INTRODUCTION

Although nicotine is the main addictive substance in tobacco, tobacco combustion is responsible for most tobacco-related diseases. U.S. adults hold misperceptions about nicotine harm. However, little is known about youth nicotine perceptions.

AIMS AND METHODS

To address this gap, we assessed U.S. youths' nicotine perceptions and how these perceptions relate to tobacco use. Participants were youth (ages 12-17) in waves 4 (w4; December 2016-January 2018; N = 14 798) and 4.5 (w4.5; December 2017-December 2018; N = 12 918) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study, a nationally representative longitudinal cohort study. We describe beliefs about nicotine; perceptions of the nicotine harm in cigarettes, e-cigarettes, and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT); and demographic differences. Regressions assess whether w4 nicotine perceptions predicted w4.5 tobacco use.

RESULTS

Most youth correctly responded that nicotine is the main cause of addiction (77.1%) but incorrectly responded that nicotine is the main substance that causes smoking-related cancer (74.7%). Youth distinguished between the harm of nicotine in different products, and on average rated the nicotine in cigarettes as most harmful, followed by e-cigarettes and NRT. Among youth who did not use at w4, greater harm perceptions of nicotine in cigarettes, e-cigarettes, and NRT were associated with lower likelihood of reporting current tobacco use at w4.5. Among youth who currently used cigarettes or e-cigarettes at wave 4, nicotine perceptions did not predict switching to e-cigarettes or cigarettes, respectively, at wave 4.5.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings underscore the challenge of developing effective and comprehensive communication strategies that accurately convey the effects of nicotine without encouraging tobacco use.

IMPLICATIONS

Many U.S. adults have misperceptions about nicotine, incorrectly believing it is the substance that causes most smoking-related cancers; studies have not assessed youth's perceptions of nicotine and how these perceptions relate to tobacco use. This study found that similar to adults, most youth incorrectly believed nicotine is the main substance that causes smoking-related cancer; youth also distinguish between the harmfulness of nicotine in different products, and rated the nicotine in cigarettes as most harmful, followed by e-cigarettes and NRT. Perceptions of the harm in different nicotine and tobacco products negatively predicted becoming a person who used tobacco a year later, but did not predict switching between e-cigarettes and cigarettes. Findings highlight the challenges of accurately communicating about the harms of nicotine without encouraging tobacco use; findings can be considered in the context of FDA's potential nicotine product standard that would lower nicotine levels in combustible tobacco products to a minimally or nonaddictive level.

The Effects of Oral Nicotine Pouch Packaging Features on Adult Tobacco Users' and Non-Users' Product Perceptions

BACKGROUND

Oral nicotine pouches (ONPs) are novel products that are marketed as "tobacco-free" alternatives to cigarettes and smokeless tobacco (ST). This study examined the effects of ONP packaging features on adult tobacco users' and non-users' product perceptions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Adult tobacco users (cigarettes, ST, and dual cigarette/ST) and non-users (total N = 301) viewed ONP pack images in a 4 × 3 × 2 between-subject experiment testing the effects of the displayed flavor (cool mint, coffee, dark frost, and smooth), nicotine concentration (none displayed on the package, 3 mg, and 6 mg), and addiction warning label (yes or no). The outcomes were perceived substitutability of ONPs for cigarettes and ST and perceived risks. We modeled the effects of tobacco user status and the experimental factors on these outcomes.

RESULTS

All tobacco user groups perceived ONPs to be significantly less harmful and less addictive than non-users. There were significant effects of nicotine concentration on perceived risks. Compared to packages that did not display nicotine concentration, packages displaying 6 mg nicotine concentration produced significantly lower perceived harm (β = -0.23, 95% CI -0.44, -0.02), perceived addictiveness (β = -0.28, 95% CI -0.51, -0.05), risk appraisals of harm (β = -0.50, 95% CI -0.88, -0.12) and risk appraisals of addictiveness (β = -0.53, 95% CI -0.95, -0.11).

CONCLUSIONS

The study findings demonstrate that the nicotine concentration displayed on ONP packaging can affect adults' perceptions of ONPs. Further research on the effects of ONP packaging features emphasizing nicotine (e.g., "tobacco free" nicotine claims) on tobacco users and non-users is needed to assess their potential public health impact.

Effect of a hypothetical modified risk tobacco product claim on heated tobacco product use intention and perceptions in young adults

INTRODUCTION

Modified risk tobacco product (MRTP) claims for heated tobacco products (HTPs) that convey reduced exposure compared with conventional cigarettes may promote product initiation and transition among young people. We assessed the effects of a hypothetical MRTP claim for HTPs on young adults' intention and perceptions of using HTPs and whether these effects differed by their current cigarette and e-cigarette use.

METHODS

We embedded a randomised between-subjects experiment into a web-based survey administered among a cohort of 2354 Southern California young adults (aged 20-23) in 2020. Participants viewed depictions of HTPs with an MRTP claim (n=1190) or no claim (n=1164). HTP use intention and HTP-related harm and use perceptions relative to cigarettes and e-cigarettes were assessed.

RESULTS

Overall, participants who viewed versus did not view the claim did not differ in HTP use intention (28.5% vs 28.7%) but were more likely to perceive HTPs as less harmful than cigarettes (11.4% vs 7.0%; p<0.001). The experimental effect on HTP use intention did not differ among past 30-day cigarette smokers versus non-smokers (interaction adjusted OR (AOR)=0.78, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.76) but differed among past 30-day e-cigarette users versus non-users (interaction AOR=1.67, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.68).

