Prevalence and correlates of nicotine and nicotine product perceptions in U.S. young adults, 2016

Correcting misperceptions about very low nicotine cigarettes for cigarette-only smokers, dual/poly smokers, other tobacco users, and non-tobacco users

Background

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration authorized the sale and marketing of two very low nicotine cigarettes (VLNC) as modified risk tobacco products. The misperception that VLNC are healthier than regular cigarettes is common. This study explores effective message strategies to inform the public about health risks associated with VLNC use, encourage cigarette smokers to try VLNC, and prevent other tobacco users and non-users from product initiation.

Methods

Following the Reasoned Action approach, a VLNC educational message was developed based on the salient beliefs associated with behavioral intention. The message was tested in an online survey conducted in 2018, where 410 participants were randomly assigned to one of the two message conditions (no-message, VLNC message). Message effects were assessed across four tobacco-use groups (non-tobacco users, cigarette-only smokers, cigarette dual/poly smokers, other tobacco users).

Results

Compared to the no-message control, the VLNC message condition showed lower nicotine risk perception for all participants, lower misbelief in VLNC safety for non-users and cigarette-only smokers, higher belief in VLNC carcinogenicity for other tobacco users, stronger belief in second-hand smoke harm for cigarette dual/poly smokers and other tobacco users, and higher VLNC intention for cigarette-only smokers.

Conclusions

Different messages are needed for different types of tobacco users. Both cigarette smokers and other tobacco users could benefit from messages that acknowledge the non-addictiveness but emphasize the health risks of VLNC. Regulators could consider making physical harm statements a requirement for VLNC packaging and marketing. New strategies need to be explored to inform cigarette dual/poly smokers.

Patterns of Marijuana Use and Nicotine Exposure in Patients Seeking Elective Aesthetic Procedures

BACKGROUND

With the increasing legalization and popularity of marijuana, it is frequently and sometimes unintentionally combined with nicotine-containing products. As a consequence, patients may fail to accurately report usage during preoperative examinations or remain unaware of the inclusion of nicotine. This poses a challenge for clinicians in identifying preoperative nicotine exposure. This study aimed to establish normative data on the use of marijuana and nicotine in plastic surgery patients and correlate it with urine nicotine and cotinine levels.

METHODS

All consecutive patients presenting to the authors' clinic seeking elective procedures were identified. Patients were surveyed on marijuana and nicotine use, and provided a urine sample for analysis. The survey responses, urine results, surgical treatments, and clinical outcomes were followed up prospectively.

RESULTS

A total of 135 patients completed the survey and were categorized as nonusers (50%), active nicotine users (19%), active marijuana users (7%), active users of both (13%), or past users (11%). Marijuana users who denied nicotine use showed significantly elevated nicotine and cotinine levels compared with nonusers (average nicotine level, 23.1 ± 13.5 ng/mL [P = 0.00007]; average cotinine level, 221.2 ± 141.8 ng/mL [P = 0.0002]). Fewer than a third of active marijuana or nicotine users reported active use of these products during clinical encounters. There was no difference in urine levels, reported use, or other patient characteristics in patients with and without postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

This is the first descriptive study to document elevated urine nicotine levels in self-reported marijuana users in an urban, diverse patient population seeking elective plastic surgery procedures.

Contingent Effects of E-Cigarette Warning Label Messages on Cognitive Elaboration and Fear Among U.S. Youth Ages 14-17 by Vaping Experience and Peer Vaping Behavior

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) currently requires a warning about the addictive nature of nicotine to be placed on electronic cigarette advertisements and packaging. To consider the value of additional warning messages on public health outcomes, this study examines the additive effect of new warnings that are based on recent claims from U.S. federal authorities. We conducted a secondary analysis of recent data from 1,202 U.S. youth ages 14-17 to test the impact of exposure to additional warnings placed on advertisements for vaping products on cognitive elaboration, fear, and willingness to vape and smoke. This investigation also looked closely at effects on youth who may have increased risk of future vaping due to prior vaping experiences or having friends who vape. Exposure to the alternative warnings did not amplify cognitive elaboration compared to the current FDA warning alone, but it did increase fear. Youth elaboration on both the benefits and risks of vaping was associated with willingness to both vape and smoke, but fear was not associated with either outcome. The effects of warning label exposure and cognitive elaboration varied by prior vaping experience and having at least one friend who vapes. We conclude by discussing the implications of this contingent pattern of effect and association.

