Search

IntroductionThe prevalence of cigarette smoking among adults aged ≥55 has remained stagnant over the past decade. National data modelling suggests no reduction in cigarette smoking prevalence attributable to e-cigarette use in the USA among people aged ≥45. Misperceptions about the absolute risks (ie, cigarettes are not harmful) and relative risks (ie, e-cigarettes are more harmful than cigarettes) of tobacco products may contribute to sustained smoking prevalence and hesitancy to switch from cigarettes to e-cigarettes among older adults.MethodsParticipants reported cigarette use (n=8072) at Wave 5 (2018–2019) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study. Weighted multivariable logistic regressions included six age categories (independent variable) and cigarette and e-cigarette risk perceptions (outcomes). Additional models assessed the associations between dichotomous age (≥55 vs 18–54), risk perceptions and an interaction term (independent variables) with past 12-month quit attempts and past-month e-cigarette use (outcomes).ResultsAdults aged ≥65 were less likely than adults aged 18–24 to rate cigarettes as very/extremely harmful (p<0.05). Odds of rating e-cigarettes as more harmful than cigarettes among adults aged 55–64 and ≥65 were 1.71 (p<0.001) and 1.43 (p=0.024) greater than for adults aged 18–24. This misperception was negatively associated with past-month e-cigarette use and was stronger among adults aged ≥55 (p<0.001) than adults aged <55 (p<0.001).DiscussionAdults aged ≥55 are more likely to have misperceptions about the absolute and relative risks of tobacco products, which may contribute to continued smoking. Health communications targeting this age group could modify beliefs about the perceived harms of tobacco products.

BackgroundThe US Food and Drug Administration requires six text-only warnings for cigar products, including cigarillos. Research has demonstrated the superiority of pictorial over text-only cigarette warnings, yet the relative effectiveness of pictorial warnings for cigarillos has not been examined. We examined the impact of pictorial cigarillo warnings compared with text-only warnings.MethodsData were collected from a nationally representative sample of US young adult (18–29) cigarillo users and susceptible non-users. Participants were randomised to one of three experimental conditions: text-only or one of two pictorial conditions (combined for analyses). For each warning, we assessed negative emotional reactions, cognitive elaboration (ie, thinking about cigarillo risks) and perceived message effectiveness (PME).ResultsParticipants (N=661) were 46.5% female, 64.7% white and 21.9% Hispanic; 34.1% reported past 30-day cigarillo use; 41.4% were lifetime users (excluding past 30-day use); and 24.4% were susceptible non-users. Pictorial warnings elicited more negative emotional reactions and higher PME than text-only warnings (p values<0.01), with interactions showing the largest effects for past 30-day users (emotional reactions: d=0.99, PME: d=0.63). For cognitive elaboration, there was no main effect of warning type, but an interaction revealed effects for past 30-day users (p<0.05, d=0.46).ConclusionsPictorial cigarillo warnings elicited greater negative emotional reactions and PME compared with text-only warnings. These effects and the effects on cognitive elaboration were strongest for past 30-day users. Our findings extend research on cigarette warnings to cigarillos, demonstrating that pictorial warnings are superior to text-only warnings for cigarillos in eliciting beneficial responses.

ObjectiveE-cigarettes have gained popularity, most recently with pod-style devices, such as JUUL. We examined changes in JUUL awareness, use, perceptions, nicotine content knowledge, number of days a pod lasts and exposure to JUUL retail advertising over a 6-month period in a cohort of young adults.MethodsIn spring and fall 2018, 1836 young adults completed online surveys on tobacco use, including JUUL perceptions and use behaviours. Demographics, tobacco use and JUUL advertising exposure in spring 2018 were examined as predictors of current JUUL use in fall 2018.ResultsEver and current JUUL use doubled in 6 months (5.9% vs 12.7%, p<0.001; 1.6% vs 3.4%, p<0.001). The number of days a JUUL pod lasts significantly changed (p=0.049). Although there was an increase in those reporting JUUL has as much or more nicotine than a pack of cigarettes, 58% are ‘not sure’ of JUUL’s nicotine content. Exposure to JUUL’s advertising significantly increased (31.8% to 46.4%; p<0.001). In multivariable models, those perceiving JUUL as or more harmful than cigarettes, and former and never cigarette smokers had significantly lower odds of current JUUL use at 6 months compared with their respective counterparts (p<0.0001). Those reporting exposure to JUUL’s advertising had significantly increased odds of current JUUL use 6 months later (p<0.03).ConclusionsFindings demonstrate changes in knowledge of JUUL’s nicotine content, perceptions and use over a short period of time, suggesting frequent measurement is necessary. Additionally, efforts are needed to regulate retail advertising and ensure consumer education about product risks as they are associated with current use.

BackgroundAlthough Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-mandated waterpipe tobacco warnings were not required until August 2018, some waterpipe tobacco packaging (WTP) sold in the USA, contained warnings prior to this date. We examined the prevalence of WTP warning exposure and whether exposure influenced risk perceptions or use among young adult (aged 18–24 years) current waterpipe users.MethodsWe used data from waves 1 (2013–2014) and 2 (2014–2015) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study, a nationally representative longitudinal study of US adults and youth. We conducted logistic regression analyses to identify factors associated with wave 1 warning exposure, and whether wave 1 WTP warning exposure predicted wave 2 relative risk perceptions and waterpipe use.ResultsMore than one-third of our sample (35.9%, 95% CI 33.5 to 38.4) reported past-month WTP warning exposure. Exposure was higher among males (adjusted OR (AOR)=1.34, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.72), those who usually do not share the waterpipe (AOR=3.10, 95% CI 1.45 to 6.60), those who purchased waterpipe tobacco (AOR=1.73, 95% CI 1.28 to 2.34), and those with a regular brand (AOR=1.84, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.68). Those exposed to WTP warnings at wave 1 were more likely than those not exposed to perceive waterpipe tobacco to be as or more harmful than cigarettes at wave 2 (AOR=1.35, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.78). There was no association between wave 1 WTP exposure and wave 2 waterpipe use.ConclusionsMore than one-third of US young adult current waterpipe users reported WTP warning exposure prior to FDA-mandated warning implementation. Findings suggest the mandated warning may result in high exposure among users; it will be critical to assess exposure’s impact on risk perceptions and behaviour after FDA-mandated warnings are implemented.