DISCUSSION

The hypothetical MRTP claim may lower young adults' HTP harm perceptions compared with cigarettes but may not change HTP use intention overall or differentially for cigarette smokers. The larger effect on HTP use intention among e-cigarette users than non-users raises the question of whether MRTP claims may promote HTP use or HTP and e-cigarette dual use among young e-cigarette users.

'95% less harmful'? Exploring reactions to quantitative modified risk claims for snus and e-cigarettes

OBJECTIVES

Studies examining perceptions of 'modified risk tobacco product' (MRTP) messages for e-cigarettes and smokeless tobacco have indicated consumers want statistics and quantification of harm reduction. However, limited research exists on reactions to quantitative MRTP messages.

DESIGN

We conducted 12 focus groups in the USA in 2019-6 focused on e-cigarette messages and 6 on snus messages. Eight groups were with current smokers (ages 21-66) and four with young adult (ages 18-25) non-smokers (n=57). Participants discussed messages stating that use of snus and vaping products have been estimated by scientists to be about 90% and 95% less harmful than smoking cigarettes, respectively.

RESULTS

Several participants agreed the messages strongly communicated that the products are less harmful than cigarettes, were attention getting and could be 'convincing'. However, participants expressed scepticism about the source and accuracy of the stated figures, and some noted the claims could be misleading and attractive to young people. Comments also reflected some claim misunderstandings (eg, that e-cigarettes only pose a 5% chance of harm). Participants also agreed that stating e-cigarette risks 'are unlikely to exceed 5% of cigarette smoking harms' was confusing and less impactful than the '95% less harmful' wording.

CONCLUSIONS

Quantitative claims suggesting high levels of reduced risk when comparing e-cigarettes or smokeless tobacco/snus relative to cigarettes may be successful in gaining attention and being persuasive for some audiences, particularly, if from more credible sources. However, message developers, users and evaluators should be mindful of message limitations and aim to mitigate unintended consequences.

US adult smokers' perceived relative risk on ENDS and its effects on their transitions between cigarettes and ENDS

Background

Perceived risk reduction motivates smokers to switch to electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS). This research examines US smokers’ relative risk perceptions and their prospective association with various behavioral stages of switching to ENDS.

Methods

Data from the nationally representative, longitudinal Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Adult survey, Waves 1 (2014) through 5 (2019), were analyzed. We assessed the association between the perceived risk of ENDS relative to cigarettes (“less harmful” vs. “equally harmful” or “more harmful”) and 1) adoption of ENDS (among never-ENDS-using smokers), 2) complete switching to ENDS (i.e., stopping smoking, among ever-ENDS-using smokers), and 3) avoiding reversion to smoking (among smokers who had switched to ENDS), at the next wave.

Results

The proportion of US smokers perceiving ENDS as less harmful than cigarettes continually decreased, reaching 17.4% in Wave 5 (2019). Current smokers with such belief were more likely to adopt ENDS (aOR 1.31; 95% CI 1.15–1.50) and switch completely to ENDS (aOR 2.24; 95% CI 1.89–2.65) in the subsequent wave. Among smokers who had switched within the past year, such beliefs predicted avoidance of resumption of smoking in the next wave (aOR 0.55; 95% CI 0.33–0.93).

Conclusions

Smokers’ beliefs about the relative risk of ENDS compared to cigarettes had a strong and consistent association with transitions between smoking and ENDS use. Addressing the growing misperception about ENDS has the potential to contribute to public health by encouraging smokers’ switching to ENDS.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-022-14168-8.

The Economics of Tobacco Regulation: A Comprehensive Review

Tobacco regulation has been a major component of health policy in the developed world since the UK Royal College of Physicians' and the US Surgeon General's reports in the 1960s. Such regulation, which has intensified in the past two decades, includes cigarette taxation, place-based smoking bans in areas ranging from bars and restaurants to workplaces, and regulations designed to make tobacco products less desirable. More recently, the availability of alternative products, most notably e-cigarettes, has increased dramatically, and these products are just starting to be regulated. Despite an extensive body of research on tobacco regulations, there remains substantial debate regarding their effectiveness, and ultimately, their impact on economic welfare. We provide the first comprehensive review of the state of research in the economics of tobacco regulation in two decades.

Risk perception of IQOS™ and cigarettes: Temporal and cross-country comparisons

Background

Risk perception (RP) is central to smokers’ decision to switch to smoke-free tobacco and nicotine products (TNP). This study assessed temporal trends in the health RP of a novel heated tobacco product, IQOS^TM, relative to cigarettes, among current IQOS^TM users.

Methods

The analyses included repeated cross-sectional data from online surveys in Germany (2018–19), Italy (2018–19), and Japan (2016–17, 2017–18, and 2018–19) among a random sample of current adult IQOS^TM users from local registers of IQOS^TM users. The health RPs of cigarettes and IQOS^TM were assessed using the ABOUT™–Perceived Risk instrument, and their difference was described as the relative RP of IQOS^TM to cigarettes (RP_Cig:IQOS^TM).

Results

After adjustment for covariates, the relative RP_Cig:IQOS^TM was higher in 2018 than in 2019 (0.93; standard error, 0.33; P = 0.005). This was driven by an increase in the RP of IQOS^TM over time in Italy (2018: 42.6 [95% CI, 41.6–43.5]; 2019: 44.4 [43.4–45.4]) and Japan (2017: 44.0 [43.1–44.9); 2018: 45.9 [45.2–46.7]; 2019: 48.6 [47.9–49.4]), while the RP of cigarettes remained stable.