Effect of nicotine corrective messaging on nicotine-related beliefs in US adults: a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Widespread misperceptions of the health risks of nicotine could undermine the public health benefits of the Food and Drug Administration's actions, including modified risk tobacco product authorisations and a reduced nicotine product standard for cigarettes.

METHODS

794 US adults (aged 18+) in NORC's AmeriSpeak panel participated in a randomised controlled trial in Spring 2021 to test the effect of three exposures to eight nicotine corrective messages (NCM) on beliefs about nicotine, nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), e-cigarettes and reduced nicotine content (RNC) cigarettes at 3-month follow-up. Analyses conducted in 2022 examined the effect of study condition (NCM (n=393) vs no message control (n=401)) on nicotine beliefs, use intentions and use of nicotine and tobacco products.

RESULTS

Exposure to three NCM doses reduced nicotine (b=-0.33; 95% CI -0.60, -0.07), NRT (b=-0.49; 95% CI -0.85, -0.14), e-cigarette (b=-0.32; 95% CI -0.59, -0.05) and RNC cigarette false beliefs (b=-0.64; 95% CI -1.26, -0.02) compared with the control, controlling for baseline beliefs. Baseline tobacco use and concern about nicotine addiction attenuated intervention effects on false beliefs about RNC cigarettes. There were few intervention effects on intention or use of nicotine and tobacco products.

CONCLUSIONS

Repeated exposure to NCM was necessary to reduce false beliefs about nicotine and tobacco products. Future studies will improve understanding of the dose and duration of nicotine education needed to shift intentions and behaviour, as well as tailored content for tobacco product users to achieve similar reductions in false beliefs as non-users.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04805515.

Perceptions about levels of harmful chemicals in e-cigarettes relative to cigarettes, and associations with relative e-cigarette harm perceptions, e-cigarette use and interest

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Exposure to chemicals contributes to harm from nicotine products, and e-cigarette communications often refer to chemicals. However, while e-cigarette studies commonly measure perceived harmfulness of e-cigarettes relative to cigarettes, few have assessed comparative perceptions about chemicals. This study measured perceived levels of harmful chemicals in e-cigarettes compared with cigarettes and associations with e-cigarette/cigarette relative harm perceptions, e-cigarette use and interest.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

This was an on-line cross-sectional survey of adults/young adults from a nationally representative research panel in the United States conducted in January 2021. Participants were independent samples of 1018 adults who smoked cigarettes and 1051 young adult non-smokers (aged 18-29 years).

MEASUREMENTS

Participants were asked their perceptions of the level of harmful chemicals in e-cigarettes versus cigarettes (fewer/about the same/more/do not know), perceived harmfulness of using e-cigarette versus cigarettes (less/about the same/more/do not know) and their current e-cigarette use and use interest.

FINDINGS

Approximately 20% of all participants (18.1% of adult smokers, and 21.0% of young adult non-smokers) believed e-cigarettes contain fewer harmful chemicals than cigarettes, while 35.6% of adult smokers and 24.9% of young adult non-smokers responded 'do not know'. Participants more frequently reported 'do not know' to the chemicals item than the harm item. Approximately half (51.0-55.7%) of those who believed e-cigarettes contain fewer harmful chemicals also believed e-cigarettes are less harmful than cigarettes. Both beliefs were associated with higher odds of interest in using e-cigarettes [less harmful belief, odds ratio (OR) = 5.53, 95% confidence interval (CI = 2.93-10.43); fewer chemicals belief, OR = 2.45, 95% CI = 1.40-4.29] and past 30-day e-cigarette use (less harmful belief, OR = 2.53, 95% CI = 1.17-5.44; fewer chemicals belief, OR = 5.09, 95% CI = 2.31-11.19) for adults who smoke, but not young adult non-smokers.

CONCLUSIONS

In the United States, most adults who smoke cigarettes and young adult non-smokers do not appear to think that e-cigarettes have fewer harmful chemicals than cigarettes, and many are uncertain about how these levels compare.

