Relative Harm Perceptions of E-Cigarettes Versus Cigarettes, U.S. Adults, 2018-2020

Support for banning sale of smoked tobacco products among adults who smoke: findings from the International Tobacco Control Four Country Smoking and Vaping Surveys (2018-2022)

BACKGROUND

Many people continue to smoke despite strong policies to deter use, thus stronger regulatory measures may be required. In four high-income countries, we examined whether people who smoke would support a total ban on smoked tobacco products under two differing policy scenarios.

METHODS

Data were from 14 363 adults (≥18) who smoked cigarettes (≥monthly) and participated in at least one of the 2018, 2020 or 2022 International Tobacco Control Four Country Smoking and Vaping Surveys in Australia, Canada, England and the USA. In 2018, respondents were asked whether they would support a law that totally bans smoked tobacco if the government provides smoking cessation assistance (Cessation Assistance scenario). In 2020 and 2022, respondents were asked a slightly different question as to whether they would support a law that totally bans smoked tobacco if the government encourages people who smoke to use alternative nicotine products like vaping products and nicotine replacement products instead (substitution scenario). Responses (support vs oppose/don't know) were estimated on weighted data.

RESULTS

Support was greater for the cessation assistance scenario (2018, 36.6%) than the nicotine substitution scenario (2020, 26.9%; 2022, 26.3%, both p<0.0001). In the longitudinal analysis, there was a significant scenario by country interaction effect with lower support in Canada, the USA and Australia under the substitution scenario than in the cessation scenario, but equivalent levels in England under both scenarios. The strongest correlates of support under both scenarios were planning to quit smoking within 6 months, wanting to quit smoking 'a lot' and recent use of nicotine replacement therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Opposition to banning smoked tobacco predominates among people who smoke, but less with a cessation assistance scenario than one encouraging nicotine substitution. Wanting to quit a lot was the strongest indicator of support.

The Role of e-Cigarette Packaging as a Health Communications Tool: A Focus Group Study With Adolescents and Adults in England and Scotland

INTRODUCTION

In the United Kingdom, e-cigarette and refill packaging must display a nicotine addiction warning. This study explored how this message is perceived, responses to alternative on-pack messages, and other options for using e-cigarette packaging to discourage youth and people who neither smoke nor use e-cigarettes while encouraging smokers to switch.

AIMS AND METHODS

Between August and September 2022, 16 focus groups (n = 70) were conducted to explore these topics with adolescents (n = 31, aged 11-17 years) and adults (n = 39, nonsmokers, smokers that use e-cigarettes, smokers that do not use e-cigarettes) in England and Scotland.

RESULTS

While several participants thought the current nicotine addiction warning could help increase awareness of nicotine addiction, most reported that it failed to capture attention and was not a deterrent. Alternative messages shown on packs (about harm, toxicity, wellness, litter, or relative risk) received mixed responses. Relative risk messages were perceived as most beneficial for smokers switching but also thought to potentially encourage uptake among nonsmokers. Some participants considered certain harm and toxicity messages to potentially dissuade uptake. Participants proposed several ideas to reduce the appeal of e-cigarette packaging and devices to deter youth uptake, including more prominent warnings, standardized packaging, and devices that are plain or include health messages.

CONCLUSIONS

Packaging can play a crucial role in communicating product and health messages to different consumer groups. Further consideration of how packaging and labeling can meet the needs of non-nicotine users while simultaneously reaching those who may benefit from using e-cigarettes to stop smoking is warranted.

IMPLICATIONS

While some viewed the nicotine addiction warning required on e-cigarettes and refill packaging in the United Kingdom as helpful in raising awareness of nicotine addiction, it did not resonate with most of our sample of adolescents and adults. The findings suggest that e-cigarette packaging could be better used to encourage smokers to switch to a less harmful alternative, with relative risk messages showing promise. Furthermore, strengthening on-pack messaging (eg increasing salience and rotating messages) and reducing the appeal of packaging (eg drab colors) and devices (eg including warnings) may help increase awareness of e-cigarette harms while deterring use among adolescents and nonsmokers.

Noticing Voluntary E-Cigarette Warning Labels and Associations With Harm Perceptions and Use Intentions: A Baseline Cross-Sectional Analysis of Wave 4 of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study Prior to the Food and Drug Administration Mandate

PURPOSE

To examine the effect of e-cigarette warning labels (EWLs) prior to the August 2018 FDA-warning label mandate to establish a baseline for future research.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey.

SETTING

United States.

PARTICIPANTS

A cohort of adult participants in the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) study (n = 30,004) at Wave 4 (Dec 2016-Jan 2018).