Conclusions

The relative RP of IQOS^TM decreased over time, driven by an increase in the RP of IQOS^TM, in agreement with epidemiological studies indicating a temporal reduction in the relative RP of smoke-free TNPs. Continued surveillance of the RP of novel TNPs is warranted to inform effective TNP risk communication and ensure that adults smokers who would otherwise continue to smoke understand the relative risks of novel TNPs.

•

Risk perception is central to smokers' decision to switch from cigarettes.

•

Little is known of temporal changes in risk perception of novel tobacco products.

•

Risk perception of heated tobacco increased in Italy and Japan.

•

Difference in risk perception of heated tobacco relative to cigarettes declined.

Perceived harm of heated tobacco products, e-cigarettes, and nicotine replacement therapy compared with conventional cigarettes among ever and current heated tobacco users

•

Hungarian HTP users similarly perceive the harm of HTPs and NRT.

•

Compared to CCs, HTP users perceive HTPs less harmful than of e-cigarettes.

•

Current and exclusive HTP users more likely perceive HTPs as less harmful than CCs.

•

HTP users have distorted harm perceptions of nicotine products.

Aims

There is limited knowledge on how ever and current heated tobacco product (HTP) users perceive the relative harm of various nicotine-containing products. The aim of this study was to explore relative harm perceptions of HTPs, e-cigarettes, and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) relative to conventional cigarettes (CCs) among ever versus current HTP users, and exclusive (who use only a HTP) versus dual/poly-users (concurrent users of HTP and CCs and/or e-cigarettes).

Methods

Data came from 1423 ever or current Hungarian adult HTP users who participated in a cross-sectional web-based survey in 2020. Unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression analyses were performed to explore the associations between relative harm perceptions, HTP use patterns, past tobacco use, HTP dependence, and socio-demographic variables.

Results

81.2% of the sample was current HTP users, of them 78.4% were exclusive HTP users. Compared to CCs, 86.2% of the sample perceived HTP to be less harmful, with current and exclusive HTP users endorsing more this belief, followed by NRT (79.8%), and e-cigarettes (45.2%). In general, neither socio-demographic variables nor past tobacco use, HTP use pattern, and HTP dependence were related to perceived harmfulness across the tested products. However, there was a specific pattern for each tested product with a set of explanatory variables.

Conclusions

Ever/current HTP users presented misperceptions about the harms of HTPs, e-cigarettes, and NRT. They underestimated the potential health benefits of NRT and had distorted harm perceptions about HTPs and e-cigarettes. Public education about the relative harms of different nicotine and tobacco products is urgently needed.

Perception of Harmfulness of Various Tobacco Products and E-Cigarettes in Poland: A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Survey

Perceptions of the harmfulness of tobacco products may be a determinant of smoking behaviors. This study aimed to: (1) assess the perception of harmfulness of various tobacco products and e-cigarettes in Poland as well as (2) to assess the awareness of the health effects of using tobacco and e-cigarettes. A cross-sectional survey was conducted in 2019 with a nationally representative sample of 1011 individuals aged 15 and over. In the studied group, 22.3% were smokers. Smokeless tobacco was most likely to be perceived as less harmful than cigarettes (25%), followed by water pipe (24.5%), heated tobacco products (22%), e-cigarettes (21.6%), slim cigarettes (17.1%), flavored cigarettes (except menthol ones) (16.1%), menthol cigarettes (15.6%) and cigarillos (12.6%). In this study, 10% of respondents denied that smoking causes serious diseases. Most of the respondents (88.9%) were aware that smoking causes lung cancer (88.9%), but only 70.4% were aware that smoking causes stroke. Smokers compared to non-smokers were less likely to declare that smoking causes a stroke (OR: 0.43, 95%CI: 0.31–0.59; p < 0.001) or myocardial infarction (OR: 0.41, 95%CI: 0.29–0.60; p < 0.001). There were no significant differences (p > 0.05) in the perception of harmfulness of various tobacco products and e-cigarettes by gender, age, or occupational status.

Associations between absolute and relative electronic cigarette harm perceptions and information-seeking behaviours among US adult current, former and never smokers

INTRODUCTION

Electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) harm perceptions and information seeking behaviours are both important antecedents of e-cigarette use, yet the relationship between them has been rarely studied. We assessed how absolute (e-cigarettes are harmful to my health) and relative harm perceptions (e-cigarettes are more/less harmful than cigarettes) were associated with specific e-cigarette information seeking behaviours in a sample of current, former and never cigarette smokers.

METHODS

We used data from US adults in two cycles of the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS-FDA 2015, n = 3738; 2017, n = 1736). Analyses controlled for socio-demographics, ever e-cigarette use and survey cycle. Data were analysed between January and August 2020.

RESULTS

Higher relative harm perceptions were associated with lower odds of having sought any information on e-cigarettes [adjusted odds ratio 0.61, 95% confidence interval (0.48, 0.84)] and on how to use e-cigarettes to quit smoking specifically [adjusted odds ratio 0.59, 95% confidence interval (0.38, 0.91)]. Smoking status did not moderate associations between absolute or relative harm perceptions and information seeking behaviours, nor was it associated with specific information seeking behaviours after adjusting for covariates.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

The risks of e-cigarettes relative to combusted cigarettes (as opposed to the absolute risks of e-cigarettes) appear to be more important in individuals' information seeking behaviours about e-cigarettes. Public health messages could ensure that all individuals understand how one's health risk would change if they exclusively used e-cigarettes, switched to e-cigarettes completely or used both products.