Individual and Conjoint Factors Associated With Beliefs About the Harmfulness of Nicotine Replacement Therapies Relative to Combustible Cigarettes Among People Who Smoke: Findings From the 2020 ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey

INTRODUCTION

This study examined individual and conjoint factors associated with beliefs about the harmfulness of nicotine replacement therapies (NRTs) relative to combustible cigarettes (CCs).

AIMS AND METHODS

Data analyzed came from 8642 adults (≥18 years) who smoked daily/weekly and participated in the 2020 ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey in Australia (n = 1213), Canada (n = 2633), England (n = 3057), and United States (n = 1739). Respondents were asked: "Compared to smoking cigarettes, how harmful do you think nicotine replacement products are?" Responses were dichotomized into "much less" versus otherwise for analysis using multivariable logistic regression models, complemented by decision-tree analysis to identify conjoint factors.

RESULTS

Percentages believing that NRTs are much less harmful than CCs were 29.7% (95% CI = 26.2% to 33.5%) in Australia, 27.4% (95% CI = 25.1% to 29.8%) in England, 26.4% (95% CI = 24.4% to 28.4%) in Canada, and 21.7% (95% CI = 19.2% to 24.3%) in the United States. Across all countries, believing nicotine is not at all/slightly harmful to health (aOR = 1.53-2.27), endorsing nicotine vaping products (NVPs) as less harmful than CCs (much less harmful: aOR = 7.24-14.27; somewhat less harmful: aOR = 1.97-3.23), and possessing higher knowledge of smoking harms (aOR = 1.23-1.88) were individual factors associated with increased odds of believing NRTs are much less harmful than CCs. With some country variations, these nicotine-related measures also interacted with each other and sociodemographic variables to serve as conjoint factors associated with the likelihood of accurate NRT relative harm belief.

CONCLUSIONS

Many people who regularly smoke cigarettes are unaware that NRTs are much less harmful than cigarettes. Additionally, beliefs about NRTs relative harmfulness appear to be influenced by both individual and conjoint factors.

IMPLICATIONS

This study demonstrates that despite past efforts to educate people who smoke about the harms of NRTs relative to CCs, misperceptions around the relative harmfulness of NRTs remain substantial. In all four studied countries, subgroups of people who smoke regularly who are misinformed about the relative harmfulness of NRTs, and who may be reluctant to use NRTs for smoking cessation can be reliably identified for corrective interventions based on their understanding of the harms related to nicotine, NVPs and smoking along with sociodemographic markers. The identified subgroup information can be used to prioritize and inform the development of effective interventions to specifically address the gaps in knowledge and understanding of the various subgroups identified. Our results suggest these may need to be tailored for each country.

Awareness and Perception Toward Nicotine Replacement Therapy Among Medical Students at Umm Al-Qura University

Background Tobacco smoking is a leading cause of premature mortality worldwide, with most deaths attributed to smoking-related diseases. Quitting smoking can have significant health benefits and increase one's lifespan. Nicotine, the addictive component of tobacco, can lead to cravings and withdrawal symptoms. Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) can be an effective aid in easing these symptoms. This study aimed to estimate the awareness, acceptance, knowledge, and perception of NRT among medical students at Umm Al-Qura University in Makkah City. Methodology A cross-sectional survey method using Google Forms was utilized to distribute a questionnaire among medical students. The data were analyzed data using RStudio with statistical significance set at p-values <0.05. Results Of the 310 students included in this study, the majority were males (56.5%) and were aged between 21 and 24 years. Overall, 31.9% of the participants were in their fourth year of study. Regression analysis showed that being in the fifth or sixth academic year significantly predicted awareness of NRT. Conclusions Senior-year medical students had more knowledge and awareness about NRT than their junior colleagues. Future recommendations are vital for medical students to increase their knowledge, awareness, and practice regarding NRT.

