U.S. adults' addiction and harm beliefs about nicotine and low nicotine cigarettes

Nicotine beliefs and perceptions of low nicotine labels and mitigating statements among people who do and do not smoke: a cross-sectional study from Aotearoa New Zealand

BACKGROUND

Aotearoa New Zealand proposed a new maximum nicotine content of 0.8 mg/g for smoked tobacco products, although the new government plans to repeal this legislation. Requiring 'Very low nicotine' (VLN) messages on cigarettes meeting this standard may reinforce misperceptions that they are less harmful than cigarettes currently sold.

METHODS

To explore knowledge of nicotine and very low nicotine cigarettes (VLNCs), and perceptions of cigarette packs featuring different low nicotine messages (eg, 'Very low nicotine') and mitigating statements (eg, 'No cigarettes are safe'), we surveyed 354 people who smoked, 142 who formerly smoked, and 214 people who had never smoked regularly.

RESULTS

Around half of all respondents believed VLNCs were less harmful than regular cigarettes and around two-thirds incorrectly thought nicotine causes most of the related health problems resulting from smoking. Nearly a third thought VLNCs would be less harmful than regular cigarettes; 34% believed they would be just as harmful. Mitigating statements did not affect perceptions of people who smoked, although people who formerly, or who had never smoked regularly, perceived mitigating statements referring to poisons and cancer as significantly more likely than the VLN message to discourage smoking.

CONCLUSIONS

Misunderstanding of VLNCs as less harmful than regular cigarettes is widespread; VLN messages may reinforce this misperception, which mitigating statements did not correct among people who smoke. As an alternative to VLN messages, policy makers could consider introducing VLNCs on a specified date and developing public information campaigns; these measures would avoid phase-in confusion and obviate the need for VLN messaging.

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.

Randomized experimental test of a reduced-exposure message for an e-cigarette: effects on risk perceptions

Adults who smoke (AWS) who switch completely to e-cigarettes reduce their exposures to many harmful chemicals in cigarette smoke. Those who believe e-cigarettes are less harmful than cigarettes are more likely to use e-cigarettes to switch away from smoking, yet most believe e-cigarettes are at least as harmful as cigarettes. This study assessed the effect on risk perceptions of communicating that switching can reduce exposure to harmful chemicals from cigarette smoke. In a randomized experiment, AWS (n = 3485), dual users (DU) of cigarettes and e-cigarettes (n = 1756), and nonusers (n = 7316) viewed an ad for JUUL with or without a reduced-exposure message, and completed assessments of perceived risk. Message exposure decreased perceived risk of JUUL among adults who smoke, while increasing perceived risk of smoking, thus increasing the perceived risk differential (PRD). Among DU, the message increased perceived risk of smoking, but did not change perceived risk of JUUL. Among nonusers, who rated the perceived risk of all assessed tobacco products higher than did AWS and DU, the message decreased perceived risk of JUUL, and did not affect perceived risk of smoking. Accurate modified exposure communications have potential public health benefit by shifting the PRD of smoking and e-cigarettes.

Public Perceptions of Very Low Nicotine Content on Twitter: Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Nicotine is a highly addictive agent in tobacco products. On June 21, 2022, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced a plan to propose a rule to establish a maximum nicotine level in cigarettes and other combusted tobacco products.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to understand public perception and discussion of very low nicotine content (VLNC) on Twitter (rebranded as X in July 2023).

METHODS

From December 12, 2021, to January 1, 2023, we collected Twitter data using relevant keywords such as "vln," "low nicotine," and "reduced nicotine." After a series of preprocessing steps (such as removing duplicates, retweets, and commercial tweets), we identified 3270 unique noncommercial tweets related to VLNC. We used an inductive method to assess the public perception and discussion of VLNC on Twitter. To establish a codebook, we randomly selected 300 tweets for hand-coding, including the attitudes (positive, neutral, and negative) toward VLNC (including its proposed rule) and major topics (13 topics). The Cohen κ statistic between the 2 human coders reached over 70%, indicating a substantial interrater agreement. The rest of the tweets were single-coded according to the codebook.

RESULTS

We observed a significant peak in the discussion of VLNC on Twitter within 4 days of the FDA's announcement of the proposed rule on June 21, 2022. The proportion of tweets with a negative attitude toward VLNC was significantly lower than those with a positive attitude, 24.5% (801/3270) versus 37.09% (1213/3270) with P<.001 from the 2-proportion z test. Among tweets with a positive attitude, the topic "Reduce cigarette consumption or help smoking cessation" was dominant (1097/1213, 90.44%). Among tweets with a negative attitude, the topic "VLNC leads to more smoking" was the most popular topic (227/801, 28.34%), followed by "Similar toxicity of VLNC as a regular cigarette" (223/801, 27.84%), and "VLNC is not a good method for quitting smoking" (211/801, 26.34%).

CONCLUSIONS

There is a more positive attitude toward VLNC than a negative attitude on Twitter, resulting from different opinions about VLNC. Discussions around VLNC mainly focused on whether VLNC could help people quit smoking.

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.

Modeling the population health impact of accurate and inaccurate perceptions of harm from nicotine

BACKGROUND

Scientific evidence clearly demonstrates that inhaling the smoke from the combustion of cigarettes is responsible for most of the harm caused by smoking, and not the nicotine. However, a majority of U.S. adults who smoke inaccurately believe that nicotine causes cancer which may be a significant barrier, preventing switching to potentially reduced risk, non-combustible products like electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) and smokeless tobacco (ST). We assessed the population health impact associated with nicotine perceptions.

METHODS

Using a previously validated agent-based model to the U.S. population, we analyzed nationally representative data from the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) study to estimate base case rates of sustained (maintained over four waves) cessation and switching to non-combustible product use, by sex. Nicotine perception scenarios were determined from PATH data. The overall switch rate from smoking in Wave 4 to non-combustible product use in Wave 5 (3.94%) was stratified based on responses to the nicotine perception question "Do you believe nicotine is the chemical that causes most of the cancer caused by smoking cigarettes?", (four-item scale from "Definitely not" to "Definitely yes"). The relative percent change between the overall and stratified rates, corresponding to each item, was used to adjust the base case rates of switching, to determine the impact, if all adults who smoke exhibited switching behaviors based on responses to the nicotine perceptions question. The public health impact of nicotine perceptions was estimated as the difference in all-cause mortality between the base case and the four nicotine perception scenarios.

RESULTS

Switch rates associated with those who responded, "Definitely not" (8.39%) resulted in a net benefit of preventing nearly 800,000 premature deaths over an 85-year period. Conversely switch rates reflective of those who responded, "Definitely yes" (2.59%) resulted in a net harm of nearly 300,000 additional premature deaths over the same period.

CONCLUSIONS

Accurate knowledge regarding the role of nicotine is associated with higher switch rates and prevention of premature deaths. Our findings suggest that promoting public education to correct perceptions of harm from nicotine has the potential to benefit public health.

Associations of educational and marketing messages with beliefs about nicotine and reduced nicotine cigarettes

INTRODUCTION

Widespread misperceptions about nicotine may have unintended effects on public health. We examined associations between existing messages about nicotine or tobacco and beliefs about nicotine and reduced nicotine cigarettes (RNC).

METHODS

2962 U.S. 18-45-year-olds were randomized in a May 2022 web-based survey to view one of 26 text-based messages about tobacco or nicotine from three sources: ongoing research (n = 8), messages authorized by FDA for VLN cigarettes (n = 6), and FDA's "From Plant to Product to Puff" campaign (n = 12); six messages from FDA's campaign did not reference nicotine and were treated as the reference source. Analyses examined associations between messages, grouped by source and individually, with beliefs about nicotine and RNC addictiveness and harms.