European adult smokers' perceptions of the harmfulness of e-cigarettes relative to combustible cigarettes: cohort findings from the 2016 and 2018 EUREST-PLUS ITC Europe Surveys

Background

This study presents perceptions of the harmfulness of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) relative to combustible cigarettes among smokers from six European Union (EU) countries, prior to the implementation of the EU Tobacco Products Directive (TPD), and 2 years post-TPD.

Methods

Data were drawn from the EUREST-PLUS ITC Europe Surveys, a cohort study of adult smokers (≥18 years) from Germany, Greece, Hungary, Poland, Romania and Spain. Data were collected in 2016 (pre-TPD: N = 6011) and 2018 (post-TPD: N = 6027). Weighted generalized estimating equations were used to estimate perceptions of the harmfulness of e-cigarettes compared to combustible cigarettes (less harmful, equally harmful, more harmful or ‘don’t know’).

Results

In 2016, among respondents who were aware of e-cigarettes (72.2%), 28.6% reported that they perceived e-cigarettes to be less harmful than cigarettes (range 22.0% in Spain to 34.1% in Hungary). In 2018, 72.2% of respondents were aware of e-cigarettes, of whom 28.4% reported perceiving that e-cigarettes are less harmful. The majority of respondents perceived e-cigarettes to be equally or more harmful than cigarettes in both 2016 (58.5%) and 2018 (61.8%, P > 0.05). Overall, there were no significant changes in the perceptions that e-cigarettes are less, equally or more harmful than cigarettes, but ‘don’t know’ responses significantly decreased from 12.9% to 9.8% (P = 0.036). The only significant change within countries was a decrease in ‘don’t know’ responses in Spain (19.3–9.4%, P = .001).

Conclusions

The majority of respondents in these six EU countries perceived e-cigarettes to be equally or more harmful than combustible cigarettes.

Smokers' Exposure to Perceived Modified Risk Claims for E-Cigarettes, Snus, and Smokeless Tobacco in the United States

INTRODUCTION

Based on arguments for harm reduction and health benefits, tobacco companies in the United States can apply for regulatory authorization to make "modified risk tobacco product" (MRTP) marketing claims. The impact of future MRTP claims may depend on whether they are noticed, believed, and lead to smokers switching products. This study provides baseline data about smokers' exposure to perceived MRTP claims ahead of any MRTP authorizations.

AIMS AND METHODS

We analyzed measures from Wave 3 of the US-based Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) study which asked smokers to indicate if they had seen any e-cigarettes, snus, or other smokeless tobacco (SLT) products that claim to be "less harmful" in the past 12 months, and their likelihood of using products with these claims in the next 30 days.

RESULTS

Significantly fewer smokers noted having seen snus (5.1%) or other SLT (5.6%) with "less harmful" claims compared with e-cigarettes (29.1%). For each product, the prevalence of MRTP claim exposure was higher among smokers who perceived the product to be less harmful than smoking, who currently used the product, and who had higher rates of tobacco advertising exposure at the point of sale. Among smokers who noticed products with "less harmful" claims, about one-quarter said they would use them in the future (24%-27%).

CONCLUSIONS

Ahead of any Food & Drug Administration (FDA) authorization for MRTP claims, some smokers already perceive exposure to "less harmful" claims for e-cigarettes, but few do for SLT. MRTP claims may motivate some smokers to use these products.

IMPLICATIONS

This study provides new baseline data about smokers' perceived exposure to MRTP claims in the United States ahead of any regulatory claim authorization. Using data from Wave 3 of the US PATH study, we found that some smokers already perceive exposure to "less harmful" claims for e-cigarettes (29%), but few do for SLT (5%-6%). Among smokers who noticed products with "less harmful" claims, about one-quarter said they would use them in the future (24%-27%), suggesting MRTP claims may motivate some smokers to use products described as "less harmful."

E-Cigarette Use among Current Smokers Experiencing Homelessness

Two-thirds of cigarette smokers experiencing homelessness report using alternative tobacco products, including blunts, cigarillos (little cigars) or roll-your-own tobacco or electronic nicotine delivery systems such as e-cigarettes. We examined attitudes toward e-cigarette use and explored whether e-cigarette use patterns were associated with past-year cigarette quit attempts among current smokers experiencing homelessness. Among the 470 current cigarette smokers recruited from homeless service sites in San Francisco, 22.1% (n = 65) reported the use of e-cigarettes in the past 30 days ('dual users'). Compared to cigarette-only smokers, dual users considered e-cigarettes to be safer than cigarettes. Patterns of e-cigarette use, including the number of times used per day, duration of use during the day, manner of use and nicotine concentration were not associated with past-year cigarette quit attempts. Studies that examine the motivations for use of e-cigarettes, particularly for their use as smoking cessation aids, could inform interventions for tobacco use among people experiencing homelessness.

Harm Perceptions of Tobacco/Nicotine Products and Child Exposure: Differences between Non-Users, Cigarette-Exclusive, and Electronic Cigarette-Exclusive Users

Objective

This study examined caregiver perception of harm and child secondhand exposure to nicotine in a sample of e-cigarette-exclusive, cigarette-exclusive, and non-tobacco/nicotine users (non-users).