MEASURES

Correlates (e.g., sociodemographics, substance use, social influence, cigarette warnings, and mental health) of noticing EWLs in the past 30-days (noticed vs did not notice), perceived harm of e-cigarettes/nicotine (from 1 = not at all harmful to 5 = extremely harmful), relative harm of e-cigarettes (from 1 = less harmful to 3 = more harmful than cigarettes), intention to quit (yes/no) and intention to try e-cigarettes (from 1 = definitely not to 4 = definitely yes).

RESULTS

The prevalence of noticing EWLs was 22.1%. Those who currently use electronic nicotine products, established and experimentally, were more likely to notice EWLs relative to never users (aOR = 3.55; 95% CI: 2.96-4.25; P < .001 and aOR = 2.42; 95% CI: 1.88-3.10; P < .001, respectively). Those with past 30-day alcohol and cigarette use were less likely to notice EWLs (aOR = .27; 95% CI: .24-.31 and aOR = .91; 95% CI: .83-.99; respectively). Those who noticed cigarette warnings were more likely to notice EWLs (aOR = 12.00; 95% CI: 10.46-13.77; P < .001). Among those who noticed EWLs, there were higher odds of perceiving e-cigarettes to be equally or more harmful than cigarettes (aOR = 1.15; 95% CI: 1.02-1.30), but no association was found between noticing EWLs and perceived harm of e-cigarettes/nicotine or use intentions.

CONCLUSION

Noticing voluntary EWLs was not associated with increased perceived harm of e-cigarettes and nicotine harm, or e-cigarette use intentions. Future research is warranted to examine the effect of the FDA mandated EWLs.

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.

Managing a policy paradox? Responses to textual warning labels on E-cigarette advertisements among U.S. national samples of youth overall and adults who smoke or vape

CONTEXT

Current use and potential future uptake of e-cigarettes among youth remain public health concerns in the U.S., even as people who smoke combustible cigarettes could benefit from switching completely to e-cigarettes. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is considering alternative warning messages, but warnings that discourage youth from use may also deter people who smoke from switching. This study tests ten pre-registered hypotheses on effects of warning messages with national samples of youth overall and adults who smoke and/or vape.

METHODS

NORC recruited 1639 adults (ages 18+) who smoke, vape, or use both products, from their probability-sampled AmeriSpeak Panel and augmented their AmeriSpeak Teen Panel with Lucid's nonprobability opt-in panel to recruit 1217 youth (ages 14-17) to participate in a web-based survey experiment. We randomly assigned respondents to view one of five warning label conditions and respond to measures of their e-cigarette risk beliefs, willingness to use e-cigarettes, and (among people who smoke or vape) considerations to quit these products.

FINDINGS

Relative to the current FDA warning about nicotine, warning messages about the harms of e-cigarette use for youth brain development did not influence risk beliefs or reduce willingness to use these products among youth. Brain development warning messages did increase beliefs about these harms among adults but did not increase quit considerations among people who vape, relative to the FDA warning. Warning messages with information about chemical constituents of vaping products and the harm of these chemicals produced higher e-cigarette quit considerations than did the FDA warning among adults who vape.

CONCLUSION

Potential alternative warning label messages were largely ineffective relative to the current FDA warning about nicotine, though limited evidence suggests some potential for chemical + harm messaging to encourage people who use both e-cigarettes and cigarettes to consider quitting both.

Trends in Harm Perceptions of E-Cigarettes vs Cigarettes Among Adults Who Smoke in England, 2014-2023

Importance

Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) are less harmful to users than combustible cigarettes. However, public health and media reporting have often overstated the potential risks of e-cigarettes, and inaccurate perceptions of the harms of vaping relative to smoking are pervasive.

Objective

To examine time trends in harm perceptions of e-cigarettes compared with combustible cigarettes among adults who smoke.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This nationally representative monthly cross-sectional survey study was conducted from November 2014 to June 2023 in England. Participants were adults who currently smoke.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Participants were asked whether they thought e-cigarettes were less harmful, equally harmful, or more harmful than cigarettes, or did not know, with the proportion responding less harmful (vs all other responses) as the primary outcome. Logistic regression was used to test associations between survey wave and participants' perceptions of the harms of e-cigarettes.