Effect of brief nicotine corrective messaging on nicotine beliefs in persons who use opioids

This pilot study tested the effect of a brief nicotine education messaging exposure on beliefs about nicotine, nicotine-replacement therapy (NRT), and e-cigarettes. Participants ages 18 and older were recruited via Amazon Mechanical Turk to complete a 20-min online survey in April/May 2020 to assess relationships between opioid use, smoking, and other behaviors. Participants with past-month extra-medical opioid use completed questions on background characteristics and literacy and then were randomized in a 2:1 ratio of two conditions: nicotine education (n = 362) or no message control (n = 181). Beliefs about nicotine, NRT, and e-cigarettes were asked of all participants; this occurred after message exposure for the nicotine education condition. Bivariate and multivariable analyses examined differences in beliefs by study condition. Brief nicotine messaging increased the probability of a correct response to "Nicotine is a cause of cancer" (false, 63% vs. 36%) and reduced the probability of a don't know response (9% vs. 17%) compared to the no message control condition. Nicotine education also reduced false beliefs about harms of long-term NRT use compared to cigarettes (p < .05). In adjusted models, participants in the nicotine education group had lower mean false beliefs about nicotine (p < .001) and to a lesser extent NRT (p = .053) compared with the control group; there was no difference in mean false beliefs about e-cigarettes (p = .547) between groups. A brief education intervention produced similar changes in nicotine beliefs in adults with past-month extra-medical opioid use as in a general adult sample. Findings support the potential for impact of nicotine public education messaging in vulnerable populations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Effects of Vaping Prevention Messages on Electronic Vapor Product Beliefs, Perceived Harms, and Behavioral Intentions among Young Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Youth have been the focus of electronic vapor product (EVP) prevention efforts though young adults had similar increases in current EVP use from 2015-2019. This study tested messages to reduce EVP use in young adults. Eight messages on vaping related harms and addictiveness combined with themes on social use and flavors were selected for inclusion in an online randomized controlled trial. Vermont young adults aged 18-24 (n = 569) were randomized to view the eight vaping prevention messages (n = 295) or eight messages on sun safety (n = 274). After completing baseline measures, participants viewed study messages and completed measures on message perceptions and perceived message effectiveness (PME), EVP-related beliefs, and EVP-related harm perceptions. Participants completed EVP-related beliefs and harm perception measures again at 1-month follow-up, as well as measures on tobacco and EVP-related behavioral intentions and behavior (ever and past 30-day use). Intervention participants reported positive impacts on vaping-related message responses. However, findings suggested no effect of vaping prevention messages on EVP-related beliefs, harm perceptions, or behaviors in the full sample. Exploratory analyses in the intervention condition showed that greater PME was associated with lower odds to intent to try cigarettes in the next year at follow-up.

Beliefs and Characteristics Associated With Believing Nicotine Causes Cancer: A Descriptive Analysis to Inform Corrective Message Content and Priority Audiences

INTRODUCTION

Many cigarette smokers want to quit but have not. Switching to noncombustible products can reduce disease risk, but misperceptions that nicotine causes cancer might impact relative harm perceptions about noncombustible products and considering switching. Identifying which smokers are most likely to hold this misperception and associated beliefs can inform the content of and priority audiences for corrective messaging.

METHODS

Bivariable log binomial models were run on a sample of 9,013 adult established smokers from Wave 3 of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health. Post hoc testing identified groups and beliefs associated with significantly higher-than-average prevalence of the misperception.

RESULTS

About 61.2% of smokers believe nicotine causes cancer or don't know. Non-Hispanic Black (PR: 2.09) and Hispanic (PR: 1.73) smokers, as well as those making under $10,000 a year (PR: 1.36) had significantly higher-than-average prevalence of the misperception. Smokers who had recently used ENDS or smokeless tobacco had significantly lower-than-average prevalence of the misperception (PR: 0.70 and 0.63, respectively). Prevalence of nicotine misperceptions was significantly higher-than-average among those who recognized all ten smoking-caused diseases (PR: 1.34), believed additive-free cigarettes were more harmful than regular cigarettes (PR: 1.71), or did not report subjective norms supporting noncombustible use (PR: 1.05).

CONCLUSION

High perceived threat of tobacco may be overgeneralized to nicotine. High prevalence of the misperception among Non-Hispanic Black and low-income smokers is concerning, considering existing health disparities. Messaging should attempt to correct the misperception that nicotine causes cancer. Inferential reasoning after message exposure should assess accuracy of relative harm perceptions.

