Smokers' sensory beliefs mediate the relation between smoking a light/low tar cigarette and perceptions of harm

A systematic review and network meta-analysis of population-level interventions to tackle smoking behaviour

This preregistered systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO: CRD 42022311392) aimed to synthesize the effectiveness of all available population-level tobacco policies on smoking behaviour. Our search across 5 databases and leading organizational websites resulted in 9,925 records, with 476 studies meeting our inclusion criteria. In our narrative summary and both pairwise and network meta-analyses, we identified anti-smoking campaigns, health warnings and tax increases as the most effective tobacco policies for promoting smoking cessation. Flavour bans and free/discounted nicotine replacement therapy also showed statistically significant positive effects on quit rates. The network meta-analysis results further indicated that smoking bans, anti-tobacco campaigns and tax increases effectively reduced smoking prevalence. In addition, flavour bans significantly reduced e-cigarette consumption. Both the narrative summary and the meta-analyses revealed that smoking bans, tax increases and anti-tobacco campaigns were associated with reductions in tobacco consumption and sales. On the basis of the available evidence, anti-tobacco campaigns, smoking bans, health warnings and tax increases are probably the most effective policies for curbing smoking behaviour.

Acute effects of charcoal filters and package color on cigarette perceptions and use behaviors: Results from a randomized pilot study examining Natural American Spirit "Sky"

INTRODUCTION

Charcoal-filtered cigarettes have been available for decades but have never held a major share of the U.S. cigarette market. This pilot study gathered initial behavioral data characterizing how "Sky"-a recently introduced charcoal-filtered cigarette variety that uses potentially misleading marketing features-is used and what impact its packaging color has on consumer perceptions.

METHODS

Forty adult daily non-menthol cigarettes users (52.5% male, 75.0% White, mean age = 46.1, 14.3 mean cigarettes/day) completed a single-session deception study utilizing a 2 ×2 mixed factorial design to manipulate cigarette filter condition (charcoal vs. non-charcoal) and pack color (light vs. dark). Participants smoked two cigarettes identical in appearance and packaging but differing in filter type (blinded and order counterbalanced) and completed pre- and post-cigarette CO samples and post-cigarette questionnaires.

RESULTS

Participants endorsed more favorable subjective ratings, puffed less of, held more correct beliefs about risks, and expressed greater intentions to use the charcoal (vs. non-charcoal)-filtered cigarette (p's <0.05). Pack color had few effects on outcomes; however, cigarettes in light vs. dark colored packs were rated as cleaner tasting (p <0.01). Neither filter condition nor pack color affected CO boost. There were no interaction effects on any outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Under blinded conditions, Sky charcoal-filtered cigarettes are initially appealing independent of their packaging color. Findings warrant further study of these effects on perceptions, behavior, and harm exposure after longer, open-label use periods. Findings may inform regulatory decisions regarding cigarette packaging and filter composition.

Tobacco industry messaging around harm: Narrative framing in PMI and BAT press releases and annual reports 2011 to 2021

Influencing public perception is a key way in which all transnational corporations (TNCs) maintain market dominance and political power. Transnational tobacco companies (TTCs) have a long history of leveraging narratives to serve commercial ambitions. The global reach of these companies' narratives has been highlighted as a challenge in combatting public health problems caused by tobacco. The corporate power of TTCs is carefully curated, and their narratives play an important role in the setting of governance dynamics at local, national and transnational levels. This qualitative work explores and compares the language used by British American Tobacco (BAT) and Philip Morris International (PMI) around harm, harm reduction and terms used to refer to newer nicotine and tobacco products, including electronic cigarettes and heated tobacco products. We systematically examine framings used by these two TTCs through company reports published between 2011 and 2021. Qualitative coding was carried out by four coders, according to a protocol developed specifically for this work. We firstly identified the presence of pre-selected keywords and then assigned chunks of text containing those key words to one or more associated frames drawn from Boydstun's policy frames codebook (2013). Qualitative coding identified the most common frames from Boydstun's codebook and thematic analysis highlighted three overarching themes. The most common frames assigned were "capacity and resources", "health and safety" and "economic" frames. The overarching themes were individualization, normalization, and regulation. These themes capture how both BAT and PMI use particular framings to downplay the role of TTCs in the perpetuation of population- and individual-level harms related to tobacco use. They seek to normalize their role in public discussions of health policy, to cast themselves as instrumental in the redress of tobacco-related inequalities and shift responsibility for the continuation of tobacco-product use onto individual consumers. These tactics are problematic for the effective and impartial development and implementation of local, national and international tobacco control agendas.