RESULTS

Relative to FDA messages that did not reference nicotine, all message sources were associated with greater odds of a correct belief about nicotine (Odds Ratios [ORs] = 1.40-1.87, p's < 0.01); VLN messages were associated with greater correct beliefs about RNC addictiveness (b = 0.23, p < .05). No campaign produced greater correct beliefs about RNC harms. At the individual level, only five messages were associated with a correct belief about nicotine (ORs = 2.12-2.56, p-values < .01), and one with correct beliefs about RNC harms (b = 1.09, p < .05), vs. the reference message.

CONCLUSIONS

Few existing messages improved understanding of the risks of nicotine separately from the risks of combustible products. Communication research is needed to promote greater public understanding of nicotine while minimizing unintended effects on nicotine and tobacco use.

Perceptions of the Addictiveness of Low-Nicotine Cigarettes Versus Typical Cigarettes and Exposure to Tobacco Industry-Sponsored Corrective Campaign

BACKGROUND

In 2017, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced a regulatory plan to reduce the nicotine content of cigarettes. This study examines the association of exposure to industry-sponsored corrective statements on perceptions of the addictiveness of low-nicotine cigarettes relative to typical cigarettes within the general US population.

METHODS

The study comprised 4975 US adult respondents of the 2019 Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS 5, Cycle 3). Multinomial logistic regression models were used to examine associations between exposure to tobacco industry corrective messages and perceptions of the addictiveness of low-nicotine cigarettes relative to typical cigarettes.

RESULTS

In the overall population, 4.1% reported that low-nicotine cigarettes were much more addictive than typical cigarettes, 67.5% said they were equally addictive, while 28.4% reported they were slightly/much less addictive. Adults exposed to industry-sponsored corrective messages had higher odds of perceiving low-nicotine cigarettes as equally addictive as typical cigarettes (aOR 1.57; 95% CI, 1.13-2.19) than those who saw no corrective messages. Those exposed to the corrective messages specifically about the addictiveness of smoking and nicotine had higher odds of perceiving low-nicotine cigarettes as equally addictive as typical cigarettes (aOR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.07-2.81) compared to those who saw no corrective message.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that exposure to court-ordered tobacco industry corrective statements may have reinforced perceptions on the addictive potential of nicotine. However, study findings indicate a need for campaigns specifically tailored to address misperceptions observed in this study.

Independent and combined effects of very low nicotine cigarette messages and e-cigarette messages: a randomised clinical trial

BACKGROUND

USA is considering reducing nicotine in cigarettes to non-addictive levels, coupled with promoting alternative nicotine delivery products (eg, e-cigarettes). However, effective communication is needed to reduce misperceptions about very low nicotine cigarettes (VLNCs) being less harmful than regular cigarettes.

METHODS

In 2022-2023, we conducted a four-group randomised clinical trial with a national probability sample from an online panel (971 adults who smoked cigarettes exclusively, 472 adults who dual used cigarettes and e-cigarettes and 458 adults aged 18-29 who had never smoked). Participants were randomised (parallel assignment) to one message condition: (1) VLNCs as harmful but easier to quit than regular cigarettes (n=468), (2) those who are not ready to quit should consider switching to e-cigarettes as less harmful alternatives (n=484), (3) combined (VLNC and e-cigarette messages; n=476) or (4) control condition (ie, water ads), n=473. The primary outcome was perceived absolute harm of VLNCs.

RESULTS

Perceived harm of VLNCs was higher in the VLNC condition compared with the e-cigarette and control conditions, and higher in the combined condition compared with the e-cigarette condition (adjusted p<0.05). Among adults who dual used, intention to switch to e-cigarettes was higher in the VLNC condition than the e-cigarette, combined or control conditions (adjusted p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

VLNC messages reduced the misperception that VLNCs are less harmful than cigarettes, but adding messages about e-cigarettes did not enhance desired outcomes. These VLNC messages can be considered during the rollout of a reduced nicotine policy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT05506046.

Messaging about very low nicotine cigarettes (VLNCs) to influence policy attitudes, harm perceptions and smoking motivations: a discrete choice experiment

BACKGROUND

To reduce smoking and the harms it causes, countries, including the USA, are considering policies to reduce nicotine in combustible tobacco to minimally addictive levels. Effective messages about very low nicotine cigarettes (VLNCs) and this policy are crucial in combating misperceptions threatening the policy's effectiveness.

DATA AND METHODS

A discrete choice experiment assessed messages about VLNCs. Participants were 590 adults who smoked exclusively, 379 adults who both smoked and used e-cigarettes, 443 adults who formerly smoked and 351 young adults who never smoked (total n=1763). Seven message attributes were varied systematically (source, harm, chemicals, nicotine, satisfaction, addictiveness and quitting efficacy). Outcomes were selection of messages that generated the most positive attitude towards reduced nicotine policy, the greatest perceived harmfulness of VLNCs, and most strongly motivated quitting and initiating behaviour for VLNCs.

RESULTS

Information about specific harms and chemicals of VLNCs had the largest effects on selection of messages as eliciting more negative attitudes towards VLNCs policy, increasing perceived VLNC harmfulness, increasing motivation to quit VLNCs and decreasing motivation to try VLNCs. Messages with information about quitting efficacy were selected as more motivating to quit among those who smoke, but also more motivating to try VLNCs among those who do not smoke.

CONCLUSION

Harm and chemical information can be prioritised to ensure VLNCs are not misperceived as less harmful than regular cigarettes. Messages about increased quitting efficacy and reduced addictiveness associated with VLNCs may backfire if presented to those who do not smoke.

Testing messaging strategies to correct beliefs about nicotine and relative harm perceptions of non-cigarette tobacco products compared to cigarettes: A 2 × 2 factorial experiment of factsheets

INTRODUCTION

The misperception that nicotine is a major cause of cancer is common and may relate to inaccurate relative harm perceptions about tobacco products. To assess if messaging can correct these misperceptions, we tested factsheets that manipulated presences vs absence of (1) a causal alternative (i.e., combustion, not nicotine, causes disease) and/or (2) a reason for the misinformation (i.e., nicotine is the focus of many health messages).

METHODS

We used an online 2 × 2 factorial experiment of n = 193 adults who smoke and believe nicotine causes cancer to assess the effect of different message strategies on perceptions of tobacco products and switch intention. Pre-post differences and between-condition differences were assessed.

RESULTS

Strength of agreement with the statement that nicotine is a major cause of cancer decreased and switch intentions increased after message exposure. The proportion of participants with low relative harm perceptions increased for e-cigarettes and smokeless tobacco (p <.0001) and decreased for very low nicotine cigarettes compared to cigarettes. The message with both strategies decreased agreement that nicotine causes cancer more than the message with only the causal alternative. There was no significant effect of condition on relative harm beliefs or switch intentions.

CONCLUSIONS

Messages with both corrective strategies can reduce the belief that nicotine causes cancer to a greater extent than messaging that only contains a causal alternative. Belief accuracy increased after any message exposure, but these findings should be interpreted cautiously given the study design. Combined strategies should be further investigated in larger samples.

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.

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.

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.