IMPLICATIONS

The current study supports the need for corrective messaging to address the misperception that nicotine causes cancer. Identifying that nicotine misperceptions are associated with higher harm perceptions about tobacco suggests that there may be unintended consequences of high perceived harm of tobacco that need to be addressed. As nicotine misperceptions are significantly more prevalent among those already at higher risk of tobacco caused diseases, care should be taken to ensure equity in message dissemination.

Charming e-cigarette users with distorted science: a survey examining social media platform use, nicotine-related misinformation and attitudes towards the tobacco industry

OBJECTIVE

To examine the role of social media in promoting recall and belief of distorted science about nicotine and COVID-19 and whether recall and belief predict tobacco industry beliefs.

DESIGN

Young adults aged 18-34 years (N=1225) were surveyed cross-sectionally via online Qualtrics panel. The survey assessed recall and belief in three claims about nicotine and COVID-19 and three about nicotine in general followed by assessments of industry beliefs and use of social media. Ordinal logistic regression with robust standard errors controlling for gender, race/ethnicity, education, current e-cigarette use and age was used to examine relationships between variables.

RESULTS

Twitter use was associated with higher odds of recall (OR=1.21, 95% CI=1.01 to 1.44) and belief (OR=1.26, 95% CI=1.04 to 1.52) in COVID-19-specific distorted science. YouTube use was associated with higher odds of believing COVID-19-specific distorted science (OR=1.32, 95% CI=1.09 to 1.60). Reddit use was associated with lower odds of believing COVID-19-specific distorted science (OR=0.72, 95% CI=0.59 to 0.88). Recall (OR=1.26, 95% CI=1.07 to 1.47) and belief (OR=1.28, 95% CI=1.09 to 1.50) in distorted science about nicotine in general as well as belief in distorted science specific to COVID-19 (OR=1.61, 95% CI=1.34 to 1.95) were associated with more positive beliefs about the tobacco industry. Belief in distorted science about nicotine in general was also associated with more negative beliefs about the tobacco industry (OR=1.18, 95% CI=1.02 to 1.35).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of social media platforms may help to both spread and dispel distorted science about nicotine. Addressing distorted science about nicotine is important, as it appears to be associated with more favourable views of the tobacco industry which may erode public support for effective regulation.

Do smokers' perceptions of the harmfulness of nicotine replacement therapy and nicotine vaping products as compared to cigarettes influence their use as an aid for smoking cessation? Findings from the ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Surveys

Introduction

This study examined whether smokers’ harm perceptions of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and nicotine vaping products (NVPs) relative to cigarettes predicted their subsequent use as smoking cessation aids during their last quit attempt (LQA).

Aims and Methods

We analyzed data from 1,315 current daily smokers (10+ cigarettes per day) who were recruited at Wave 1 (2016), and who reported making a quit attempt by Wave 2 (2018) of the International Tobacco Control Four Country Smoking and Vaping Surveys in Australia, Canada, England, and the United States. We used multinomial logistic regression models to examine prospective associations between harm perceptions of (a) NRT and (b) NVPs and their use at LQA, controlling for socio-demographic and other potential confounders.

Results

Smokers who perceive that (a) NRT and (b) NVPs are much less harmful than cigarettes were more likely to subsequently use the respective product as an aid than using no aid or other aids during LQA (adjusted relative risk ratio [aRRR] = 3.79, 95%CI = 2.16–6.66; and aRRR = 2.11, 95%CI = 1.29–3.45, respectively) compared to smokers who perceive these products as equally or more harmful. Additionally, those who perceive NVPs as much less harmful than cigarettes were less likely to use NRT as a quit aid (aRRR = 0.34, 95%CI = 0.20–0.60). No country variations for these associations were found.

Conclusions

This study found that smokers’ perceptions of the harmfulness of (a) NRT and (b) NVPs relative to cigarettes predicted the respective product use when trying to quit smoking. Corrective education targeting misperceptions of nicotine products’ relative harmfulness may facilitate their use for smoking cessation.