Promoting healthier options? Inside the branding of light cigarettes and targeting youth in Brazil

This study aimed to understand how the internal strategies of British American Tobacco (BAT) selling 'light' cigarettes to young people in Brazil may inform current global efforts to promote new tobacco and nicotine products. We reviewed industry documents in the Truth Tobacco Industry Documents (TTID) Library. In 1976, Philip Morris and BAT introduced 'low tar' or 'light' cigarettes in Brazil to maintain and attract new young smokers. At the time it was a novel tobacco product that implied lower health risks. While an initial push for 'light' cigarettes in Brazil did not materialise in the 1970s, BAT launched a new 'light' cigarette, Free, in 1984, with a marketing campaign consisting of symbols of personal freedom and choice to attract young people. In the mid-1990s, BAT used the success in Brazil to expand the lights segment throughout Latin America. BAT drove the lights segment through brand marketing and claims of a healthier alternative. As tobacco companies introduce and market new tobacco and nicotine products, mixing health and imagery messages, governments should recognise aggressive brand marketing messaging to attract new tobacco users and ensure that marketing regulations are enforced.

Shedding 'light' on cigarette pack design: colour differences in product perceptions, use and exposure following the US descriptor ban

INTRODUCTION

Many countries removed misleading descriptors (eg, 'light,' 'mild') from cigarette packaging because they falsely conveyed messages of reduced risk. It is unclear if relabelled products currently promote misperceptions or differences in product use and toxicant exposure. We compared product perceptions, use and exposure between a US sample of Marlboro Gold (formerly 'light') and Red smokers.

METHODS

240 non-treatment-seeking adult daily Marlboro smokers (70% male, 71% White, mean cigarettes/day=16.4 (SD=8.3)) completed two laboratory sessions over a 5-day period. During sessions, participants smoked two cigarettes through a topography device to capture their puffing behaviour, provided precigarette and postcigarette carbon monoxide (CO) assessments, and completed risk perception and subjective rating questionnaires. Self-reported cigarettes per day were verified via daily filter collection; urine collected at the end of the period was assayed for nicotine metabolites.

RESULTS

Gold (n=49) smokers were more likely than Red (n=191) to incorrectly believe their cigarettes had less nicotine and tar than regular cigarettes (ps<0.001), and rated them as weaker, less harsh, and mild tasting (ps<0.05). Differences between Red and Gold smokers in cigarettes per day and puffing behaviours trended towards significance (ps<0.1). Notably, there were no group differences on CO boost or total nicotine equivalents (ps>0.1).

CONCLUSIONS

Misperceptions about nicotine and tar exist years after rebranding Marlboro Lights as Marlboro Gold. Biological results support that Gold smokers do not have lower toxicant exposure. The US should consider comprehensive packaging or product design regulations to properly inform smokers of product risks.Trial registeration number NCT02301351.

The "organic" descriptor and its association with commercial cigarette health risk expectancies, subjective effects, and smoking topography: a pilot human laboratory study

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this mixed method pilot study was to (1) examine whether the "organic" descriptor affects smokers' health risk expectancies, subjective ratings of smoking, and topography, and (2) describe how smokers interpret the "organic" descriptor and relate it to their subjective smoking experience.

METHODS

Twenty-two daily smokers (45.5% men, 81.8% non-Hispanic White, M (SD) age = 47.3 [12.7], M (SD) cigarettes/day = 14.5 [5.1]) completed a within-person laboratory study. Following a baseline session, smokers attended 2 experimental sessions where they smoked a study-provided cigarette (identical across conditions) paired with either an "organic" or conventional (e.g., no "organic") descriptor condition and completed subjective and behavioral measures. Participants completed a semi-structured interview at the last visit.

RESULTS

Relative to the conventional cigarette, more participants rated the "organic" cigarette as healthier, having fewer chemicals, and having a more favorable burn rate (p's<0.05). There were no differences in total puff volume by condition (p=0.42). Stratifying by gender, men inhaled 225 ml (SE = 82.7) more in the conventional condition (p=0.02); women inhaled 408 ml (SE = 233.3) more in the organic condition (p=0.11). A common understanding of "organic" was that the product was "…less processed... like less chemicals and it's more natural." Some believed that "organic" cigarettes contained fewer chemicals, which in turn produced a "much cleaner and healthier smoking cigarette" and that they could "taste the difference."