Methods

Cigarette-exclusive (n = 19), e-cigarette-exclusive (n = 12), and non-users (n = 20) and their children (N = 51, M_age  = 10.47) completed self-report questionnaires about perceptions of harm, child secondhand exposure, and provided urine to assess child nicotine exposure (cotinine). ANOVAs examined differences between caregiver use status on tobacco harm perceptions and child cotinine levels. Independent samples t-test compared differences in caregiver-reported child secondhand exposure in the home and car.

Results

All 3 caregiver groups rated cigarettes as highly harmful (P = .14), but e-cigarette users rated all 3 types of e-cigarette products (Cartridge-based: P < .001; Tank: P < .001; Box Mod: P < .001) as less harmful than cigarette users and non-users. Caregivers from the e-cigarette user group reported greater child secondhand exposure than caregivers using cigarettes (past 7-day in-home exposure (P = .03); past 7-day exposure in-home + in-car exposure (P = .02); in-home exposure by caregivers and other people exposure (P = .02)). Children from the cigarette user group had significantly higher levels of cotinine (M = 16.6, SD = 21.7) compared to children from the Non-User group (M = .43, SD = .95; P = .001), but no significant difference when compared to children from the E-Cigarette User group (M = 6.5, SD = 13.5).

Discussion

In this sample, caregivers who used e-cigarettes perceived them as less harmful, reported using them more frequently at home and in the car, even when their children were present, compared to cigarette users. As a result, children appear to be exposed to nicotine at levels similar to children living with cigarette users. Future caregiver prevention and intervention efforts should target education around the potential harms of secondhand e-cigarette aerosol to children.

Quantification of Flavorants and Nicotine in Waterpipe Tobacco and Mainstream Smoke and Comparison to E-cigarette Aerosol

INTRODUCTION

Waterpipe use remains popular among youth with the availability of flavored shisha tobacco being one of the main drivers of waterpipe use. Although waterpipe mainstream toxicant emissions are well understood, less is known about the carryover of flavorants such as vanillin, benzaldehyde, and eugenol. In this study, flavored waterpipe tobacco was analyzed for flavorants and nicotine, and subsequent carryover to mainstream smoke.

METHODS

Flavorants vanillin, benzaldehyde, and eugenol, and nicotine were quantified in vanilla-, cherry-, and cinnamon-flavored shisha tobacco by gas chromatography/flame ionization detector and subsequently in waterpipe mainstream smoke generated by a smoking machine. The setup allowed for sampling before and after the water-filtration step.

RESULTS

Flavorant and nicotine content in smoke was reduced 3- to 10-fold and 1.4- to 3.1-fold, respectively, due to water filtration. Per-puff content of filtered waterpipe mainstream smoke ranged from 13 to 46 µg/puff for nicotine and from 6 to 55 µg/puff for flavorants.

CONCLUSIONS

Although water filtration reduced flavor and nicotine content in waterpipe mainstream smoke, the detected flavorant concentrations were similar or higher to those previously reported in e-cigarette aerosol. Therefore, users could be drawn to waterpipes due to similar flavor appeal as popular e-cigarette products. Absolute nicotine content of waterpipe smoke was lower than in e-cigarette aerosol, but the differential use patterns of waterpipe (>100 puffs/session) and e-cigarette (mostly <10 puffs/session, multiple session throughout the day) probably result in higher flavorant and nicotine exposure during a waterpipe session. Strategies to reduce youth introduction and exposure to nicotine via waterpipe use may consider similar flavor restrictions as those for e-cigarettes.

IMPLICATIONS

Although waterpipe mainstream smoke is well characterized for toxicants content, little is known about carryover of molecules relevant for appeal and addiction: flavorants and nicotine. This study shows that flavorant content of waterpipe mainstream smoke is comparable or higher than e-cigarette aerosol flavorant content. Regulatory action to address tobacco use behaviors targeting the availability of flavors should also include other tobacco products such as flavored shisha tobacco.

Harm Perceptions and Beliefs about Potential Modified Risk Tobacco Products

Under US law, tobacco products may be authorized to claim lower exposure to chemicals, or lower risk of health harms. We sought to examine the harm perceptions and beliefs about potential modified risk tobacco products (MRTPs). We recruited 864 adult current and former smokers in August 2019. Participants read a paragraph describing the potential for the FDA to authorize MRTPs and a brief description of MRTPs. The most endorsed beliefs for each product were that they contained nicotine and that they were risky. Believing that e-cigarettes can help smokers quit smoking, that they tasted good, and looked cool were associated with greater odds of intending to try e-cigarettes after controlling for demographic and use factors. For snus, the beliefs that the product was not addictive and tasted good were associated with increased odds of intending to try snus. The beliefs that heated tobacco would taste good and would be a good quit aid was associated with increased odds of intentions to try heated tobacco products. Understanding what the public believes about products currently or potentially authorized to be marketed as modified risk tobacco products can inform communication efforts.

E-cigarette use among Asian Americans: a systematic review

The use of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) has been rising among adolescents and adults in the United States, including among Asian Americans. However, despite being one of the largest racial/ethnic minority groups, the specific trends and patterns of e-cigarette use among Asian Americans are understudied and unclear. This review aimed to summarize relevant information in the last two decades. This systematic review followed the a priori guide outlined by the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement. Articles were gathered from PsycINFO, PubMed, Sage Journals Online, ScienceDirect, and SpringerLink. Forty articles were reviewed and analyzed. Most articles reviewed only reported on the prevalence rate of e-cigarettes among Asian Americans and indicated regional differences. Results noted between- and within-group differences among racial/ethnic groups that warrant further examination. There is a dearth of information regarding health outcomes and correlates or predictors of e-cigarette use among Asian Americans. Despite its popularity and prevalence among Asian Americans, the use of e-cigarettes and related factors or outcomes deserves more nuanced studies and analyses. It is important to delineate subgroup differences by adjusting study designs and data analytic methods to glean meaningful information regarding Asian American's e-cigarette use in the future.