Implications

Nicotine replacement therapy and nicotine vaping products are two commonly used smoking cessation aids. This study demonstrates that misperceptions of the harms of nicotine products relative to cigarettes influence their use for smoking cessation. Believing that nicotine vaping products are much less harmful than cigarette smoking may lead some smokers to prefer these products over nicotine replacement therapy to aid smoking cessation. Education targeting misperceptions of nicotine products’ harmfulness relative to cigarettes may enable smokers to make informed choices about which are appropriate to aid smoking cessation.

Harm perceptions of nicotine-containing products and associated sources of information in UK adults with and without mental ill health: A cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

People with mental ill health are more likely to smoke and experience smoking-related harm than those without. Switching from combustible tobacco to lower-risk nicotine-containing products may be of benefit; however, misperceptions of harm may prevent their use. We aimed to assess, among adults with and without mental ill health, (1) perceptions of harm from nicotine and relative harm and addictiveness of different nicotine-containing products and (2) sources of information associated with harm perceptions.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

On-line survey of adults (n = 3400) who smoke cigarettes and/or use e-cigarettes, or have recently stopped, in the United Kingdom.

MEASUREMENTS

Outcomes: harm perceptions of nicotine; relative perceived harm and addictiveness of different nicotine-containing products; sources of information for harm perceptions of nicotine, cigarette smoking and e-cigarettes. Demographics: sex, age, education, ethnic group and region. Other measures: self-reported smoking, vaping and mental health status.

ANALYSES

frequencies and logistic regressions adjusting for demographic/other measures.

FINDINGS

Among those with serious mental distress (versus no/low mental distress): 9.6% [13.9%, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.50-0.97] correctly identified that none/a very small amount of the health risks of smoking cigarettes come from nicotine; 41.7% (53.5%, aOR = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.54-0.84) perceived e-cigarettes and 53.2% (70.3%, aOR = 0.62, 95% CI = 0.50-0.77) perceived nicotine replacement therapy to be less harmful than cigarettes; and 42.1% (51.3%, aOR = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.62-0.95) perceived e-cigarettes as being less likely than cigarettes to cause cancer, 35.4% (45.5%, aOR = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.57-0.88) heart attacks and 34.9% (42.3%, aOR = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.64-0.99) lung problems. The most popular sources of information for cigarette smoking, e-cigarettes and nicotine were scientific experts' opinions and media reports, with little variation by mental distress.

CONCLUSIONS

Among adults with a history of tobacco and/or e-cigarette use, those with serious mental distress appear to have less accurate harm perceptions of nicotine and nicotine-containing products than those with no/low distress, despite reporting similar sources of information.

E-Cigarette-Related Nicotine Misinformation on Social Media

Background. Twitter provides an opportunity to examine misperceptions about nicotine and addiction as they pertain to electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS). The purpose of this study was to systematically examine a sample of ENDS-related tweets that presented information about nicotine or addiction for the presence of potential misinformation.Methods. A total of 10.1 million ENDS-related tweets were obtained from April 2018 through March 2019 and were filtered for unique tweets containing keywords for nicotine and addiction. A subsample (n = 3,116) were human coded for type of account (individual, group, commercial, or news) and presence of potential misinformation.Results. Of tweets that presented ENDS-related nicotine or addiction information (n = 904), 41.7% (n = 377) contained potential misinformation coded as anti-vaping exaggeration, pro-vaping exaggeration, nicotine is not addictive or is never harmful, or unproven health benefits.Conclusions. Anti-vaping exaggeration tweets distorted or embellished claims about ENDS nicotine and addiction; pro-vaping exaggeration tweets misinterpreted results from scientific studies. Misinformation that nicotine is not addictive or is never harmful or has unproven health benefits appeared less but are potentially problematic. ENDS-related messaging should be designed to be easily understood by the public and monitored to detect the spread of misinterpretation or misinformation on social media.

Associations Between Nicotine Knowledge and Smoking Cessation Behaviors among U.S. Adults Who Smoke

INTRODUCTION

Misperceptions about nicotine's contribution to smoking-related health harms could complicate efforts to reduce the public health burden of smoking. Study goals were to describe nicotine knowledge among adults who smoke and investigate whether misperceiving nicotine as a source of health harm was associated with beneficial health behaviors, or lower uptake of using less harmful sources of nicotine to support smoking cessation attempts.