Qualitative reactions to a low nicotine product standard for cigarettes from adolescents and young adults living in the United States who smoke

The Biden Administration is considering a low nicotine product standard for cigarettes. This qualitative study examined reactions to a nicotine reduction policy among adolescents and young adults (AYA) who smoke cigarettes. After completing a lab study involving masked exposure either to low nicotine or normal nicotine research cigarettes and unmasked exposure to e-cigarettes varying in nicotine concentration and flavor, we conducted follow-up semi-structured interviews (N = 25) to explore participants' knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of a low nicotine product standard and their anticipated tobacco use behavior after policy implementation. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, double-coded, and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. Nearly half of participants supported the policy because they thought it would prevent young people from starting smoking and/or would help people quit. Reasons some participants opposed the policy included beliefs that adults should have the choice to smoke or that a nicotine reduction policy is counterintuitive because the government benefits from cigarette sales. Others believed the policy would be ineffective because youth could circumvent the policy (e.g., illicit market) or would increase their smoking to maintain the same nicotine level. Almost half of participants said they would quit smoking while the other half said they would continue smoking, although potentially reduce their smoking. Overall, our qualitative findings point to the need for pre-policy media campaigns targeting AYA who smoke to minimize negative reactions, dispel fears, and correct misperceptions as well as encourage quitting and provide information on accessing cessation resources.

"I Crave a Blunt, I Don't Crave a Cigarillo": A Focus Group Study on Perceptions of Nicotine and Addiction among US Adults Who Currently Smoke Little Cigars or Cigarillos

While the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)'s proposal to reduce the nicotine content in cigarettes is gaining traction, it is still undetermined whether the policy will also include other combustible tobacco products, such as little cigars and cigarillos (LCCs), and how such a policy should be communicated given the patterns of use and perceptions around LCCs. This study examined perceptions of nicotine and addiction related to LCC use and involved data collection from eight semi-structured virtual focus groups conducted in Summer 2021 in the US. Participants were adults who reported past-30-day use of LCCs, consisting of African American males (n = 9), African American females (n = 9), white males (n = 14), and white females (n = 11). Participants discussed their perceptions of nicotine and addiction in general and in relation to LCC use. Inductive thematic analysis of transcripts was conducted. Differences across race and sex groups were examined. Participants did not consider nicotine to be a characterizing feature of LCCs; rather, they generally associated nicotine with cigarettes. Participants' views of nicotine and addiction related to LCCs were discussed along four dimensions: context of use, frequency of use, the presence of cravings, and whether a product is modified (e.g., by adding marijuana). Social and infrequent use, a lack of cravings, and the use of LCCs for marijuana were considered indicative of a lack of addiction and reasons not to be concerned about nicotine in LCCs. Because perceptions of nicotine and addiction related to LCCs differ from those of cigarettes, communications about a reduced nicotine policy that includes LCCs should consider these differences to ensure the policy is understood by people who currently use LCCs and to prevent people who use cigarettes from switching to LCCs.

Effects of advertising features on smokers' and non-smokers' perceptions of a reduced nicotine cigarette modified risk tobacco product

INTRODUCTION

Research is needed to determine the impact of marketing on perceptions and use of reduced nicotine content (RNC) cigarettes, particularly as US regulators have permitted the sale of an RNC cigarette modified risk tobacco product (MRTP) that seeks further authorisation to advertise using modified risk claims. This study examined the effects of two advertising elements (product name and disclaimer content) on perceptions of an RNC cigarette MRTP.

METHODS

Adult participants (n=807, 28.7% smokers, 58.2% male, 74.2% non-Latinx white) completed an online MTurk survey. Participants were randomised to view one of six RNC cigarette advertisements, using a 2×3 between-subject factorial design to manipulate product name ('Moonlight' vs 'Moonrise') and disclaimer content (industry-proposed: 'Nicotine is addictive. Less nicotine does NOT mean a safer cigarette' vs focused: 'Less nicotine does NOT mean a safer cigarette' vs no content), then completed recall and product perception questionnaires.

RESULTS

All participants who viewed the industry-proposed disclaimer (vs no content) perceived greater addiction risk (p's<0.05). Non-smokers who viewed this disclaimer also perceived greater health risks and held fewer false beliefs (p's<0.05). Smokers who viewed Moonlight (vs Moonrise) ads perceived lower health risks (p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Disclaimer content may effectively inform consumers about addiction risk of a new RNC cigarette MRTP, and further inform non-smokers about health risks. This element, however, had little effect on perceived health risks among smokers, among whom the Moonlight product name was associated with health risk misperceptions similar to the banned 'light' descriptor.

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).

Public Health Practitioners' Knowledge towards Nicotine and Other Cigarette Components on Various Human Diseases in Pakistan: A Contribution to Smoking Cessation Policies

Smoking cessation seems to be a weak link in the struggle against tobacco epidemic in Pakistan. Awareness regarding nicotine is lacking not only in the general population but also among public health practitioners. This lack of knowledge is one of the key barriers to bringing down the prevalence of smoking. Using primary survey data and nonparametric econometric techniques, this study assesses the knowledge of nicotine and harm reduction among public health practitioners in Pakistan. Results indicate physicians have misconceptions about nicotine. The majority of the medical professionals associate nicotine use with birth defects, cancer, cardiovascular illness, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). More than two-thirds of doctors (70%) strongly agreed and 17.9% somewhat agreed with the statement that nicotine causes cancer. This study suggests physicians need to be better informed about the fact that nicotine in tobacco products is addictive while chemicals, particularly those causing combustion, are the primary risk sources for tobacco-related illnesses. Misconceptions regarding nicotine can be quickly remedied with communication interventions. This study also suggests that alternative nicotine delivery systems can help smoking cessation and reduce the consumption of combustible tobacco in Pakistan.

'It brings light to what you really put into your body': a focus group study of reactions to messages about nicotine reduction in cigarettes

OBJECTIVE

In 2017, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced a proposed regulation to lower nicotine in cigarettes to minimally addictive levels to help smokers quit. We sought to explore effective message strategies communicating about nicotine reduction in cigarettes across the different key audiences that the regulation is most likely to influence.

METHODS

We designed four types of messages: efficacy messages, risk messages, a message about alternative sources of nicotine and a compensation message. Sixteen virtual focus groups were conducted in Atlanta and San Francisco in April-May 2020. Data were analysed in NVivo 12.0 using a thematic analysis approach.

FINDINGS

Exclusive smokers were receptive to both efficacy messages and risk messages. Dual users were the only group that was open to resorting to alternative sources of nicotine. Former smokers were critical of these messages as promoting the new kinds of cigarettes and potentially encouraging initiation and relapse of smoking. Non-smokers felt that efficacy messages downplayed the risks of smoking and did not scare people away from smoking. Presenting information that very low nicotine cigarettes (VLNCs) still contain harmful chemicals made smokers question continued smoking in the absence of nicotine and view VLNCs as harmful.

CONCLUSIONS

Messages communicating about nicotine reduction in cigarettes might help to motivate smokers to quit and can correct the misperceptions that VLNCs are less harmful. The FDA should consider specific target audiences and use different messages that complement each other in communicating about this regulation.

Perceptions of Nicotine Reduction Policy in the United States: A Qualitative Study

INTRODUCTION

Several countries are considering a reduced nicotine policy that would make cigarettes minimally or nonaddictive. This qualitative study documents reactions to the policy that should be addressed by future communication efforts.

METHODS

In 2020, we recruited participants in Atlanta, GA and San Francisco, CA (27 people who exclusively smoke, 25 who dual use cigarettes and e-cigarettes, 32 who formerly smoked, and 31 young adults who do not smoke). We held 16 focus groups: 2 focus groups for each smoking status in each city. Participants viewed messages about very low nicotine content cigarettes (VLNCs) and were asked about their reactions to each message and their overall response to the reduced nicotine policy.