The past is not the future in tobacco control

In this paper we have attempted to identify missed opportunities to change the trajectory of smoking and smoking caused diseases in America over the past 100 years. Many of the missed opportunities identified are due to the actions of cigarette manufacturers who misled the public about the dangers of cigarette smoking, the addictiveness of nicotine, and the feasibility of providing lower risk alternative nicotine delivery products to addicted smokers. An important lesson learned from the past is that treating all tobacco/nicotine products as equivalently harmful is counterproductive to public health as it only serves to protect the most lethal nicotine product - cigarettes. Since 2000, the evolving marketplace of lower risk nicotine products combined with regulatory authority over tobacco products represents a new opportunity to dramatically transform the cigarette business in ways that were never imagined when the war on tobacco was raging decades ago. However, this requires embracing risk-proportionate regulation, taxation policies, and providing consumers with accurate public messaging on product relative risks. A regulatory framework based on sound science that encourages and rewards new or existing manufacturers to invest in consumer acceptable lower risk products to replace cigarettes needs to be encouraged. The past is indeed not the future in smoking control, but it may be difficult to escape the past unless a realignment of market forces and policies can be achieved.

Validation of a nicotine vapor self-administration model in rats with relevance to electronic cigarette use

The debate about electronic cigarettes is dividing healthcare professionals, policymakers, manufacturers, and communities. A key limitation in our understanding of the cause and consequences of vaping is the lack of animal models of nicotine vapor self-administration. Here, we developed a novel model of voluntary electronic cigarette use in rats using operant behavior. We found that rats voluntarily exposed themselves to nicotine vapor to the point of reaching blood nicotine levels that are similar to humans. The level of responding on the active (nicotine) lever was similar to the inactive (air) lever and lower than the active lever that was associated with vehicle (polypropylene glycol/glycerol) vapor, suggesting low positive reinforcing effects and low nicotine vapor discrimination. Lever pressing behavior with nicotine vapor was pharmacologically prevented by the α4β2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor partial agonist and α7 receptor full agonist varenicline in rats that self-administered nicotine but not vehicle vapor. Moreover, 3 weeks of daily (1 h) nicotine vapor self-administration produced addiction-like behaviors, including somatic signs of withdrawal, allodynia, anxiety-like behavior, and relapse-like behavior after 3 weeks of abstinence. Finally, 3 weeks of daily (1 h) nicotine vapor self-administration produced cardiopulmonary abnormalities and changes in α4, α3, and β2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor subunit mRNA levels in the nucleus accumbens and medial prefrontal cortex. These findings validate a novel animal model of nicotine vapor self-administration in rodents with relevance to electronic cigarette use in humans and highlight the potential addictive properties and harmful effects of chronic nicotine vapor self-administration.

Adult perceptions of the relative harm of tobacco products and subsequent tobacco product use: Longitudinal findings from waves 1 and 2 of the population assessment of tobacco and health (PATH) study

OBJECTIVES

To examine: (1) How perceptions of harm for seven non-cigarette tobacco products predict subsequent use; (2) How change in use is associated with changes in perceptions of product harm; (3) Whether sociodemographic variables moderate the association between perceptions and use.

METHODS

Data are from the adult sample (18+) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study, a nationally representative longitudinal cohort survey conducted September 2013-December 2014 (Wave 1 (W1) n = 32,320) and October 2014-October 2015 (Wave 2 (W2) n = 28,362).

RESULTS

Wave 1 users and non-users of e-cigarettes, filtered cigars, cigarillos, and pipes, who perceived these products as less harmful had greater odds of using the product at W2. For the other products, there was an interaction between W1 perceived harm and W1 use status in predicting W2 product use. At W2, a smaller percentage of U.S. adults rated e-cigarettes as less harmful than cigarettes compared to W1 (41.2% W1, 29.0% W2). Believing non-cigarette products to be less harmful than cigarettes was more strongly associated with subsequent product use in the oldest age group (55+ years) while weaker effects were observed in the youngest age group (18-24 years). This moderating effect of age was significant for e-cigarettes, hookah, traditional cigars, and cigarillos.

CONCLUSIONS

Strategies to prevent initiation and promote cessation of these products may benefit from understanding and addressing perceptions of these products.

Assessing comprehension and perceptions of modified-risk information for snus among adult current cigarette smokers, former tobacco users, and never tobacco users

•

Comprehension and risk perceptions of modified-risk messages for snus were tested.

•

Modified-risk information communicated reduced risk of snus compared to cigarettes.

•

The modified-risk information was understood by majorities of respondents.

•

Most perceived snus to have considerable risk, although less risk than cigarettes.

•

Providing modified-risk information about snus could facilitate smokers switching.

Introduction

Snus, a low nitrosamine smokeless tobacco product, presents less risks to health than cigarettes. Effectively communicating such risk information could facilitate smokers switching completely to snus, thereby benefiting public health.