CONCLUSIONS

Findings support that smokers associate the "organic" descriptor with health and reduced harm. This descriptor may differentially impact puffing behavior by gender.

IMPLICATIONS

This study provides qualitative and quantitative data regarding how the "organic" descriptor influences adult daily smokers' perceptions and use of cigarettes. After smoking two identical cigarettes described as "organic" and conventional (e.g., no "organic"), smokers expressed more problematic health expectancies about the "organic" cigarette condition, providing further empirical support that the "organic" descriptor is associated with expectancies of reduced harm. The source of reduced harm was understood to be fewer chemicals in the organic cigarette. Though preliminary, findings suggest that "organic" may differentially affect puffing behavior by gender.

Smokers' awareness of filter ventilation, and how they believe it affects them: findings from the ITC Four Country Survey

BACKGROUND

Filter ventilation creates sensations of 'lightness' or 'smoothness' and is also highly effective for controlling machine-tested yields of tar, nicotine and carbon monoxide. Nearly all factory-made cigarettes (FMC) now have filter ventilation in countries such as Australia, Canada, the UK and the USA. Research conducted before 'light' and 'mild' labelling was banned found low smoker awareness of filter ventilation and its effects. This study explores current levels of awareness of filter ventilation and current understanding of its effects in these four countries.

METHODS

We used data from the 2018 wave of the ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey with samples from USA, England, Canada and Australia. Analyses were conducted initially on a weighted sample of 11 844, and subsequently on 7541 daily FMC smokers.

FINDINGS

Only 40.3% of all respondents reported being aware of filter ventilation. Among daily FMC smokers, only 9.4% believed their cigarettes had filter ventilation. Believing that their usual cigarettes are smoother was positively associated with believing they are also less harmful. Both these beliefs independently predict believing their cigarettes are ventilated (smoother OR=1.97 (95% CI 1.50 to 2.59) and less harmful OR=2.41 (95% CI 1.66 to 3.49) in relation to those believing each characteristic is average.

INTERPRETATION

Awareness of filter ventilation is currently low, despite decades of public 'education efforts around the misleading nature of 'light' and 'mild" descriptors. Few smokers realise that their cigarettes almost certainly are vented. Smokers who believed their cigarettes have filter ventilation were more likely to believe they were both smoother and less harmful. Awareness of the technology appears to be insufficient to prevent smokers being deceived by it. Filter ventilation is inherently misleading to smokers and it is time to ban it.

Can Removing Tar Information From Cigarette Packages Reduce Smokers' Misconceptions About Low-Tar Cigarettes? An Experiment From One of the World's Lowest Tar Yield Markets, South Korea

INTRODUCTION

Despite regulations that forbid cigarette packages from displaying messages such as "mild," "low-tar," and "light," many smokers still have misperceptions about "light" or "low-tar" cigarettes. One reason may be that tar amount displays continue to be permitted. This study examines whether removing tar delivery information from packaging reduces consumer misperceptions about "low-tar" cigarettes.

METHODS

An online experiment was conducted in South Korea among 531 smokers who were randomly assigned to one of two conditions: with and without tar information on cigarette packages. Participants evaluated which type of cigarette was mildest, least harmful, easiest for nonsmokers to start smoking, and easiest for smokers to quit.

RESULTS

Ten out of 12 chi-square tests showed that people judged the lowest reported tar delivery cigarette to be the mildest (p < .01), least harmful (p < .05), easiest to start (p < .05), and easiest to quit (p < .05)-less so in the "no-tar" condition than the "tar" condition. A higher level of misbeliefs about supposed low-tar cigarettes were found in the "tar" condition compared to the "no-tar" condition for all three brands (t = 5.85, 4.07, 3.82, respectively, p < .001). Regression analyses showed that the "no-tar" condition negatively predicted the level of misbeliefs after controlling for demographic and smoking-related variables (B [SE] = -.72 (.12), -.50 (.12), -.48 (.13), respectively, p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Banning reported tar deliveries from cigarette packages is likely to reduce smokers' misconceptions about "low-tar" cigarettes. When reported tar deliveries are absent, smokers have inconsistent judgments about differently packaged cigarettes.