RESULTS

While responses to the policy were predominantly positive, focus group discussion also revealed concerns, questions, and misunderstandings (referred to here collectively as "perceptions") that may need to be addressed if a reduced nicotine policy is enacted. Participants expressed perceptions related to the policy intent, including that the FDA has ulterior motives, adoption/ implementation, including that nicotine would have to be replaced with other chemicals if removed or that the policy would be unfeasible to implement, and effectiveness, including concern that VLNCs would still be addictive or the policy would backfire.

CONCLUSIONS

Addressing perceptions about reduced nicotine policy intent, adoption/implementation, and effectiveness could be key in creating public support and political motivation to move forward with such a policy. Countries contemplating adopting such a policy should consider pairing it with communications that address these perceptions.

IMPLICATIONS

This study is one of very few to use qualitative methods to explore potentially problematic perceptions about nicotine reduction policy among US adults. Results illuminated new policy-specific concerns, questions, and misunderstandings about the reduced nicotine policy intent, adoption/implementation, and effectiveness. Identifying, studying, and addressing relevant perceptions may play a key role in generating support in countries contemplating such a policy.

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.

Associations Between Nicotine Knowledge and Smoking Cessation Behaviors Among US 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 9140 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.

Challenges associated with e-cigarette use by people in custody in Scottish prisons: a qualitative interview study with prison staff

OBJECTIVES

Little is known about the perspectives of staff working in prisons where e-cigarettes are permitted. Scotland now permits people in custody (PiC), but not staff/visitors to use e-cigarettes, following implementation of smoke-free prisons policy in 2018. Previous studies, conducted before and immediately after the introduction of e-cigarettes in Scottish prisons, have evidenced stakeholder support for their use by PiC. This study focuses on key challenges associated with e-cigarette use in prisons, using data collected from prison staff once e-cigarettes had been allowed in a smoke-free environment for 6-9 months.

SETTING

Five prisons in Scotland.

PARTICIPANTS

Sixteen qualitative interviews were conducted with prison staff from five prisons varying by population (sex, age and sentence length). Data were managed and analysed using the framework approach.

RESULTS

While these staff confirmed strong support for the smoke-free prison policy and reported some benefits of replacing tobacco with e-cigarettes, they also spoke of the challenges e-cigarettes pose. These included: workplace e-cigarette vapour exposures; perceptions that e-cigarettes provide a new, effective way for some PiC to take illegal drugs, particularly new psychoactive substances; organisational challenges relating to the value attached to e-cigarettes in prisons; and implications for long-term nicotine use and tobacco cessation. Staff anticipated difficulties in tightening restrictions on e-cigarette use by PiC given its scale and significance among this population.

CONCLUSIONS

Maximising the benefits of e-cigarette use by PiC is likely to require multiple measures to support effective and safe use and e-cigarette reduction/cessation where desired. This includes monitoring any misuse of e-cigarettes, and provision of guidance and support on appropriate e-cigarette use and how to limit or quit use if desired. Findings are relevant to jurisdictions considering or planning changes in prison smoking or vaping policies.

Addicted to smoking or addicted to nicotine? A focus group study on perceptions of nicotine and addiction among US adult current smokers, former smokers, non-smokers and dual users of cigarettes and e-cigarettes

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

In 2017, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) proposed to reduce nicotine in cigarettes to minimally or non-addictive levels. This study qualitatively explored perceptions of nicotine and addiction, both independently and in response to messages communicating about nicotine reduction.

DESIGN

Qualitative study using focus groups. Participants described their perceptions of nicotine and addiction and their responses to messages about the nicotine reduction.

SETTING

Atlanta, GA and San Francisco, CA, USA. Semi-structured focus groups were conducted virtually in Spring 2020.

PARTICIPANTS

Exclusive smokers (n = 27), dual users (of cigarettes and electronic cigarettes) (n = 25), former smokers (n = 32) and young adult non-smokers (n = 31).

MEASUREMENT

Inductive thematic analysis of transcripts was conducted, and results were compared across smoking status groups.

FINDINGS

Participants across all smoking status groups associated nicotine with tobacco products, but consistently misperceived that nicotine caused disease. Perceptions of addiction were largely negative and varied by smoking status. Experienced smokers (exclusive smokers, former smokers and dual users) differentiated tobacco use from other addictions and minimized their own experiences of addiction. Perceptions of addiction across experienced smokers included not only the chemical properties of nicotine, but also the behavioral aspects of tobacco use, including oral fixation, having a smoking routine and response to internal and external cues. In response to messages, many believed that removing the nicotine would not make cigarettes less addictive because of the multi-factorial nature of smoking addiction that includes non-pharmacological cues.

CONCLUSIONS

Perceptions of nicotine and addiction among non-smokers, former smokers, exclusive smokers and dual users of cigarettes and e-cigarettes vary based on smoking status, but there is a common tendency to believe that nicotine is addictive, that addiction results from more than just nicotine, and that very low nicotine cigarettes will not necessarily reduce the addictiveness of cigarettes.

Educating the Public on the Health Risks of Very Low Nicotine Content Cigarettes: Results From a US-Based Convenience Sample

INTRODUCTION

US FDA issued an advance notice of proposed rulemaking to reduce nicotine in cigarettes. To maximize the benefits of this potential standard, very low nicotine content (VLNC) cigarettes must be communicated in a way that does not result in misperceptions.

AIMS AND METHODS

Adults (n = 567 who smoke; n = 610 non-smokers) from an online platform were randomized to a control message previously associated with accurate addictiveness perceptions of VLNC cigarettes but health misperceptions or to one of five messages that also included messaging on nicotine morbidity effects or VLNC cigarettes morbidity or mortality effects. p value <.01 was significant.

RESULTS

In participants who smoke, perceived lung cancer risk (responses: 1, very little risk to 10, very high risk) if smoked VLNC cigarettes regularly was higher in conditions that communicated mortality effects of VLNC cigarettes compared to the control (7.12-7.18 vs. 5.97, p values < .01). In non-smokers, perceived lung cancer risk was higher in all five message conditions when compared with the control (7.58-8.22 vs. 6.35, p values < .01). Proportion who responded accurately (ie, False) to the statement Cigarettes with 95% less nicotine are safer than cigarettes with normal nicotine levels was higher in conditions describing VLNC morbidity or mortality effects when compared with the control in both participants who smoke (52.04-67.37% vs. 30.85%, p values < .01) and do not smoke (62.50-72.38% vs. 32.00%, p values < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Messaging on mortality effects of VLNC cigarettes (ie, cigarettes with 95% less nicotine are as deadly as current cigarettes) was associated with more accurate perceptions of the health risks of VLNC cigarettes than the control; however, misperceptions remained in one-third of participants.

IMPLICATIONS

One approach to communicating a VLNC cigarette standard to the public is to include messaging on the mortality effects of VLNC cigarettes. However, further study and possible refinement of this message condition are recommended since approximately one-third of participants exposed to this message still perceived VLNC cigarettes to be safer than normal nicotine content cigarettes.

A review of the evidence on cigarettes with reduced addictiveness potential

BACKGROUND

In May 2018, the Secretariat for the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control convened a meeting to discuss the potential for reducing the addictiveness of tobacco products. A central focus was to review research findings on the behavioral effects of reducing the addictiveness of cigarettes.

METHODS

This manuscript reports the results of a review of the behavioral science literature, updated through April 2021, with special attention to both the potential benefits and unintended consequences of reducing nicotine in cigarettes.

