Search

AimsTo examine the relationship between changes in electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) use and subsequent cigarette smoking cessation.MethodsUsing data from the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study (wave 1-wave 4), we analysed a study cohort of 3014 current adult cigarette smokers at wave 1 who tried to quit during the past 12 months. We categorised changes in e-cigarette use from wave 1 to wave 2 as: daily initiation, non-daily initiation, increase to daily use, increase to non-daily use, stable daily use, stable non-daily use, decrease from daily use, quit non-daily use and non-use. We estimated multivariable logistic regressions on short-term (≥1 month and

Electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) continue to rapidly evolve. Current products pose unique challenges and opportunities for researchers and regulators. This commentary aims to highlight research gaps, particularly in toxicity research, and provide guidance on priority research questions for the tobacco regulatory community. Disposable flavoured ENDS have become the most popular device class among youth and may contain higher nicotine levels than JUUL devices. They also exhibit enhanced harmful and potentially harmful constituents production, contain elevated levels of synthetic coolants and pose environmental concerns. Synthetic nicotine and flavour capsules are innovations that have recently enabled the circumvention of Food and Drug Administration oversight. Coil-less ENDS offer the promise of delivering fewer toxicants due to the absence of heating coils, but initial studies show that these products exhibit similar toxicological profiles compared with JUULs. Each of these topic areas requires further research to understand and mitigate their impact on human health, especially their risks to young users.

BackgroundBritish American Tobacco (BAT) released an industry-first human rights report in 2020, which extolled the efforts and objectives of the tobacco industry giant for promoting human rights. How BAT came to brand itself as a human rights champion, being a leader in an industry long accused of enabling human rights violations from leaf-to-stub including profiting from a product which inherently violates the right to health, is unknown. Exploring BAT's evolution through reviewing its materials and Tobacco Industry Documents could shed light on their development and what it means in the tobacco control and human rights context.MethodologyWe reviewed publicly available materials from BAT as well as conducted archival research in the Tobacco Industry Documents digital archives at University of California San Francisco. We focused on how and when BAT used terms such as 'human rights', 'right to health', 'sustainable development goal' and 'harm reduction' as well as 'Framework Convention on Tobacco Control'.ResultsWe reviewed 48 BAT publications and 45 documents from the Tobacco Industry Documents archives. These materials demonstrate both BAT's increasing utilisation of human rights language as well as BAT's reuse of the same language, concepts and general rhetoric. BAT has not engaged significantly or meaningfully on the human right to health.ConclusionBAT's increasing use of human rights rhetoric does not appear to reflect a shift in the company's human rights positions, particularly with respect to the right to health of consumers and BAT's lack of impactful measures to eliminate the harms of its tobacco products.

ObjectiveTo assess the effectiveness of e-cigarettes in smoking cessation in the USA from 2017 to 2019, given the 2017 increase in high nicotine e-cigarette sales.MethodsIn 2017, the PATH Cohort Study included data on 3578 previous year smokers with a recent quit attempt and 1323 recent former smokers. Respondents reported e-cigarettes or other products used to quit cigarettes and many covariates associated with e-cigarette use. Study outcomes were 12+ months of cigarette abstinence and tobacco abstinence in 2019. We report weighted unadjusted estimates and use propensity score matched analyses with 1500 bootstrap samples to estimate adjusted risk differences (aRD).ResultsIn 2017, 12.6% (95% CI 11.3% to 13.9%) of recent quit attempters used e-cigarettes to help with their quit attempt, a decline from previous years. Cigarette abstinence for e-cigarette users (9.9%, 95% CI 6.6% to 13.2%) was lower than for no product use (18.6%, 95% CI 16.0% to 21.2%), and the aRD for e-cigarettes versus pharmaceutical aids was -7.3% (95% CI -14.4 to -0.4) and for e-cigarettes versus any other method was -7.7% (95% CI -12.2 to -3.2). Only 2.2% (95% CI 0.0% to 4.4%) of recent former smokers switched to a high nicotine e-cigarette. Subjects who switched to e-cigarettes appeared to have a higher relapse rate than those who did not switch to e-cigarettes or other tobacco, although the difference was not statistically significant.ConclusionsSales increases in high nicotine e-cigarettes in 2017 did not translate to more smokers using these e-cigarettes to quit smoking. On average, using e-cigarettes for cessation in 2017 did not improve successful quitting or prevent relapse.