IMPLICATIONS

When cigarette packages depict lower reported tar number deliveries, participants erroneously perceive them to be less harmful than packages displaying higher tar numbers. These misperceptions of harm may prompt smokers who might otherwise attempt to quit smoking to instead consume cigarettes with lower tar deliveries due to the mistaken belief that they will reduce their risk.

Smokers Awareness and Risk Perceptions of Filter Ventilation

Objectives

The addition of tiny rows of holes in the tipping paper (filter ventilation) of cigarettes allows air to mix with the smoke, which can change risk perceptions. In this study, we examine smokers' knowledge and beliefs about filter ventilation.

Methods

Web-based panel surveys conducted in 2016 and 2017 of current adult cigarette smokers (N = 2355) provided data on awareness and understanding of filter vents in their cigarettes, whether they believed blocking the holes would change the taste of their cigarettes, and their perceptions about their future risk of being diagnosed with lung cancer. The most commonly used cigarette brands reported by participants also were characterized on the presence and level of ventilation holes.

Results

Approximately 40% of participants (mostly younger and male) reported awareness of the filter ventilation in their cigarettes. Only 30% of the participants were both aware of and understood the function of filter ventilation; they also were significantly more likely to worry about developing lung cancer.

Conclusion

Although misleading descriptors associated with filter ventilation are prohibited, most smokers still smoked cigarettes with filter vents, and many are unaware and misunderstand the potential risks of filter ventilation.

Reduced nicotine content cigarette advertising: How false beliefs and subjective ratings affect smoking behavior

INTRODUCTION

Tobacco advertising can create false beliefs about health harms that are reinforced by product design features. Reduced nicotine content (RNC) cigarettes may reduce harm, but research has not addressed advertising influences. This study examined RNC cigarette advertising effects on false harm beliefs, and how these beliefs - along with initial subjective ratings of RNC cigarettes - affect subsequent smoking behaviors. We further explored whether subjective ratings moderate associations between false beliefs and behavior.

METHODS

Seventy-seven daily, non-treatment-seeking smokers (66.2% male) participated in the first 15days of a randomized, controlled, open-label RNC cigarette trial. Participants viewed an RNC cigarette advertisement at baseline before completing a 5-day period of preferred brand cigarette use, followed by a 10-day period of RNC cigarette use (0.6mg nicotine yield). Participants provided pre- and post-advertisement beliefs, and subjective ratings and smoking behaviors for cigarettes smoked during laboratory visits.

RESULTS

Viewing the advertisement increased beliefs that RNC cigarettes contain less nicotine and are healthier than regular cigarettes (p's<0.001 and 0.011), and decreased the belief that they are less likely to cause cancer (p=0.046). Neither false beliefs nor subjective ratings directly affected smoking behaviors. Significant interactions of strength and taste ratings with beliefs (p's<0.001), however, indicated that among smokers with less negative initial subjective ratings, greater false beliefs were associated with greater RNC cigarette consumption.

CONCLUSIONS

Smokers may misconstrue RNC cigarettes as less harmful than regular cigarettes. These beliefs, in conjunction with favorable subjective ratings, may increase product use.

US Smokers' Beliefs, Experiences and Perceptions of Different Cigarette Variants Before and After the FSPTCA Ban on Misleading Descriptors Such as "Light," "Mild," or "Low"

INTRODUCTION

In December 2008, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) took action that prompted the removal of nicotine and tar listings from cigarette packs and ads. As of June 2010, the US Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act prohibited the use of explicit or implicit descriptors on tobacco packaging or in advertising that convey messages of reduced risk or exposure, specifically including terms like "light," "mild," and "low" and similar descriptors. This study evaluates the effect of these two policy changes on smokers' beliefs, experiences and perceptions of different cigarettes.

METHODS

Using generalized estimating equations models, this study analyzed survey data collected between 2002 and 2013 by the International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Study regarding US smokers' beliefs, experiences, and perceptions of different cigarettes.

RESULTS

Between 2002 and 2013, smoker misperceptions about "light" cigarettes being less harmful did not change significantly and remained substantial, especially among those who reported using lower-strength cigarettes. After the two policy changes, reported reliance on pack colors, color terms, and other product descriptors like "smooth" to determine cigarette strength style trended upward.

