Search

Introduction The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has proposed rulemaking to reduce the nicotine content in cigarettes and other combusted tobacco products to non-addictive levels. This qualitative study documents reactions to messages communicating this policy among people who use little cigars and cigarillos (LCCs). Aims and Methods We conducted eight focus groups with participants from four populations with the highest prevalence of cigar use (African American males and females, white males and females). Participants described their reactions to eight messages about the policy: Three messages about the equal risk of LCCs with regular and low nicotine levels; three quit efficacy messages about low nicotine LCCs being easier to quit; one "compensation" message to correct misperceptions about the policy causing people to smoke more to get desired nicotine; and one message about using alternative nicotine sources (eg, e-cigarettes). Results Participants perceived risk messages as the most motivating to quit, whereas efficacy messages made some participants feel that the policy would cause former users of LCCs to relapse. Many participants expressed favorable responses to the compensation message. The message about using alternative nicotine sources sparked intense responses, with many participants expressing outrage and mistrust of the message. Participants' beliefs that they were not addicted to LCCs dampened their perceptions of the effectiveness of the policy. Conclusions Perceptions of the addictiveness and relative harms of LCCS influenced responses to policy messages. The FDA should consider using different messages to communicate with people who use LCCs because they perceive LCCs as different from cigarettes. Implications This is the first study to document affective and cognitive responses to the FDA's reduced nicotine policy among people who use LCCs. The false belief that cigar products are less harmful than cigarettes may be influencing people's lack of support for the reduced nicotine policy and difficulty in understanding its potential positive impact. To maximize the public health benefit of the reduced nicotine policy, the FDA should include LCC products in the policy; however, it is crucial that they use educational messaging to clarify misperceptions regarding nicotine and harm as it applies to LCCs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Youth in the United States are using electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) at a high rate. Modifications to ENDS by youth can introduce additional health hazards which have not been previously considered. To better understand these risks, we need more information on what these modifications are, the motivations behind them, and the sources of information on modifications. Aims and Methods Utilizing a trained moderator, in 2020–2021, we conducted one-on-one interviews with 19 youth ENDS users aged 16–17 living in the United States and analyzed their responses using a qualitative description approach. Results The most prominent modification was to the e-liquid; youth indicated they mixed e-juices to create new flavors and added substances not intended for vaping, including illicit drugs such as cannabis and cocaine. Few youths from our sample were interested in achieving a specific nicotine level to vape, and modifications to the battery, coil and wick were less frequently mentioned. Some of these modifications were motivated by a desire to achieve specific experiences with their device. At other times, modifications were made due to necessity because of limited access to ENDS devices and supplies. YouTube and peers were the main sources of information about modifying. Conclusions Youth are making modifications that are both intended and unintended by the manufacturer. Adding illicit drugs and other substances not made for vaping is of particular concern. Understanding how youth modify ENDS and how that changes their use is important to guide regulatory policy intended to reduce harm to youth from ENDS use. Implications Youth from our study indicated that they make modifications to the ENDS devices, specifically to the e-liquid. These modifications are both intended by the manufacturer, such as changing the e-liquid and replacing coils, and unintended, such as adding substances not meant for vaping. Future policies aimed at reducing youth ENDS use should consider mandating better safeguards against modifications that appeal to youth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background To better understand the various influences of COVID-19 on tobacco use, we examined three different tobacco user groups using qualitative methods. Methods Ten online focus groups with 61 adults from the Atlanta, GA area were held in October–November 2020: four with exclusive smokers (n = 16), three with Electronic Nicotine Delivery System (ENDS) users (dual and exclusive, n = 22), and three with transitioning (recently quit or currently quitting) smokers and/or ENDS users (n = 23). Results Exclusive smokers reported smoking more frequently, driven by COVID-19-related stress, time at home, and boredom. They were not motivated to quit during the pandemic, and some considered smoking to be protective against COVID-19. ENDS users reported vaping less, with dual users often increasing their smoking; many were concerned about health effects of smoking and ENDS use during the pandemic. Transitioning smokers/ENDS users worried about their health and wanted to quit, but many found the stress of COVID-19 unbearable without tobacco use. Conclusions There were some similarities among the groups, but also pronounced differences. Educational campaigns should capitalize on the teachable moment of COVID-19 to increase perceived risk of smoking. Smokers need access to more adaptive ways to deal with stress (such as mindfulness training) in lieu of smoking and systems-level approaches should address structural determinants of health that cause high levels of stress. The proposed policy to lower nicotine in combusted tobacco products might help smokers choose other means of coping instead of cigarettes by reducing the stress-relieving properties of smoking particularly salient during the pandemic. Implications Smokers believe that cigarettes help them deal with the stresses and challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic. This needs to be counteracted by educational campaigns to increase perceived harm of smoking, alternative stress-relief strategies, and mandated changes to the combusted tobacco products to make them less appealing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Thus, despite policy prohibiting free tobacco product samples, findings highlight how the cigar industry circumvents these marketing restrictions through cigar festivals and similar events. Although prohibitions on tobacco company sponsorship of events exist, it is clear that premium cigar manufacturers will continue to sponsor and promote their products at cigar festivals and events in the absence of product-specific enforcement under the TCA. For instance, how often does cigar festival marketing on social media circumvent social media tobacco marketing restrictions given that it is marketing an event and not a commercial tobacco product?. [Extracted from the article]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: In 2017, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) proposed lowering the amount of nicotine in combusted cigarettes to minimally addictive levels. If used, to encourage cessation and maximize the benefits of this action, the FDA needs to determine the most effective way to communicate to the public the practical impact of this nicotine tobacco product standard.Methods: Data were collected in 2018 from a nationally representative, online probability sample of 1198 adult smokers (aged ≥18 years old) in the United States. Smokers were randomly assigned one of five versions of the question regarding what they would most likely do if nicotine in cigarettes was reduced (nicotine levels were reduced by 95%; the government reduced nicotine levels by 95%; cigarettes were no longer addictive; cigarettes no longer relieved cravings; cigarettes were changed so that you would be able to quit more easily). Effects of framing on anticipated tobacco use intentions and perceived risk of very low nicotine cigarettes (VLNCs) were evaluated with multinomial logistic regressions.Results: Framing the nicotine tobacco product standard as cigarettes no longer relieved cravings resulted in the highest proportion of smokers reporting they intend to quit in response to this standard (43.9%), lowest proportions reporting anticipated intentions to continue using combusted tobacco products (45.3%), and lowest proportion believing that VLNCs are less harmful than regular cigarettes (26%).Conclusions: Different frames of nicotine reduction in cigarettes differentially affected smokers' anticipated tobacco use intentions and perceived risk of VLNCs. Presenting reduction as making cigarettes unable to relieve cravings might be particularly effective at motivating cessation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cigarette companies increasingly promote novel smokeless tobacco products to smokers, encouraging them to use smokeless tobacco in smoke-free environments. New messages may counteract this promotion. We developed 12 initial anti-smokeless message ideas and tested them in eight online focus groups with 75 US smokers. Those smokers who never tried smokeless tobacco were unaware of health risks of novel smokeless tobacco products, perceived scary messages as effective and acknowledged the addictive nature of nicotine. Smokers who had tried smokeless tobacco shared their personal (mainly negative) experiences with smokeless tobacco, were aware of health risks of novel smokeless tobacco products, but denied personal addiction, and misinterpreted or disregarded more threatening messages. Portraying women as smokeless tobacco users was perceived as unbelievable, and emphasizing the lack of appeal of novel smokeless tobacco products was perceived as encouraging continued smoking. Future ads should educate smokers about risks of novel smokeless tobacco products, but past users and never users may require different message strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: While smoking rates have declined, use of smokeless tobacco (ST) has remained constant. ST is heavily marketed to cigarette smokers, and many ST users smoke cigarettes. This study provides updated comparisons of the characteristics, smoking behaviors, and perceptions of US adult dual ST and cigarette users and exclusive cigarette smokers in 2015-2016.Methods: Data were from nationally representative, cross-sectional surveys from 2015 and 2016. Adult smokers reported past 30-day use of ST, current cigarette smoking, risk perceptions, smoking, and quitting behaviors. We estimated Rao-Scott χ2 and adjusted odds ratios (AORs) to compare dual users and exclusive smokers.Results: Dual users were more likely to be younger, reside in nonmetropolitan statistical areas (MSA) and outside the Northeast United States. Adjusting for covariates, dual users did not differ significantly from exclusive smokers on most smoker characteristics, including number of past year quit attempts. Dual users were more likely to report past 30-day use of novel tobacco products (AORs 2.90 [little cigars and cigarillos] to 11.02 [hookah]). Dual users who reported at least 1 past year cigarette quit attempt were more likely than exclusive smokers to report using ST, traditional cigars, hookah, or heat-not-burn as a past year quit method (AOR: 9.54 [95% CI: 3.22 to 28.23]).Conclusions: Smokers who use ST are more likely than exclusive smokers to attempt to quit smoking cigarettes using other tobacco products. These findings may be attributed to increasing use prevalence of novel products. We recommend further monitoring to assess polytobacco use and differences among these populations.Implications: Many current ST users smoke cigarettes and ST promotions often target cigarette smokers. As the FDA considers ST regulations and implements a nicotine centered regulatory framework, it is imperative to evaluate how these policies and promotion of ST as potentially reduced risk products impact dual and polytobacco use. Our study found that many dual users engage in novel tobacco use in general and as a cessation method. Consideration of ST and polytobacco use among smokers may be helpful in the development of forthcoming FDA regulations, messaging, and interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]