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) applies the Population Health Standard in tobacco product review processes by weighing anticipated health benefits against risks associated with a given commercial tobacco product at the population level. However, systemic racism (ie, discriminatory policies and practices) contributes to an inequitable distribution of tobacco-related health benefits and risks between white and Black/African Americans at the population level. Therefore, Black-centered, antiracist data standards for tobacco product review processes are needed to achieve racial equity and social justice in US tobacco control policy. Regardless of whether FDA implements such data standards, non-industry tobacco scientists should prioritise producing and disseminating Black-centred data relevant to FDA's regulatory authority. We describe how systemic racism contributes to disparities in tobacco-related outcomes and why these disparities are relevant for population-level risk assessments, then discuss four possible options for Black-centred data standards relevant to tobacco product review processes.

IntroductionFlavoured tobacco control policy exemptions and electronic cigarette products may contribute to increased youth access and tobacco use disparities.MethodsWe assessed public support among California Central Valley residents for four policies to regulate flavoured tobacco products and e-cigarettes. The probability-based, multimode survey was conducted with English-speaking and Spanish-speaking registered voters (n=845) across 11 counties between 13 and 18 August 2020. Weighted logistic regression analyses measured odds of policy support, adjusting for predictor variables (attitudes and beliefs) and covariates.ResultsThe weighted sample was 50% female and predominantly Latino (30%) or non-Hispanic white (46%); 26% had a high school education or less, and 22% an annual household income DiscussionFindings add to mounting evidence of support for policies to regulate flavoured tobacco and e-cigarette products. Results on attitudes and beliefs elucidate how these factors influence support.

ObjectivesTo estimate the effect of menthol use and transitions in use (switching to or from menthol) on short-term and long-term cessation from cigarette smoking and whether this differed across demographic groups (age, sex, race).MethodsWe compared the probability of 30+ day and 12-month abstinence from cigarette smoking by menthol use status using two cohorts of US adult cigarette smokers who attempted to quit smoking in the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (wave 1 to wave 3 and wave 2 to wave 4; n=5759), inverse probability of treatment weighting and adjusted risk ratios (aRRs).ResultsUsing menthol (vs non-menthol) prior to a quit attempt decreased the probability of 30+ day abstinence by 28% (aRR=0.78; 95% CI 0.67 to 0.91) and the probability of 12-month abstinence by 53% (aRR=0.65; 95% CI 0.47 to 0.88). Additionally, switching from menthol (vs maintaining menthol use) increased the probability of 30+ day abstinence by 58% (aRR=1.58; 95% CI 1.00 to 2.50) and the probability of 12-month abstinence by 97% (aRR=1.86; 95% CI 0.92 to 3.74). Switching to menthol (vs maintaining non-menthol use) was associated with a lower probability of 30+ day (aRR=0.70; 95% CI 0.42 to 1.16) and 12-month abstinence (aRR=0.64; 95% CI 0.30 to 1.36), but these associations were imprecise. The effects of menthol use on impaired quitting were slightly larger for non-Hispanic Black smokers, but not different for other demographic groups.ConclusionThese results demonstrate that menthol impaired menthol smokers' attempts to quit smoking but switching from menthol improved success. This suggests that removing menthol may improve menthol smokers' success during quit attempts.

ObjectiveTo investigate the perceptions of young people and adults, smokers and non-smokers about the current set of innovations introduced in 2018 into the Brazilian tobacco products' health warnings.MethodsTwenty focus groups were conducted in five state capitals in Brazil. The participants (n=163) were segmented by smoking status, age (15-17 years, 18-55 years) and social grade (C, D-E classes) to examine cigarette packaging and explore the participants' perceptions of health warnings.ResultsHealth warnings capture attention, eliciting apprehension, fear, disgust and concern about the negative consequences of cigarette consumption. The 2018 Brazil health warnings are spontaneously recalled by participants, even without the presence of cigarette packages. However, the analysis also reveals the challenges of overcoming communication barriers and distorted interpretations, especially among smokers. The inclusion of direct and provocative stimuli, such as the use of the word 'you', attracts attention and creates more proximity to the recipient of the message. The results also highlight the interest and fear elicited by warnings on toxic constituents and the importance of using contrasting colours in warnings, which differentiate them from the colours of cigarette packs.ConclusionIntroducing innovative components in health warnings can catch consumers' attention but considering that the interviewees encountered difficulties interpreting textual warnings about toxic constituents in cigarettes, the study reinforces the importance of adopting direct language and pictures, instead of text, which can visually transmit the warning messages and the use of specific wording that generates proximity between the emitter and receiver.