METHOD

This study used longitudinal data from 9,140 adults who participated in four waves of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study and were current smokers during the first wave. Logistic regressions estimated odds ratios for correct responses across six aspects of nicotine knowledge assessed in Wave 4. Longitudinal models estimated associations between misperceptions and cigarette consumption, and odds of making a quit attempt; self-reported cessation; e-cigarette use; and use of NRT or e-cigarettes to support quit attempts.

RESULTS

Participants who were non-White, older, and had lower educational attainment or income tended to be least knowledgeable about nicotine. Misperceiving nicotine as harmful to health was associated with increased odds of quit attempts (AOR: 1.12, 95% CI: 1.03, 1.23), lower odds of cessation success (AOR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.73, 0.98) and e-cigarette use (AOR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.72, 0.86), and lower odds of using NRT (AOR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.71, 0.99) or e-cigarettes to support quit attempts (AOR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.49, 0.71).

CONCLUSION

Harm reduction efforts may be impeded by misperceptions about nicotine. Further work should evaluate the effects of correcting such misperceptions through public education.

IMPLICATIONS

This study provides longitudinal evidence that among adult smokers, misperceiving nicotine as a primary cause of smoking-related diseases may be associated with reduced cessation success and lower likelihood of using less harmful nicotine products. These misperceptions may therefore impede efforts to encourage smokers ready to quit to use evidence-based cessation support such as nicotine replacement during quit attempts and limit the success of policies designed to shift smokers to less harmful sources of nicotine. Further work should evaluate the longitudinal effects of correcting nicotine misperceptions through public education targeted toward adults who smoke.

Persistent Misperceptions about Nicotine among US Physicians: Results from a Randomized Survey Experiment

We conducted a survey experiment among US physicians to evaluate whether question wording impacted perceptions about the health effects of nicotine. 926 physicians were randomized to receive one of two versions of a question matrix that asked about the "extent to which they agree or disagree that 'nicotine' (Version 1) or 'nicotine, on its own,' (Version 2) directly contributes to" birth defects, cardiovascular disease (CVD), cancer, depression, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We evaluated whether question condition predicted strong agreement and/or agreement with each statement, and assessed demographic correlates of each outcome while adjusting for question version. Physicians who received Version 2 were less likely to "strongly agree" that nicotine directly caused birth defects (Prevalence Ratio (PR) 0.84, 95% CI 0.72-0.98), CVD (PR 0.89, 95% CI 0.84-0.95), cancer (PR 0.81, 95% CI 0.75-0.87), and COPD (PR 0.78, 95% CI 0.72-0.84). Females were more likely to "strongly agree" that nicotine directly contributes to birth defects and cancer, and family physicians were most likely to "strongly agree" that nicotine directly contributes to CVD, cancer, and COPD. Question wording is important when measuring physicians' beliefs about nicotine; however, even after accounting for question version, misperceptions about the direct health effects of nicotine were common and varied by sex and specialty.

Prospective associations between nicotine beliefs and tobacco-related susceptibility, curiosity, and use in U.S. adults

Low harm perceptions of tobacco products have been associated with use of those products in youth and adults, but this relationship has not been assessed for nicotine beliefs. This study used data from a national sample of adults aged 18-40 in Wave 9 (Spring 2016) of the Truth Initiative Young Adult Cohort Study to examine correlations and prospective associations between the latent classes of nicotine beliefs and susceptibility, curiosity, and use of tobacco products in 3122 adults who also completed Wave 10 (Fall 2016). At Wave 9, four latent classes of beliefs characterized the role of nicotine in the health risks of smoking: Class 1, large role, 51%; Class 2, large role/don't know, 9.4%; Class 3, small role in health, 32.5%; and Class 4, none/small role in cancer, 7.5%. Latent classes of nicotine beliefs were highly correlated with susceptibility and curiosity to use cigarettes, e-cigarettes, and hookah, as well as past 30-day use of a range of tobacco products at Wave 9 among never users. Classes 3 and 4 had the highest prevalence of past 30-day tobacco use; never users in these classes reported the greatest susceptibility to try cigarettes, hookah, and e-cigarettes at Wave 9. Class 4 had higher odds of increased e-cigarettes use at follow-up compared to Class 1. There were few prospective associations between nicotine beliefs latent class, susceptibility, and curiosity at Wave 10. Nicotine beliefs are associated with tobacco-related outcomes and, if assessed, may provide novel information to guide tobacco prevention and intervention efforts.