CONCLUSIONS

Policies implemented to reduce smoker misperceptions that some cigarettes are safer than others appear to have had little impact. Because of pack colors, color terms, descriptors such as "smooth," cigarette taste or feel, and possibly other characteristics, millions of smokers continue to believe, inaccurately, that they can reduce their harms and risks by smoking one cigarette brand or sub-brand instead of another, which may be delaying or reducing smoking cessation.

IMPLICATIONS

What this study adds: This study confirms that US policies to reduce smoker misperceptions that some cigarettes are less harmful than others have not been successful. Following the removal of light/low descriptors and tar and nicotine numbers from cigarette packs and ads, pack colors, color words, other descriptors (eg, smooth), and sensory experiences of smoother or lighter taste have helped smokers to continue to identify their preferred cigarette brand styles and otherwise distinguish between which brands and styles they consider "lighter" or lower in tar and, mistakenly, less harmful than others. These findings provide additional evidence to support new enforcement or regulatory action to stop cigarettes and their packaging from misleading smokers about relative risk, which may be reducing or delaying quit attempts.

The importance of the belief that "light" cigarettes are smoother in misperceptions of the harmfulness of "light" cigarettes in the Republic of Korea: a nationally representative cohort study

BACKGROUND

A number of countries have banned misleading cigarette descriptors such as "light" and "low-tar" as called for by the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. These laws, however, do not address the underlying cigarette design elements that contribute to misperceptions about harm. This is the first study to examine beliefs about "light" cigarettes among Korean smokers, and the first to identify factors related to cigarette design that are associated with the belief that "light" cigarettes are less harmful.

METHODS

We analysed data from Wave 3 of the ITC Korea Survey, a telephone survey of a nationally representative sample of 1,753 adult smokers, conducted October - December 2010. A multinomial logistic regression was used to examine which factors were associated with the belief that "light" cigarettes are less harmful than regular cigarettes.

RESULTS

One quarter (25.0 %) of smokers believed that "light" cigarettes are less harmful than regular cigarettes, 25.8 % believed that smokers of "light" brands take in less tar, and 15.5 % held both of these beliefs. By far the strongest predictor of the erroneous belief that "light" cigarettes are less harmful was the belief that "light" cigarettes are smoother on the throat and chest (p < 0.001, OR = 44.8, 95 % CI 23.6-84.9).

CONCLUSIONS

The strong association between the belief that "light" cigarettes are smoother on the throat and chest and the belief that "light" cigarettes are less harmful, which is consistent with previous research, provides further evidence of the need to not only ban "light" descriptors, but also prohibit cigarette design and packaging features that contribute to the perception of smoothness.

Australian adult smokers' responses to plain packaging with larger graphic health warnings 1 year after implementation: results from a national cross-sectional tracking survey

BACKGROUND

We assessed whether the Australian plain packs with larger graphic health warnings (GHWs) achieved three specific objectives of reducing the appeal of tobacco, increasing health warning effectiveness and reducing the ability of packaging to mislead about smoking harms.

METHODS

We compared responses from continuous cross-sectional telephone surveys of n=2176 cigarette smokers during pre-plain packaging (April-September 2012, pre-PP) with n=759 surveyed in the transition period (October-November 2012) and n=4240 during the first year of implementation (December 2012-November 2013, PP year 1), using multivariate logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

From pre-PP to PP year 1, more smokers disliked their pack (p<0.001), perceived lower pack appeal (p<0.001), lower cigarette quality (p<0.001), lower satisfaction (p<0.001) and lower value (p<0.001) and disagreed brands differed in prestige (p=0.003). There was no change in perceived differences in taste of different brands. More smokers noticed GHWs (p<0.001), attributed much motivation to quit to GHWs (p<0.001), avoided specific GHWs when purchasing (p<0.001), and covered packs (p<0.001), with no change in perceived exaggeration of harms. PP year 1 saw an increased proportion believing that brands do not differ in harmfulness (p=0.004), but no change in the belief that variants do not differ in strength or the perceived harmfulness of cigarettes compared with a year ago. Interactions signified greater change for four outcomes assessing aspects of appeal among young adults and two appeal outcomes among mid-aged adults.

CONCLUSIONS

The specific objectives of plain packaging were achieved and generally sustained among adult smokers up to 12 months after implementation.