IntroductionE-cigarette users typically initiate vaping with flavoured e-liquids. People who vape flavours tend to underestimate the harm of vaping. We examined the inter-relationship between flavour preference, vaping for cessation purposes, e-cigarette dependence, e-cigarette harm perception and purchase/use intention, given a hypothetical flavour ban. We hypothesised that non-tobacco flavour preference and vaping for cessation would be negatively associated with harm perception of e-cigarettes and intention to continue vaping if a flavour ban occurred and that these effects would be mediated by e-cigarette dependence.MethodsFrom July 2019 to March 2020, we conducted intercept interviews with 276 customers at 44 vape shops in California. The predictor variables were flavour preference and vaping for cessation. The outcome variables were harm perception of e-cigarettes and intention to purchase/use, given a hypothetical flavour ban. Multilevel structural equation modelling tested whether e-cigarette dependence mediates the effects of flavour preference on hypothetical continued vaping and purchase.ResultsThose who preferred flavours showed significantly lower intention to purchase e-liquids (β=-0.28, p

BackgroundThe increased popularity of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) has been linked to the abundance of flavoured products that are attractive to adolescents and young adults. In the last decade, e-cigarette designs have evolved through four generations that include modifications in battery power, e-cigarette liquid (e-liquid) reservoirs and atomiser units. E-liquids have likewise evolved in terms of solvent use/ratios, concentration and number of flavour chemicals, use of nicotine salts and acids, the recent increased use of synthetic cooling agents and the introduction of synthetic nicotine. Our current objective was to evaluate and compare the evolving composition of tobacco-flavoured e-liquids over the last 10 years.MethodsOur extensive database of flavour chemicals in e-liquids was used to identify trends and changes in flavour chemical composition and concentrations.ResultsTobacco-flavoured products purchased in 2010 and 2011 generally had very few flavour chemicals, and their concentrations were generally very low. In tobacco-flavoured refill fluids purchased in 2019 and Puff Bar Tobacco e-cigarettes, the total number and concentration of flavour chemicals were higher than expected. Products with total flavour chemicals >10 mg/mL contained one to five dominant flavour chemicals (>1 mg/mL). The most frequently used flavour chemicals in tobacco e-liquids were fruity and caramellic.ConclusionsThere is a need for continuous surveillance of e-liquids, which are evolving in often subtle and harmful ways. Chemical constituents of tobacco flavours should be monitored as they clearly can be doctored by manufacturers to have a taste that would appeal to young users.

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued orders in July 2020 authorising Philip Morris Products S.A. to market its heated tobacco product (HTP) IQOS inside the USA with claims that it reduces exposure to some dangerous substances. FDA's 'reduced-exposure' orders explicitly prohibit the marketing of IQOS with claims that IQOS will reduce harm or the risk of tobacco-related diseases. Under US law, FDA's IQOS orders are problematic because FDA disregarded valid scientific evidence that IQOS increases exposure to other dangerous toxins and that Philip Morris Products S.A. failed to demonstrate that consumers understand the difference between reduced-exposure and reduced-harm claims. Unfortunately, both 'reduced-exposure' and 'reduced-harm' are classified as 'modified risk tobacco products' under US law. Exploiting this confusion, Philip Morris International used the FDA decision as the basis for marketing and public relations campaigns outside the USA to press governments to reverse policies that ban or regulate the sales and marketing of HTPs, including IQOS. Parties to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control should reject tobacco companies' unsubstantiated explicit or implied claims of reduced harm associated with HTPs and resist Philip Morris International's and other companies' calls to relax HTP regulations based on the FDA's actions. Instead, parties should adopt policies aligned with the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control when dealing with HTPs and other novel tobacco products.

ObjectivesTo assess whether the late 2019 US outbreak of pulmonary disease linked to vaping ('E-cigarette, or Vaping, product use Associated Lung Injury' (EVALI)) impacted online shopping queries for vaping products and the Philip Morris 'IQO' brand of heated tobacco.MethodsWe tracked online shopping queries for vape(s), JUUL and IQOS by analysing rates of Google queries indicative of shopping (eg, buy IQOS) after news of the outbreak was first reported (the week of 29 July 2019) until hospitalisations ceased (the week of 16 February 2020). We compared observed rates of shopping during the outbreak to counterfactual expected rates that were predicted using an autoregressive iterative moving average model fit to queries from 1 January 2014 to the week of 21 July 2019.ResultsDuring the outbreak, vape shopping queries were 34% (95% CI 30% to 38%) lower than expected and JUUL shopping queries were 39% (95% CI 34% to 45%) lower than expected, translating into about 7.2 and 1.0 million fewer searches. IQOS shopping queries were 58% (95% prediction interval (PI): 34-87) higher than expected, translating into 35 000 more searches. Moreover, IQOS shopping queries reached a historic high the week they were discussed as a potentially safe alternative to vaping (the week of 29 September 2019), when they were 382% (95% PI: 219-881) above expected rates for the week.ConclusionsThese results suggest that unplanned events, such as the EVALI outbreak, can provoke changes in the epidemiology of product usage. Tobacco companies should be prohibited from using events such as disease outbreaks to position their products as less harmful without prior approval.