Methods

This study assessed comprehension and perceptions of modified-risk information regarding snus. Adult cigarette smokers, former tobacco users, and never tobacco users (N = 3,922) from a US internet panel viewed an advertisement stating that smokers who switched completely to snus could greatly reduce risk of lung cancer, respiratory disease, heart disease, and oral cancer. Respondents answered questions regarding the modified-risk information and rated perceived risks of snus relative to cigarettes and other smokeless tobacco products.

Results

Across the four diseases mentioned in the advertisement, most respondents (49.7%–68.6%, across tobacco user groups) understood that snus presents less risk than cigarettes but is not completely safe. Some indicated snus presents the same risk as cigarettes; this was highest for oral cancer (33.7%–42.02%) and lowest for lung cancer (15.4%–23.1%) and respiratory disease (15.6%–23.4%). Majorities understood snus is addictive (77.7%–87.9%), quitting all tobacco is the best option for smokers (83.6%–93.1%), and non-users of tobacco should not use snus (80.4%–87.8%). Only 2.1%–5.8% indicated smokers would receive a health benefit if they continued to smoke while using snus.

Conclusions

The modified-risk information, conveying that snus presents less risk than cigarettes but is not completely safe, was understood by majorities of respondents. Differential risk beliefs across diseases suggest responses were shaped not only by the modified-risk information, but also by intuitions and pre-existing beliefs about tobacco products.

Latent Classes of Nicotine Beliefs Correlate with Perceived Susceptibility and Severity of Nicotine and Tobacco Products in US young adults

BACKGROUND

Pervasive misperceptions about nicotine may influence uptake of quit smoking aids and the impact of policies addressing nicotine as a tobacco product constituent.

METHODS

Latent class analyses were conducted using four items on nicotine beliefs asked of 4037 adults aged 18-40 in wave 9 (February-March 2016) of the Truth Initiative Young Adult Cohort Study. Confirmatory factor analyses identified three factors from 12 items: nicotine susceptibility (NSUS), nicotine severity (NSEV), and tobacco severity (TSEV). Analyses assessed correlations between latent classes, sociodemographics, and nicotine/tobacco factor scores.

RESULTS

A four-class model of nicotine beliefs was the best fit, with the largest class believing that nicotine plays a major part in smoking risks (class 1, n = 2070; 52%). Class 2 shared that belief but also responded "Don't know" to addiction questions (class 2, n = 382; 11%). Fewer belonged in class 3, who reported that nicotine plays a small part in health risks (n = 1277; 30%), and class 4, who perceived nicotine as not cancer causing (n = 308; 7%). Latent class membership was correlated with sociodemographics, peer smoking, and past 30-day tobacco use. Classes 1 and 2 had similar NSUS scores and classes 3 and 4 had similar NSEV and TSEV scores.

DISCUSSION

Differences in the perceptions of nicotine and tobacco-related harms can be partially explained by clustering of underlying nicotine beliefs. These classes of beliefs are correlated with sociodemographic predictors of smoking. These findings may help to identify specific beliefs or groups to be targeted by public education efforts on nicotine.

IMPLICATIONS

The current study supports that underlying nicotine beliefs are associated with perceived harms of specific nicotine and tobacco products (relative to cigarettes), with greater false beliefs about nicotine correlated with greater perceived susceptibility to nicotine addiction. Two important inferences emerge from this study: first, that education to address nicotine beliefs may also reframe perceptions of the harms of nicotine and tobacco products; and second, that this type of education may differentially impact perceptions of the harms of nicotine products (e.g., nicotine replacement therapy and e-cigarettes) and tobacco products (e.g., cigars, smokeless, and hookah).

Lifestyle characteristics of parental electronic cigarette and marijuana users: healthy or not?

Objective To assess lifestyle characteristics among parental electronic cigarette (e-cigarette), marijuana and tobacco users. Methods A total of 1214 parents (77% mothers and 23% fathers) were surveyed and categorized into five exposure groups: e-cigarette use only (1%), marijuana use only (3%), tobacco products only (10%), multi-exposed [11% (marijuana, e-cigarette and tobacco)], and non-users [75% (no e-cigarette, tobacco or marijuana)]. Results Similar to non-users, the e-cigarette group had no illicit drug use. Further, e-cigarette users were more likely, in adjusted models, to self-identify as non-smokers and exercise compared with tobacco and multi-exposed groups. Although marijuana users also had higher odds of self-identifying as non-smokers compared to tobacco and multi-exposed groups, they were more likely than non-users to drink alcohol. Conclusion E-cigarette and marijuana using parents were less likely to identify as smokers. E-cigarette users had healthier lifestyle characteristics than the other exposed groups. Clinicians should consider specifically screening for parental e-cigarette and marijuana use as assessing for only "smoking" may underrepresent first-and second-hand exposure. Additionally, clinicians should be aware that marijuana using parents are more likely to drink alcohol and should counsel accordingly.

Age differences in electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) usage motivations and behaviors, perceived health benefit, and intention to quit

INTRODUCTION

Data from comprehensive studies are sparse regarding age differences in issues related to electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) usage. This study examined age differences in usage motivations and behaviors, perceived health benefit, and quit intentions in a large and diverse sample recruited online.

METHODS

The sample included 1,432 current ENDS users, ages 18-64, drawn from a national online survey conducted in 2016. Descriptive and multivariable analyses were used.