RESULTS

Available evidence suggests that reducing nicotine content in cigarettes to very low levels could benefit public health in three primary ways, by 1) decreasing uptake of regular smoking, 2) decreasing the amount people smoke, and 3) increasing the likelihood of smoking cessation. Current evidence also suggests that reducing nicotine in cigarettes may produce similar benefits across many important subpopulations of people who smoke, including those with psychiatric comorbidities, those who use other substances, those with low socioeconomic status, young people, people who smoke infrequently and people who prefer menthol cigarettes. Cigarette nicotine reduction could also lead to some undesirable outcomes, such as experiencing withdrawal, product manipulation, an illicit market, and harm misperceptions; strategies that may mitigate each are discussed.

CONCLUSION

Overall, behavioral research suggests product standards that limit the nicotine content of combusted tobacco products could render cigarettes and similar products less addictive. The availability of legal, non-combusted products that effectively substitute for cigarettes and the dissemination of public health campaigns that clarify misperceptions about the relationship between nicotine, tobacco and disease may facilitate the extent to which a nicotine reduction policy reduces smoking.

Mobile Text Messaging for Tobacco Risk Communication Among Young Adult Community College Students: Randomized Trial of Project Debunk

BACKGROUND

The use of new and emerging tobacco products (NETPs) and conventional tobacco products (CTPs) has been linked to several alarming medical conditions among young adults (YAs). Considering that 96% of YAs own mobile phones, SMS text messaging may be an effective strategy for tobacco risk communication.

OBJECTIVE

Project Debunk is a community-based randomized trial aiming to identify specific types of messages that effectively improve perceived NETP and CTP risk among YAs in community colleges.

METHODS

With YAs recruited offline from 3 campuses at the Houston Community College (September 2016 to July 2017), we conducted a 6-month randomized trial with 8 arms based on the combination of 3 message categories: framing (gain-framed vs loss-framed), depth (simple vs complex), and appeal (emotional vs rational). Participants received fully automated web-based SMS text messages in two 30-day campaigns (2 messages per day). We conducted repeated-measures mixed-effect models stratified by message type received, predicting perceived CTP and NETP risks. Owing to multiple testing with 7 models, an association was deemed significant for P<.007 (.05 divided by 7).

RESULTS

A total of 636 participants completed the baseline survey, were randomized to 1 of 8 conditions (between 73 and 86 participants per condition), and received messages from both campaigns. By the 2-month post campaign 2 assessment point, 70.1% (446/636) completed all outcome measures. By the end of both campaigns, participants had a significant increase in perceived NETP risk over time (P<.001); however, participants had a marginal increase in perceived CTP risk (P=.008). Separately for each group, there was a significant increase in perceived NETP risk among participants who received rational messages (P=.005), those who received emotional messages (P=.006), those who received simple messages (P=.003), and those who received gain-framed messages (P=.003).

CONCLUSIONS

In this trial, YAs had an increase in perceived NETP risk. However, with stratification, we observed a significant increase in perceived NETP risk upon exposure to rational, emotional, simple, and gain-framed messages. In addition, YAs generally had an increase in perceived CTP risk and presented nonsignificant but observable improvement upon exposure to emotional, complex, and loss-framed messages. With the results of this study, researchers and practitioners implementing mobile health programs may take advantage of our tailored messages through larger technology-based programs such as smartphone apps and social media campaigns.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03457480; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03457480.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

RR2-10.2196/10977.

"It's Cool, Modifying and All, but I Don't Want Anything Blowing Up on Me:" A Focus Group Study of Motivations to Modify Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS)

Introduction: Modifications to electronic nicoti ne delivery systems (ENDS) can pose health risks to users. This study explored users’ motivations for modifying ENDS devices and how perceived risks of modifications influenced modification behaviors as product availability and device characteristics changed over time. Method: We conducted nine focus groups (February–June 2020) with 32 current ENDS users (18+, used ENDS in the past 30 days, and had been using ENDS for more than 2 months). Results: Participants primarily modified ENDS devices to improve their experiences, such as experimenting with flavor, controlling nicotine levels, or using cannabis products with ENDS. Another reason for modifying was routine maintenance to ensure a satisfactory experience, including maintaining coils and keeping batteries charged. The broader availability of ENDS products shifted modification behaviors over time, with newer devices making some modifications (e.g., coil replacement) easier and making more intricate modifications (e.g., building coil from scratch) less common. Participants were aware of modification dangers and cited perceived risk as the reason for avoiding certain modifications, such as battery alterations. Conclusions: Modifications of ENDS are ongoing and evolving among users and should be considered by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and other regulatory decision-makers as product authorization reviews are conducted and product standards are developed.

Perception and intention of using less harmful and less addictive hypothetical modified risk tobacco products among never tobacco users in the united states

AIMS

There is limited research focusing on how never tobacco users respond to claims associated with modified risk tobacco products (MRTPs). The purpose of the present study is twofold: (1) to identify how never tobacco users perceive hypothetical modified risk tobacco product (MRTP) claims; and (2) to assess whether these perceptions impact their intentions of using MRTPs described as "less harmful" and "less addictive."

METHOD

The present study draws upon a nationally representative dataset of US adults aged ≥ 18 years (n = 850) from a cross-sectional survey (HINTS-FDA, Cycle 2, 2017). Weighted unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression analyses were performed to analyze the data.

RESULTS

Participants who perceived tobacco products labeled as having "no additives" to be less harmful were close to three times more likely to report intentions of using "less harmful" (Adjusted OR = 2.93 [95% CI: 1.12-7.65]) and "less addictive" (Adjusted OR = 2.72 [95% CI: 1.03-7.21]) tobacco products than those who perceived them to be more/equally harmful. Participants who believed that tobacco products could be manufactured without some chemicals were over five and six times more likely to report intentions of using "less harmful" (Adjusted OR = 5.53 [95% CI: 1.59-19.25]) and "less addictive" (Adjusted OR = 6.60 [95% CI: 2.65-16.46]) tobacco products than those who were unlikely to believe it.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings have implications for FDA's regulation of MRTPs and provides insights regarding how the marketing of authorized MRTPs could impact population health in the future.

Responses to reduced nicotine cigarette marketing features: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the literature regarding responses to commercial and public health marketing features for reduced nicotine cigarettes (RNCs) to anticipate potential industry and regulatory actions should an RNC product standard be issued.

DATA SOURCES

We searched PubMed for English-language articles using several keywords for reduced nicotine products, cigarettes and marketing features published through 2020.

STUDY SELECTION

Of 4092 records, 26 studies were retained for review that met criteria focusing on responses to RNC marketing features.

DATA EXTRACTION

Search terms created by the research team were used for review and included independent extraction and coding by two reviewers. Coding was categorised using study design terminology, commercial and public health features in tobacco regulatory science, and their association with individual responses outlined by several message processing outcomes.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Most studies focused on current cigarette smokers and were cross-sectional. Reactions to RNCs and attitudes and beliefs were the most common outcomes measured. For commercial features, articles generally studied RNC advertisements, products and/or descriptors. For public health features, articles studied counter-messaging (eg, warning labels) or general descriptors about nicotine or a reduced nicotine product standard. Commercial features were generally associated with favourable responses. Public health features offset favourable responses across most outcomes, though their efficacy was mixed. Contrasts in results by smoking status are discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

Commercial marketing of RNCs is appealing and may need stronger regulations or communication campaigns to accurately convey risks. Opportunities exist for future research within tobacco regulatory science.

Development and testing of relative risk-based health messages for electronic cigarette products

BACKGROUND

Health messages on e-cigarette packs emphasise nicotine addiction or harms using similar wording to warnings on cigarette packs. These may not be appropriate for e-cigarettes which constitute a reduced risk alternative for smokers. This research aimed to (1) develop and test a selection of relative risk messages for e-cigarette products; (2) compare these to the two current EU Tobacco Products Directive (TPD) nicotine addiction messages; and (3) explore differences between smokers, non-smokers and dual users.