Tobacco harm reduction: Past history, current controversies and a proposed approach for the future

Tobacco harm reduction remains a controversial topic in tobacco control. Tobacco harm reduction involves providing tobacco users who are unwilling or unable to quit using nicotine products with less harmful nicotine-containing products for continued use. The skepticism towards harm reduction is based in part on the experience with low-yield tar/nicotine cigarettes, which were presumed to be associated with lower health risks than higher yield cigarettes and marketed as such by cigarette manufacturers. Only later did the field learn that these cigarettes were a deceptive way for cigarette manufacturers to allay the health concerns over cigarette smoking. Since this experience, there has been a proliferation of tobacco products that might potentially serve as a means to reduce tobacco harm. Some members of the tobacco control community believe that these products have great potential to reduce mortality and morbidity among smokers who completely switch to them. Others believe that we will be addicting another generation to tobacco products. This paper reviews the past history, the current tobacco landscape and controversies, and an approach that might rapidly reduce the yearly half-million deaths associated with cigarette smoking in the U.S.

Waterpipe Tobacco Warnings Need to Inform Users of Harm

Objectives

Health warning messages could be an effective means of communicating the health risks associated with waterpipe (WP) smoking. The objective of this study was to select a message that conveyed the risks associated with WP smoking.

Methods

A mixed-methods approach was used to explore the effectiveness of the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) mandated message, and others, among young adults using focus groups and surveys. Two focus group studies and one convenience survey were conducted to examine the FDA's mandated message and 11 other WP warning messages. The final study, conducted with a random sample of first-year university students, examined the effectiveness and reactance of the chosen message using previously validated items (scored on a 1-5 scale).

Results

The FDA's mandated message did not resonate well with focus group participants. In the random sample of students, the top message (WARNING: Hookah smoke contains poisons that cause lung and oral cancers) had high effectiveness (M = 4.49) and a low reactance (M = 2.12).

Conclusions

Our studies suggest that other messages are more effective for communicating the risks associated with WP smoking than the FDA's message for WP tobacco.

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).

Impact of Brief Nicotine Messaging on Nicotine-Related Beliefs in a U.S. Sample

INTRODUCTION

The current study pilot tested the effect of a single, brief exposure to nicotine education messages on beliefs about nicotine, nicotine-replacement therapy (NRT), E-cigarettes, and cigarettes with reduced nicotine content (RNC).

METHODS

Five hundred and twenty-one U.S. adults (aged ≥18 years) completed a 15-minute survey on Amazon Mechanical Turk in 2018. After completing items on sociodemographics, literacy, and cancer risk behaviors, participants were randomized in a 2:1:1 ratio to 1 of 3 conditions: nicotine education (n=263), sun safety education (attention control, n=128), or no message control (n=130). All participants completed items regarding nicotine, NRT, E-cigarette, and RNC cigarette beliefs, as well as norms about nicotine use, behavioral control regarding cigarette/tobacco use, and intention to use cigarettes, NRT, E-cigarettes, and RNC cigarettes in the next 12 months. Analyses were conducted in 2019.

RESULTS

Following exposure, nicotine education participants reported fewer false beliefs about nicotine (p<0.001), NRT (p<0.001), E-cigarettes (p<0.05), and RNC cigarettes (p<0.05) compared with the control conditions. Nicotine messaging doubled the probability of a correct response (false, 78.3% vs 36.8%) to nicotine is a cause of cancer and dramatically reduced the probability of responding don't know to this item (5.3% vs 26.0%). There was no impact of the intervention on beliefs about other substances within cigarette, norms, or behavioral intentions.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings from the current study support the hypothesis that a brief nicotine messaging intervention-similar to the messages likely to be seen on warning labels or in media campaigns-is likely to correct misperceptions of nicotine, NRT, E-cigarettes, and RNC cigarettes.