RESULTS

The sample included participants in the following age groups: 18-24 (17.5%), 25-34 (38.6%), 35-44 (23.3%), and 45-64 (20.7%). With multiple adjustments, the 18-24 age group was more likely to vape for reasons such as flavors or friends' use, and to use multiple flavors and products with varying nicotine content. For example, the odds (95% CI) of vaping initiation due to flavor attraction vs. other reasons in the 18-24 age group were 1.40 (1.02-1.92), 2.73 (1.85-3.99), and 2.12 (1.41-3.18) compared to the 25-34, 35-44, and 45-64 age groups, respectively. In contrast, compared to older age groups, the 18-24 age group was less likely to use ENDS as an alternative to cigarettes or as a quitting device; they also used ENDS less frequently and perceived less health benefit of ENDS use. The 18-24 age group, especially those who had only used ENDS, had the lowest odds of likely quitting use of tobacco/nicotine products compared to other groups (lower by 44-73%).

CONCLUSION

There were significant age differences in ENDS usage motivations and behaviors, perceived health benefit, and quit intentions.

Knowledge about E-Cigarettes and Tobacco Harm Reduction among Public Health Residents in Europe

Introduction: Although electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) and other tobacco-related products are becoming widely popular as alternatives to tobacco, little has been published on the knowledge of healthcare workers about their use. Thus, the aim of this study was to elicit the current knowledge and perceptions about e-cigarettes and tobacco harm reduction (THR) among medical residents in public health (MRPH). Material and Methods: A Europe-wide cross-sectional study was carried out amongst MRPH from the countries associated with the European Network of MRPH from April to October 2018 using an online questionnaire. Results: 256 MRPHs agreed to participate in the survey. Approximately half the participants were women (57.4%), with a median age of 30 years, and were mainly Italian (26.7%), Spanish (16.9%) and Portuguese (16.5%). Smoking prevalence was 12.9%. Overall, risk scores significantly differed for each investigated smoking product when compared with e-cigarettes; with tobacco cigarettes and snus perceived as more risky, and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and non-NRT oral medications seen as less risky (p < 0.01 for all). Regarding the effects of nicotine on health, the vast majority of MRPHs associated nicotine with all smoking-related diseases. Knowledge of THR was low throughout the whole sample. Conclusions: European MRPH showed a suboptimal level of knowledge about e-cigarettes and THR. Training programs for public health and preventive medicine trainees should address this gap.

The E-Cigarette Debate: What Counts as Evidence?

Two major public health evaluations of e-cigarettes-one from the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM), the other from Public Health England (PHE)-were issued back to back in the winter of 2018. While some have read these analyses as broadly consistent, providing support for the view that e-cigarettes could play a role in smoking harm reduction, in every major respect, they come to very different conclusions about what the evidence suggests in terms of public health policy. How is that possible? The explanation rests in what the 2 reports see as the central challenge posed by e-cigarettes, which helped to determine what counted as evidence. For NASEM, the core question was how to protect nonsmokers from the potential risks of exposure to nicotine and other contaminants or from the risk of smoking combustible cigarettes through renormalization. A precautionary standard was imperative, making evidence that could speak most conclusively to the question of causality paramount. For PHE, the priority was how to reduce the burdens now borne by current smokers, burdens reflected in measurable patterns of morbidity and mortality. With a focus on immediate harms, PHE turned to evidence that was "relevant and meaningful." Thus, competing priorities determined what counted as evidence when it came to the impact of e-cigarettes on current smokers, nonsmoking bystanders, and children and adolescents. A new clinical trial demonstrating the efficacy of e-cigarettes as a cessation tool makes understanding how values and framing shape core questions and conclusive evidence imperative.

Relative Risk Perceptions between Snus and Cigarettes in a Snus-Prevalent Society-An Observational Study over a 16 Year Period

Background: Most studies on perceived risks of smokeless tobacco products (SLT) have been conducted in the U.S., and the vast majority conclude that perceptions of the relative harmfulness of SLT versus cigarettes in the population are inconsistent with epidemiologically-based risk estimates, and typically conflated to that of cigarettes. We tested whether such inaccuracies also existed in Norway, where SLT-products are less toxic (Swedish snus) and SLT use is more prevalent than in the U.S. Methods: Over a 16 years period (2003⁻2018), 13,381 respondents (aged 16⁻79 years) answered questions about risk perceptions in Statistics Norway's nationally representative survey of tobacco behavior. We applied an indirect measure of comparative harm where risk beliefs for eight nicotine products were assessed independently of other products and then compared the answers. The wording of the question was: "We will now mention a variety of nicotine products and ask you how harmful you think daily use of these are. Use a scale from 1 to 7, where 1 is slightly harmful and 7 is very harmful". Mean scores with 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Results: The overall risk score for cigarettes was 6.48. The risk score for snus was 5.14⁻79.3% of the risk score of cigarettes. The relative risk scores for e-cigarettes (3.78) and NRT products (3.39) was 58.4% and 52.3% when compared to cigarettes. Perceptions of risk were stable over time. A strong association was observed between perceived risk of snus and having used snus in attempts to quit smoking. Conclusion: Perceptions of relative risk between snus and cigarettes is inconsistent with estimates from medical expert committees, which assess the overall health risk from use of Swedish snus to be minor when compared to the risk from smoking. Like the situation in the US, incorrect beliefs about SLT risks seem to be prevalent also in the snus-prevalent Norwegian setting. Accurate information on differential harms needs to be communicated. Future research should try to identify reasons why health authorities in the US and Scandinavia allow these well-documented misconceptions to persist.