METHOD

Twenty-six messages focusing on either harm-reduction or cessation were developed and rated by multidisciplinary experts for accuracy, persuasiveness and clarity. The eight highest ranking messages were compared alongside the TPD messages in a sample of 983 European residents (316 smokers, 327 non-smokers, 340 dual users) on understandability, believability and convincingness.

RESULTS

On all three constructs combined, the two TPD messages rated the highest, closely followed by four relative risk messages "Completely switching to e-cigarettes lowers your risk of smoking related diseases", "Use of this product is much less harmful than smoking", "Completely switching to e-cigarettes is a healthier alternative to smoking", and "This product presents substantially lower risks to health than cigarettes" which did not differ statistically from the TPD messages. Non-smokers rated TPD1 significantly higher overall than dual users. Dual users rated "This product is a safer alternative to smoking" significantly higher than non-smokers. Messages did not differ on understandability.

CONCLUSIONS

These alternative messages provide a useful resource for future research and for policy makers considering updating e-cigarette product labelling.

Knowledge and Beliefs Regarding Harm From Specific Tobacco Products: Findings From the H.I.N.T. Survey

PURPOSE

Determine whether dual tobacco users have different levels of knowledge about nicotine addiction, perceived harm beliefs of low nicotine cigarettes (LNCs) and beliefs about electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes).

DESIGN

Quantitative, Cross-sectional.

SETTING

Health Information National Trends Survey 5 (Cycle 3, 2019).

PARTICIPANTS

Nationally representative adult non-smokers (n=3113), exclusive cigarette smokers (n=302), and dual (cigarette and e-cigarette) users (n=77).

MEASURES

The survey included single item measures on whether nicotine causes addiction and whether nicotine causes cancer. A five-point Likert scale assessed comparative harm of e-cigarettes and LNCs relative to conventional combustible cigarettes (1=much more harmful, 3=equally harmful…5 = much less harmful, or don't know).

ANALYSIS

We used weighted multiple linear regression model to estimate means and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of e-cigarettes and LNCs beliefs by current tobacco user status.

RESULTS

Over 97% of dual users, 83% of non-smokers and 86% of exclusive cigarette smokers correctly identified that nicotine is addictive. The majority of subjects incorrectly identified nicotine as a cause of cancer, with dual users having the lowest proportion of incorrect responses (60%). Dual users rated e-cigarette harmfulness as less harmful than combustibles (mean=2.20; 95% CI=1.73, 2.66) while exclusive cigarette smokers and non-smokers rated them as similarly harmful. LNCs were considered equally harmful and addictive as conventional cigarettes.

CONCLUSION

Dual users had a higher knowledge base of tobacco-related health effects. The effectiveness of policies or medical recommendations to encourage smokers to switch from cigarettes to LNCs or e-cigarettes will need to consider accurate and inaccurate misperceptions about the harm and addictiveness of nicotine. Improved public health messages about different tobacco products are needed.

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.

Effects of tobacco product type and characteristics on appeal and perceived harm: Results from a discrete choice experiment among Guatemalan adolescents

Guatemala is one of the few countries where both heated tobacco products (HTPs) and electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) remain unregulated. We used a discrete choice experiment (DCE) administered to 2038 high school students to assess how tobacco product attributes influence their appeal among Guatemalan adolescents. Participants were randomly assigned to evaluate 4 of 32 contrasting sets, each containing 3 packs (1 of each product type). Experimental manipulations included: product type, brand, nicotine content and flavor. Participants then indicated which product they were most and least interested in trying and would be most and least harmful to their health. Conditional logistic regression models were used to assess the impact of product characteristics on choice. Product type accounted for almost 90% of variation in choices. Respondents were less interested in trying HTPs (B = -0.93; p < 0.001) and viewed them as more harmful (B = 2.77; p < 0.001) compared to cigarettes. They were more interested in trying e-cigarettes (B = 1.22; p < 0.001), which were also perceived as less harmful (B = -1.47; p < 0.001) compared to cigarettes. Products without nicotine were of more interest for trying (B = 0.14; p < 0.001) and perceived as more harmful (B = 0.20; p < 0.001) than those with. Students were more interested in trying a flavor compared to regular tobacco and among the flavors, berry was the highest rated one (B = 0.28; p < 0.001). Finally, in this country with weak tobacco control, e-cigarettes appear to be more appealing and perceived as less harmful than HTPs and cigarettes. Packaging and flavoring regulations are urgently needed on these products as they are a marketing strategy targeting adolescents.

Regulatory approaches and implementation of minimally addictive combusted products

INTRODUCTION

A joint meeting was held by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Convention Secretariat of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control to examine the potential effects of a regulatory policy to reduce nicotine in cigarettes to minimally addictive levels. This paper reviews the feasibility of and approaches to implementing a nicotine product standard.

METHODS

Prior WHO reports on this topic were consulted and a systematic review of the scientific literature was conducted. The paper was reviewed by the participants at the aforementioned meeting and their feedback was incorporated.

RESULTS

The nicotine dose most likely to consistently reduce smoking behavior and dependence is < 0.4 mg nicotine/g tobacco. An immediate rather than a gradual nicotine reduction approach appears to be more beneficial. Smokers are likely to seek nicotine from alternate sources (e.g., nicotine replacement therapies, e-cigarettes) or potentially, the illegal market. As such, the availability of alternative products, as well as strong policies against illegal markets, can potentially mitigate unintended consequences. An effective reduced nicotine regulation must be imbedded in a comprehensive and strong tobacco control program that includes public education and surveillance. Barriers and challenges to implementing a nicotine product standard exist, particularly in low-capacity countries.

CONCLUSION

Not all countries will have the capacity to implement a regulation to reduce nicotine in cigarettes (and preferably other combusted tobacco products) to minimally addictive levels. However, for the countries that choose to implement it, such a policy could potentially dramatically reduce the burden of tobacco use.

Health Information on Waterpipe Lounge Menus to Educate Young Adults: Pilot Study Findings

BACKGROUND

For years, tobacco risk communication has largely focused on cigarette smoking. New strategies must be developed to adapt to emerging tobacco products, such as waterpipe tobacco smoking (WTS).

AIMS

The purpose of this pilot study was to determine the preliminary effects of health information on waterpipe lounge menus on the perceptions of harm and risk from WTS and inform future efficacy interventions for health communication (i.e., educating populations on the risks, harms, and health consequences of WTS).

METHOD

Participants aged 18 to 24 years (n = 213) who smoked waterpipe at least monthly were randomized to one of four waterpipe lounge menu groups using a two-by-two experimental design with "warning message" and "nicotine content" as factors.

RESULTS

Those who viewed waterpipe lounge menus that included a warning message had greater perceived relative harm to health and perceived risk of decreased lung function from WTS. Those who viewed waterpipe lounge menus that included nicotine content had greater perceived risk of heart attack from WTS.

DISCUSSION

Participants who were exposed to health warnings of WTS and information on the nicotine content of waterpipe tobacco increased on measures of perceived relative harm and risk of health consequences.

CONCLUSION

The pilot test results indicate promise for providing health information on waterpipe lounge menus to educate young adults on the harms and risks of WTS.

Risk Perceptions of Low Nicotine Cigarettes and Alternative Nicotine Products across Priority Smoking Populations

BACKGROUND

As the U.S. Food and Drug Administration considers a low nicotine product standard for cigarettes, it is important to examine how people who smoke, especially individuals from priority populations disproportionately affected by smoking, perceive low nicotine content (LNC) cigarettes and their relative risk perceptions of alternative nicotine delivery system (ANDS) products, including e-cigarettes and snus, and medicinal nicotine.