Results

Data were collected from 28 393 adults who smoke (mean [SD] age, 43.5 [17.3] years; 13 253 [46.7%] women). In November 2014, 44.4% (95% CI, 42.0%-46.8%) thought e-cigarettes were less harmful than cigarettes, 30.3% (95% CI, 28.2%-32.6%) thought e-cigarettes were equally harmful, 10.8% (95% CI, 9.4%-12.3%) thought they were more harmful, and 14.5% (95% CI, 12.9%-16.4%) did not know. However, by June 2023, the proportion who thought e-cigarettes were less harmful had decreased by 40% (prevalence ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.55-0.66), and the proportion who thought e-cigarettes were more harmful had more than doubled (prevalence ratio, 2.16; 95% CI, 1.84-2.54). Changes over time were nonlinear: late 2019 saw a sharp decline in the proportion who thought e-cigarettes were less harmful and increases in the proportions who thought they were equally or more harmful. These changes were short-lived, returning to pre-2019 levels by the end of 2020. However, perceptions worsened again from 2021 up to the end of the study period: the proportion who thought e-cigarettes were more harmful increased to a new high, and the proportion who thought e-cigarettes were less harmful decreased to levels comparable to those in late 2019. As a result, in June 2023, the perception that e-cigarettes were equally as harmful as cigarettes was the most commonly held view among adults who smoke (33.7%; 95% CI, 31.4%-36.1%), with roughly similar proportions perceiving e-cigarettes to be less (26.7%; 95% CI, 24.6%-28.9%) and more (23.3%; 95% CI, 21.1%-25.7%) harmful.

Conclusions and Relevance

This survey study of adults who smoke in England found that harm perceptions of e-cigarettes have worsened substantially over the last decade, such that most adults who smoked in 2023 believed e-cigarettes to be at least as harmful as cigarettes. The timing of the 2 most notable changes in harm perceptions coincided with the e-cigarette, or vaping product, use-associated lung injury outbreak in 2019 and the recent increase in youth vaping in England since 2021.

How does health communication on social media influence e-cigarette perception and use? A trend analysis from 2017 to 2020

OBJECTIVE

E-cigarettes have achieved a high prevalence rapidly. While social media is among the most influential platforms for health communication, its impact on attitudes and behaviors of e-cigarettes and its changes over time remain underexplored. This study aims to address the gap.

METHODS

Four years of data (2017-2020) were derived from the U.S. Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) (aged 18-64 years, n = 9,914). Initially, key variables were compared across years. Furthermore, guided by the health belief model, we employed a moderated mediation model to examine the influence of social media health communication on the public's perceptions and behaviors related to e-cigarettes, distinguishing between smokers and non-smokers throughout the four-year period.

RESULTS

The evidence shows a process of dynamic interaction between communication, perception, and behavior. (1) We observed an increasing trend of social media health communication (SMH) and perceived relative harm of e-cigarettes (PHE). (2) Higher SMH was associated with more e-cigarette use directly in 2019. (3) Higher SMH was associated with less e-cigarette use indirectly through PHE in 2020. (4) Smokers consistently displayed heightened sensitivity in responding to harm perception compared to non-smokers.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings support two mechanisms underlying the association between SMH and e-cigarette use: direct and indirect. The changes in the pathways during the timespan may have been influenced by increased e-cigarette information on social media and public health events like COVID-19. Stricter regulations for unverified e-cigarette advertisements and anti-e-cigarette education on social media are called for to curtail e-cigarette use.

A Randomized, Controlled Study to Assess Changes in Biomarkers of Exposures Among Adults Who Smoke That Switch to Oral Nicotine Pouch Products Relative to Continuing Smoking or Stopping All Tobacco Use

The purpose of this open-label, randomized, controlled, in-clinic, 5-parallel-group study was to assess biomarkers of exposure (BoE) to select harmful and potentially harmful constituents in adults who smoke (N = 144) switching to oral tobacco products (on!® mint nicotine pouches; test products) compared to continuing smoking cigarettes (CS) and completely quitting all tobacco products (NT). Changes in 20 BoE to select harmful and potentially harmful constituents, including 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol (NNAL), were evaluated. Adult smokers smoked their usual brand of cigarettes for 2 days (baseline assessments) and then were randomly assigned to ad libitum use of 2, 4, or 8 mg test products, CS, or NT for 7 days. Analysis of covariance was used to assess the Day 7 BoE levels between each group using test products, CS, and NT. The creatinine-adjusted total urinary NNAL and other 18 of 19 BoE levels (except nicotine equivalents [NEs]) were significantly lower (P < .05) on Day 7, among all test product groups compared to CS. Geometric least-square means were reduced for all biomarkers of exposure, except NEs, in test product groups by approximately 42%-96% compared to the CS group, and reductions were comparable to the NT group. The geometric least-square means for urinary NE between the test product and the CS groups, although not significantly different, the Day 7 mean change relative to the CS group were 49.9%, 65.8%, and 101% for the 2, 4, and 8 mg test product groups, respectively. The substantial reduction in harmful and potentially harmful constituent exposure suggests complete switching from cigarettes to test products may present a harm reduction opportunity for adults who smoke.