BackgroundThe Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has recently banned flavours from pod-style electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes), except for menthol and tobacco. JUUL customers have quickly discovered that flavoured disposable e-cigarettes from other manufacturers, such as Puff, are readily available. Our goal was to compare flavour chemicals, synthetic coolants and pulegone in mint-flavoured/menthol-flavoured e-cigarettes from JUUL and Puff, evaluate the cytotoxicity of the coolants and perform a cancer risk assessment for pulegone, which is present in both JUUL pods and disposable Puff products.MethodsIdentification and quantification of chemicals were performed using gas chromatography/mass spectrometry. Cytotoxicity of the coolants was evaluated with BEAS-2B cells using the MTT 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide assay. The cancer risk of pulegone was calculated using the margin of exposure (MOE).ResultsMenthol was the dominant flavour chemical (>1 mg/mL) in all products from both manufacturers. Minor flavour chemicals (

With patented nicotine salt technology, JUUL dominates the e-cigarette market. We reviewed studies of JUUL's nicotine pharmacokinetic profile and studies quantifying nicotine in a JUULpod, emitted in the aerosol and absorbed by users. Examined in eight studies, JUUL's peak nicotine levels were half to three-quarters that of a combustible cigarette in industry-conducted studies with JUUL-naïve users, while comparable to or greater than combustible cigarettes in independent studies of experienced e-cigarette users. JUUL Labs reports each 5% (nicotine-by-weight) cartridge contains approximately 40 mg nicotine per pod and is 'approximately equivalent to about 1 pack of cigarettes.' In five independent studies, nicotine in the liquid in a JUULpod ranged from 39.3 to 48.3 mg. Seven studies measured nicotine delivery via vaping-machine generated aerosols, varying in puffing regimes and equipment. One study estimated 68% transfer efficiency to the aerosol, measuring 28.8 mg nicotine per JUULpod. The other studies reported nicotine values ranging from 72 to 164 µg/puff. At 200 puffs, this is 14.4-32.8 mg of nicotine per pod with equivalence to 13-30 cigarettes. A study measuring nicotine levels in JUUL users during a 5-day controlled switch found equivalence to 18 cigarettes. One JUULpod appears capable of delivering the nicotine equivalent to smoking about a pack of cigarettes, with variability. In JUUL-naïve smokers, JUUL's nicotine boost was lower than that of combustible cigarettes; while in experienced users, JUUL was comparable. Minimising harshness and adaptive to user experience, JUUL's design facilitates initiation to a high nicotine, and ultimately, highly addictive vaping product.

BackgroundHeated tobacco products (HTP) generate nicotine-containing aerosol by heating tobacco rather than burning it. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has recently authorised the sale of one HTP brand, iQOS, in the USA. This study examined the awareness, use and risk perceptions of HTP in the USA following FDA authorisation.MethodsA national probability sample of 20 449 US adults completed an online survey between November 2019 and February 2020. In addition to assessing awareness and use of HTP, two ratios were calculated: the ratio of those who experimented with HTP given that they had heard about it (E/H) and the ratio of those who currently used HTP given experimentation (C/E). These ratios for HTP were compared against those for e-cigarettes from a similar national survey in 2012.ResultsOverall, 8.1% of respondents had heard of HTP. Only 0.55% had tried and 0.10% were current users. The rate of experimentation among those who heard about HTP and the rate of current use among experimenters were, however, similar to those for e-cigarettes in 2012: E/H and C/E for HTP were 6.8% and 18.2%, respectively; and 10.7% and 17.8%, respectively for e-cigarettes. The majority of respondents considered HTP either less harmful than (11.6%), or equally harmful as e-cigarettes (42.7%).ConclusionsOnly a small fraction of US population in 2020 have tried any HTP. However, the similarity in early adoption rates following awareness, suggests that future adoption for HTP may be similar to that for e-cigarettes, if HTP are marketed more aggressively.