METHODS

Data are from Wave 4 (2016-2017) of the adult Population Assessment of Tobacco Use and Health (PATH) Study. We examined respondents' absolute risk perceptions about nicotine, LNC cigarettes, ANDS products and medicinal nicotine; their relative risk perceptions of LNC cigarettes and ANDS products compared to conventional cigarettes; and their relative risk perceptions of medicinal nicotine compared to ANDS products.

RESULTS

The majority of respondents across priority smoking populations indicated snus, e-cigarettes, and LNC cigarettes were 'about the same' level of harmfulness or addictiveness as conventional cigarettes. The majority of respondents indicated e-cigarettes to be 'about the same' harmfulness as medicinal nicotine.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study indicates that adults who smoke cigarettes generally have misperceptions about the harms of nicotine and the relative risks of ANDS products and such misperceptions exist regardless of their racial/ethnic identity, sexual orientation, and gender identity.

Do Young Adults Attend to Health Warnings in the First IQOS Advertisement in the U.S.? An Eye-Tracking Approach

INTRODUCTION

In October 2019, a heated tobacco product (HTP) IQOS debuted in the United States. This study examined young adults' attention and cognitions in response to an IQOS ad that carried two mandated textual health warnings (Surgeon General's warning and nicotine warning), and how their vaping and smoking status may interact with attention patterns to affect attitude and intention to use IQOS.

METHODS

In November 2019, college students (N = 164) viewed IQOS' first U.S. magazine ad and two distractor ads. Viewing patterns were recorded with eye-tracking. Masked recall and aided recognition, attitude and intention towards IQOS use were later assessed with self-report. Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regressions and moderated mediation analyses examined the associations between visual attention and viewers' cognitions about IQOS use.

RESULTS

Promotional content attracted significantly more attention compared to the warnings. Attention to the Surgeon General's warning but not to the nicotine warning was associated with recall and recognition of the warning's content. For ever-vapers, greater attention allocation to the promotional content in the IQOS ad was associated with more favorable attitude toward IQOS use, which was in turn positively associated with intention to use IQOS. Attention allocation to the warnings did not affect attitude or intentions, regardless of tobacco use status.

CONCLUSIONS

The results revealed the effects of IQOS promotional content overshadowed the two health warnings in influencing young people's attitude and intention to use IQOS. Young adults who vaped were more vulnerable to HTP advertising with respect to future use and vaping may be a gateway to HTP use.

IMPLICATIONS

This is the first eye-tracking study examining attention and cognitions associated with the new IQOS ad exposure among young adults. Promotional content in the ad attracted significantly more attention than the two warnings combined. Attention to the Surgeon General's warning but not to the nicotine warning was associated with recall and recognition of the warning's content. Greater attention allocation to the promotional content led to a more favorable attitude toward IQOS use which was associated with increased intention to use IQOS for ever-vapers. However, greater attention allocation to the warnings did not affect attitude or intentions to use IQOS.

Development and validation of behavioral intention measures of an E-vapor product: intention to try, use, dual use, and switch

BACKGROUND

The harm caused by tobacco use is primarily attributable to cigarette smoking. Switching completely to non-combustible products may reduce disease risks in adult cigarette smokers who are unable or unwilling to quit. Before a new tobacco product can enter the market or can be marketed as a modified risk tobacco product, the manufacturer must determine the impact that the product will have on the likelihood of changes in tobacco use behavior among both tobacco users and nonusers. One way to estimate change in tobacco use behavior is to assess tobacco users' and nonusers' behavioral intentions toward the product and its marketing, including intentions to try, use, dual use, and switch to the product from cigarettes. The purpose of this study was to develop and validate behavioral intention metrics appropriate for use with current, former, and never adult tobacco users.

METHODS

Preliminary items were subjected to cognitive testing with adult (1) smokers planning to quit cigarettes in the next 30 days, (2) smokers not planning to quit cigarettes in the next 30 days, (3) e-vapor users, (4) former tobacco users, and (5) never tobacco users. Items were iteratively revised based on feedback during cognitive testing, and surviving items were administered to a large sample of adults (N = 2943) representing the aforementioned sub-groups. Rating scale functioning, reliability, validity, bias, and ability to detect change were evaluated.

RESULTS

Examination of the response category thresholds generated by the Rasch model provided evidence that the rating scales were functioning appropriately. Results revealed good stability and excellent internal consistency and person reliability and provided evidence of unidimensionality and convergent validity. Estimates of reliability and validity were similar across sub-groups. A cross-validation sample generally confirmed findings from the validation sample. No items were discarded due to differential item function. Exploratory analyses provided support for ability to detect change.

CONCLUSIONS

Results from this rigorous, empirical evaluation using large validation and cross-validation samples provide strong support for the psychometric properties of the Intention to Try, Use, Dual Use, and Switch scales with current, former, and never adult tobacco users.

Experiences With Smoking Cessation Attempts and Prior Use of Cessation Aids in Smokers With HIV: Findings From a Focus Group Study Conducted in Durham, North Carolina

Cigarette smoking remains disproportionately prevalent and is increasingly a cause of death and disability among people with HIV (PWH). Many PWH are interested in quitting, but interest in and uptake of first-line smoking cessation pharmacotherapies are varied in this population. To provide current data regarding experiences with and perceptions of smoking cessation and cessation aids among PWH living in Durham, North Carolina, the authors conducted five focus group interviews (total n = 24; 96% African American) using semistructured interviews. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, coded, and thematically analyzed. Major themes included ambivalence and/or lack of interest in cessation; presence of cessation barriers; perceived perceptions of ineffectiveness of cessation aids; perceived medication side effects; and conflation of the harms resulting from use of tobacco products and nicotine replacement therapy. Innovative and effective interventions must account for the aforementioned multiple barriers to cessation as well as prior experiences with and misperceptions regarding cessation aids.

Support for a nicotine reduction policy among participants enrolled in a 20-week trial of very low nicotine content cigarettes

INTRODUCTION

The Food and Drug Administration is considering a policy to drastically reduce the allowable nicotine content of cigarettes. The current study examined whether the policy implementation approach, i.e., either immediately reducing nicotine content to very low levels or gradually reducing nicotine content over an extended period, influences policy support among people who smoke cigarettes.

METHODS

Adults who smoked daily were randomly assigned (double-blind) to an immediate nicotine reduction condition (0.4 mg/g nicotine cigarettes), a gradual nicotine reduction condition (15.5 to 0.4 mg/g), or a control condition (15.5 mg/g) for 20 weeks. Participants were asked if they would "support or oppose a law that reduced the amount of nicotine in cigarettes, to make cigarettes less addictive." Logistic regression analyses assessed if policy support was affected by treatment condition, demographic covariates, interest in quitting, and subjective cigarette effects.

RESULTS

At Week 20 (N = 957 completers), 60.4% of participants supported the policy, 17.4% opposed, and 22.2% responded "Don't know." Policy support did not differ by treatment condition. Support was greater among those interested in quitting (OR = 3.37, 95% CI = 2.49, 4.55). Support was lower among males (OR = 0.49, 95% CI = 0.37, 0.67), those with greater dependence scores (OR = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.86, 0.99) and participants aged 18-24 (OR = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.28, 0.99). No other covariates were associated with policy support.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of participants supported a nicotine reduction policy. The implementation approach, immediate or gradual reduction, did not affect policy support. Participants interested in quitting smoking were more likely to support a nicotine reduction policy.

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.