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.

Changes in E-Cigarette Use Among U.S. Adults, 2019-2021

INTRODUCTION

E-cigarette use increased between 2014 and 2018 among younger U.S. adults who had never smoked combustible cigarettes, potentially increasing nicotine addiction risk and progression to combustible tobacco products. It is unknown how prevalence changed after the E-cigarette, or vaping, product use-associated lung injury epidemic (late 2019) and COVID-19 pandemic (March 2020) by age group and combustible cigarette smoking status.

METHODS

Data from cross-sectional, nationally representative National Health Interview Surveys in 2019, 2020, and 2021 (analyzed in 2022) were used to estimate current E-cigarette use prevalence, adjusted prevalence difference between survey years, and population counts, by age group (younger, 18-29 years, n=11,700; middle age, 30-44 years, n=21,300, 45-59 years, n=21,308; older, ≥60 years, n=36,224) and cigarette smoking status (current, former, and never).

RESULTS

E-cigarette use prevalence increased among younger adults between 2019 and 2021 (8.8%-10.2%, adjusted prevalence difference=1.7% points, 95% CI=0.1, 3.3), primarily owing to an increase among those who never smoked cigarettes (4.9%-6.4%, adjusted prevalence difference=1.7% points, 95% CI=0.3, 3.1). People who never smoked cigarettes constituted 53% (2.68 million) of younger adults who used E-cigarettes in 2021, increasing by 0.71 million from 2019. Conversely, among middle age and older adults, the prevalence was similar in 2019 and 2021 irrespective of cigarette smoking status, and those who formerly smoked cigarettes constituted the largest proportion of people who used E-cigarettes in 2021 (age 30-44 years: 51.8%, 1.8 million; age 45-59 years: 51.6%, 0.85 million; age ≥60 years: 47.5%, 0.45 million).

CONCLUSIONS

Efforts must address the rise in E-cigarette use among younger adults who never smoked cigarettes. At the same time, assistance is needed to help those who switched to E-cigarettes to stop smoking to transition to non-use of all products.

Optimising messages and images for e-cigarette warnings

BACKGROUND

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requires electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) to have a single addiction warning, but many other health harms are associated with vaping and warnings grow stale over time. We aimed to develop new warning messages and images to discourage e-cigarette use.

METHODS

Participants were 1629 US adults who vaped or smoked. We randomised each participant to evaluate 7 of 28 messages on newly developed warning themes (metals exposure, DNA mutation, cardiovascular problems, chemical exposure, lung damage, impaired immunity, addiction), and the current FDA-required warning (total of 8 messages). Then, participants evaluated images of hazards (eg, metal), internal harms (eg, organ damage) or people experiencing harms.

RESULTS

Regarding intended effects, new warning themes all discouraged vaping more than the current FDA-required warning (all p<0.001), led to greater negative affect (all p<0.001) and led to more anticipated social interactions (all p<0.001). The most discouraging warnings were about toxic metals exposure. Regarding unintended effects, the new themes led to more stigma against people who vape (6 of 7 themes, p<0.001) and led to a greater likelihood of thinking vaping is more harmful than smoking (all 7 themes, p<0.001), although unintended effects were smaller than intended effects. Images of harms (internal or people experiencing) discouraged vaping more than images of hazards (all p<0.001).

DISCUSSION

Vaping warning policies should communicate a broader range of hazards and harms, beyond addiction, to potentially increase awareness of health harms. Images of internal harm or people experiencing harms may be particularly effective at discouraging vaping.

Longitudinal transitions in e-cigarette and cigarette use among US adults: prospective cohort study

Background

To support tobacco control efforts, this study sought to characterize longitudinal transitions in use of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) and cigarettes.

Methods

Participants were nationally representative samples of 53,729 US adults from Waves 3-5 (2015-2019) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study. We examined behavioral transitions (initiation, relapse, progression, and cessation) in ENDS and cigarette use across waves. Weighted generalized estimating equation models adjusted for sociodemographic variables.

Findings

Of never ENDS users at baseline, an estimated 1.7% reported initiating ENDS use by follow-up. Of former ENDS users, an estimated 12.1% relapsed into ENDS use. Of periodic ENDS users at baseline, 13% progressed to established ENDS use. Of baseline current ENDS users, 46.3% discontinued ENDS use. The corresponding transitions for cigarette smoking were 1.6% (initiation), 4.8% (relapse), 21.1% (progression), and 14% (discontinuation). Adults aged 18-24 (vs. older age), Hispanics (vs. non-Hispanic white), and past 12-month cannabis users were more likely to initiate ENDS or cigarettes (all p < 0.05). Having any internalizing mental health symptoms increased the odds of ENDS initiation, while externalizing symptoms increased the odds of cigarette initiation. Those who perceived nicotine as very harmful (vs. none/low harm) were more likely to discontinue ENDS. Current cigarette users (vs. non-users) at baseline were more likely to initiate, relapse, or discontinue ENDS (all p < 0.05) and vice versa.

Interpretation

We observed high changeability in ENDS and cigarette use among US adults over time. In absolute terms, ENDS use grew, while smoking fell. Tobacco control programs should focus on priority populations, including young adults and people with internalizing and externalizing mental health symptoms.

Funding

National Institutes of Health, R01-CA246606-01A1, R01-DA048390.

Do Current Smokers and Ex-Smokers Who Use Nicotine Vaping Products Daily Versus Weekly Differ on Their Reasons for Vaping? Findings from the 2020 ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey

This study examined reasons why adults who currently smoke or formerly smoked cigarettes use nicotine vaping products (NVPs) by vaping frequency (daily vs. weekly) stratified by smoking status. This cross-sectional study included 3070 adults from the 2020 ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey (Australia, Canada, England, United States) who reported using a NVP (vaping) at least weekly and who either currently smoke (n = 2467) or formerly smoked (n = 603). Respondents were asked to select the reason(s) they use NVPs, including to manage their smoking (reduce/quit or remain quit) and/or for reasons unrelated to managing smoking (e.g., to save money, enjoyment, flavours). We found that both current and former smokers endorsed an average of six reasons for vaping, with those vaping daily reporting significantly more reasons than those vaping weekly. Among current smokers, 72.8% reported vaping may help them quit smoking, 13.0% reported vaping to reduce smoking but not to quit, and 14.2% reported vaping only for reasons other than to reduce or quit smoking. The most common reason for vaping among current smokers was to reduce smoking (81.3%). Current smokers vaping daily were significantly more likely than those vaping weekly to report using a NVP to reduce smoking, for enjoyment, to reduce harm to themselves and others, to quit smoking, likeable flavours, and to save money. The most common reason cited for vaping by respondents who formerly smoked was enjoyment, with those who vaped daily more likely than those who vaped weekly to report vaping for enjoyment and to reduce harm to themselves. Nearly all reported vaping to help stay abstinent from smoking (92.3%), with no significant difference by vaping frequency. In conclusion, a majority of respondents reported using NVPs to manage their smoking (reduce/quit smoking or remain quit), particularly those vaping daily. Those who were vaping daily also endorsed a greater number of reasons other than managing smoking relative to those who were vaping weekly.

'It's like if a vape pen and a cigarette had a baby': a mixed methods study of perceptions and use of IQOS among US young adults

Young adults' perceptions and use of heated tobacco products (HTPs) are understudied. This mixed methods study analyzed (i) Fall 2020 survey data from 2470 US young adults (meanage = 24.67; 19.5% and 25.2% past-month cigarette and e-cigarette use; 4.1% ever HTP use) assessing HTP use intentions and perceptions (1 = not at all to 7 = extremely) and (ii) Spring 2021 interview data regarding IQOS (most widely available HTP) in a subset of 40 e-cigarette users. Among survey participants, HTPs versus cigarettes and e-cigarettes showed lower use intentions (mean = 1.27 vs. mean = 1.73, mean = 2.16) but were perceived as less addictive (mean = 5.11 vs. mean = 6.28, mean = 5.82) and harmful (mean = 5.37 vs. mean = 6.65, mean = 5.62). HTPs were perceived more socially acceptable than cigarettes but less than e-cigarettes (mean = 3.39 vs. mean = 3.13, mean = 4.37). Among interviewees, most reported limited HTP knowledge. A few perceived IQOS as a hybrid of traditional cigarettes and e-cigarettes. Most perceived IQOS as harmful but less harmful than cigarettes and were uncertain in relation to e-cigarettes. Over half reported minimal interest in trying IQOS; common reasons included IQOS containing tobacco, limited flavors and use complexity. The varied perceptions of IQOS versus cigarettes and e-cigarettes underscore the need for continued surveillance of perceptions, use and marketing of IQOS to inform regulatory oversight and potential interventions.