Communicating risk differences between electronic and combusted cigarettes: the role of the FDA-mandated addiction warning and a nicotine fact sheet

INTRODUCTION

The US Food and Drug Administration requires e-cigarettes to carry a nicotine addiction warning. This research compared the effects of messages communicating comparative risk of electronic and combusted cigarettes (CR messages) with and without the mandated warning and tested the effects of showing a nicotine fact sheet (NFS) before exposure to CR messages with warning.

METHOD

In an online experiment, 1528 US adult smokers were randomised to one of four conditions: (1) three CR messages, (2) three CR messages in condition one with an addiction warning, (3) an NFS followed by the three messages in condition 2 and (4) control messages. Outcomes included message reactions and perceived effectiveness, e-cigarette-related and cigarette-related beliefs and behavioural intentions and nicotine-related beliefs.

RESULTS

CR messages with and without an addiction warning did not differ. The NFS condition produced higher odds of correctly understanding the risk of nicotine and stronger beliefs that switching to e-cigarettes could reduce health risks (response efficacy) than other treatments. Compared with control, all messages made it more likely for people to report e-cigarettes are less harmful than cigarettes and increased response efficacy and switch intentions to e-cigarettes. Only NFS condition increased correct beliefs about the risk of nicotine and self-efficacy about switching to e-cigarettes.

CONCLUSION

Including an addiction warning on CR messages did not reduce intentions to switch to e-cigarettes. Communicating accurate risk of nicotine together with CR messages and addiction warning increased smokers' self-efficacy beliefs about switching completely to e-cigarettes, making it a potentially promising antitobacco communication strategy.

Perceptions of nicotine in current and former users of tobacco and tobacco harm reduction products from seven countries

Purpose

Nicotine is widely known as a tobacco constituent and for its use as a tobacco cessation aid. The development of new devices for nicotine delivery in recent years has led to uncertainty among consumers regarding the health risks of nicotine relative to tobacco. The purpose of this study was to discover if current and former consumers of tobacco and tobacco harm reduction (THR) products could distinguish between “nicotine” and “cigarettes” and examined the preceding media dialogue to determine if conflicting messages by the media influence public perceptions.

Design/methodology/approach

A quantitative survey was administered online in Norway (NO), Japan (JP), the United Kingdom (UK) and the United States (US), while face-to-face computer-aided interviews were conducted with randomly selected samples in India (IN), Greece (GR) and South Africa (SA). Participants were between 18 and 69 years of age and either current users of tobacco and THR products or previous users who quit within the past five years. Questions assessed beliefs about harmfulness of nicotine. Nicotine and other products and substances were also independently rated for harmfulness on a scale of 1–10 and subsequently compared. In addition, the authors examined the media dialogue of top media outlets in four countries to assess the potential influence on people’s beliefs.

Findings

A total of 54,267 participants (NO: 1,700, JP: 2,227, UK: 2,250, USA: 2,309, IN: 41,633, GR: 1,801, SA: 2,359) were sampled with the percentage of women participants ranging from 14.8% (IN) to 53.8% (UK). Between 68.3% (men, IN) and 88.7% (men, USA) of current consumers believed nicotine is harmful. Current consumers who agreed with the statement that nicotine is the primary cause of tobacco-related cancer ranged from 43.7% (men, UK) to 78.0% (men, SA). In six countries nicotine was rated nearly as harmful as cigarettes and alcohol, while other substances such as sugar, salt or caffeine, were usually rated as less harmful.

Research limitations/implications

A large proportion of consumers across all surveyed countries view nicotine and cigarettes similarly. Clearer communication on the harmful properties of both by the media is needed to help consumers make informed decisions about products across the continuum of risk. Messaging to consumers, especially via the media, propagates misinformation about the relative harms of tobacco and nicotine through reporting that is often incomplete and biased toward more negative aspects.

Originality/value

This study specifically assessed public perceptions of nicotine as opposed to products containing nicotine, which is the focus of previous studies. Apart from showing that consumers often incorrectly perceive nicotine and cigarettes as similar in terms of harmfulness, the authors highlight the need for more accurate and complete reporting by the media to clarify widespread misunderstandings and mitigate public uncertainty.

Interest in Illicit Purchase of Cigarettes Under a Very Low Nicotine Content Product Standard

Significance

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is considering a very low nicotine content (VLNC) product standard to substantially reduce nicotine in cigarettes. We examined whether learning about a potential VLNC standard increased smokers’ interest in illicit purchases of cigarettes with regular nicotine content if such a standard were adopted.

Methods

Participants were a national convenience sample of 1712 US adult smokers. In an online experiment, we randomly assigned smokers to view information about a new VLNC standard (experimental condition) or no information (control condition). The experimental condition explained that a VLNC standard would remove 95% of the nicotine in cigarettes and would require stores to only sell VLNC cigarettes. Then, the survey assessed smokers’ interest in purchasing regular cigarettes from three illicit sources.

Results

Smokers who learned about the VLNC standard were more likely to be very or extremely interested in purchasing regular cigarettes illicitly from a Web site compared to smokers in the control group (24% vs. 16%, p < .001). They were also more interested in illicitly buying cigarettes from a street vendor (19% vs. 13%, p < .001) and a store on an Indian reservation (28% vs. 22%, p < .05), compared to the control. The impact of learning about the VLNC standard on interest in illicit purchases did not differ by smoking frequency or current e-cigarette use.

Conclusions

A VLNC standard could increase smokers’ interest in illicit purchases of regular nicotine cigarettes. To prevent VLNC-induced illicit trade from undermining public health, FDA should consider proven measures such as track and trace for these products.

Implications

Little is known about how a VLNC cigarette standard would affect consumer interest in regular content cigarettes purchased from illicit sources (eg, the Internet). We found that smokers informed about a potential VLNC product standard had greater interest in illicit cigarette purchases, compared to controls. This suggests the importance of proactive measures accompanying a VLNC standard, such as track-and-trace cigarette packaging regulations and communication campaigns, in order to maximize the standard’s public health impact.

Nicotine Reduction in Cigarettes: Literature Review and Gap Analysis

BACKGROUND

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is considering reducing nicotine levels in cigarettes to "minimally or non-addictive levels." However, important research gaps remain, and the FDA must determine when the available research is sufficient to support moving forward.

METHODS

The authors conducted a systematic review of research articles in PubMed relating to nicotine reduction. Building on a review of risk assessment best practices, the authors also developed a risk assessment framework for tobacco regulation and used it to guide a gap analysis of nicotine reduction research.

RESULTS

The final sample consisted of 78 articles. The majority examined either nicotine dependence on very low nicotine cigarettes (VLNCs) or markers of potential health effects of using VLNCs. One-third of the identified articles reported results from four large randomized controlled trials (RCTs). While these studies report promising results and suggest that a nicotine reduction rule would be a powerful tool to reduce cigarette smoking, our gap analysis suggests that there is a need for studies that better reflect the use and availability of a wide range of tobacco/nicotine products and the potential for dual- or multi-product use.

CONCLUSION

The current body of research on nicotine reduction is weighted towards RCTs, which is appropriate for a policy that has not yet been implemented anywhere in the world. The FDA must consider a wide range of factors that may impact a product standard's public health impact, including those difficult to assess in RCTs, such as a nicotine reduction rule's impact on smoking initiation and relapse.

IMPLICATIONS

This systematic review presents a gap analysis based on a risk assessment framework to help identify remaining research priorities to inform FDA's potential product standard to reduce nicotine levels in cigarettes. Quickly addressing those gaps would support the FDA's effort to develop a nicotine reduction product standard that will be effective and withstand legal challenges.