Search

IntroductionIn 2018, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) required that electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) manufacturers, packagers, importers, distributors, and retailers display an addictive or alternate warning statement on e-cigarette visual advertisements. Few studies have investigated the FDA-mandated and other warnings on social media. This study examined the prevalence and content of warning statements in e-cigarette-related YouTube videos.MethodsIn 2019, The Virginia Commonwealth University Center for the Study of Tobacco Products conducted bi-monthly (February-June) YouTube searches by relevance and view count to identify e-cigarette-related videos. Overall, 178 videos met the inclusion criteria. Staff coded each video for the presence of a visual/verbal warning statement, warning statement type (eg, FDA-mandated, addiction/tobacco, safety/toxic exposure, health effects), sponsorship, and tobacco product characteristics. A data extraction tool collected the video URL, title, upload date, and number of views, likes/dislikes, and comments.ResultsOnly 5.1% of videos contained FDA-mandated and 21.9% contained non-mandated warnings. All videos with FDA-mandated and 46.2% of non-mandated warnings were represented visually. Only 13.1% of industry-sponsored videos uploaded after the mandate effective date had an FDA-mandated warning statement and videos with FDA-mandated and non-mandated (v. no) warnings had significantly fewer views, likes, dislikes, and comments. Among all non-mandated warnings, 31.3% featured an addiction/tobacco, 18.8% a safety/toxic exposure, and 37.5% a health effects warning.ConclusionsThe prevalence of FDA-mandated warning statements in e-cigarette related YouTube videos was low. FDA enforcement of the warning statement mandate on YouTube could increase the public's understanding of the addictive nature of nicotine in e-cigarettes.ImplicationsThe FDA has the authority to regulate the advertisement and promotion of e-cigarettes on the Internet. These data can inform future FDA requirements related to the language content and visual representation of addiction/tobacco, safety/exposure, and health effects warning statements that appear in YouTube videos and other visual social media popular among young people. Such data would help consumers make informed decisions about purchasing e-cigarette products, using e-cigarettes, and avoiding unintentional harm related to e-cigarettes. In addition, these data may help social media platforms make decisions on whether they will prohibit advertisements that promote or facilitate the sale of tobacco products.

Introduction:Sugars are major constituents and additives in traditional tobacco products, but little is known about their content or related toxins (formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, and acrolein) in electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) liquids. This study quantified levels of sugars and aldehydes in e-cigarette liquids across brands, flavors, and nicotine concentrations (n = 66). Methods:Unheated e-cigarette liquids were analyzed using liquid chromatography mass spectrometry and enzymatic test kits. Generalized linear models, Fisher's exact test, and Pearson's correlation coefficient assessed sugar, aldehyde, and nicotine concentration associations. Results:Glucose, fructose and sucrose levels exceeded the limits of quantification in 22%, 53% and 53% of the samples. Sucrose levels were significantly higher than glucose [χ2(1) = 85.9, p < .0001] and fructose [χ2(1) = 10.6, p = .001] levels. Formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, and acrolein levels exceeded the limits of quantification in 72%, 84%, and 75% of the samples. Acetaldehyde levels were significantly higher than formaldehyde [χ2(1) = 11.7, p = .0006] and acrolein [χ2(1) = 119.5, p < .0001] levels. Differences between nicotine-based and zero-nicotine labeled e-cigarette liquids were not statistically significant for sugars or aldehydes. We found significant correlations between formaldehyde and fructose (-0.22, p = .004) and sucrose (-0.25, p = .002) and acrolein and fructose (-0.26, p = .0006) and sucrose (-0.21, p = .0006). There were no significant correlations between acetaldehyde and any of the sugars or any of the aldehydes and glucose. Conclusions:Sugars and related aldehydes were identified in unheated e-cigarette liquids and their composition may influence experimentation in naïve users and their potential toxicity. Implications:The data can inform the regulation of specific flavor constituents in tobacco products as a strategy to protect young people from using e-cigarettes, while balancing FDA's interest in how these emerging products could potentially benefit adult smokers who are seeking to safely quit cigarette smoking. The data can also be used to educate consumers about ingredients in products that may contain nicotine and inform future FDA regulatory policies related to product standards and accurate and comprehensible labeling of e-cigarette liquids.

IntroductionPrior to the US Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) regulation of electronic cigarettes and warning statements related to nicotine addiction, there was no critical examination of manufacturer/distributor voluntary practices that could potentially inform FDA actions aimed to protect consumers. This study examined the content of warning statements and safety characteristics of electronic cigarette liquid bottles using a national sample.MethodsResearch staff randomly selected four electronic cigarette liquid manufacturers/distributors from four US geographic regions. Staff documented the characteristics of product packaging and content of warning statements on 147 electronic cigarette liquids (0-30 mg/ml of nicotine) purchased online from 16 manufacturers/distributors in April of 2016.ResultsData showed that 97.9% of the electronic cigarette liquid bottles included a warning statement, most of which focused on nicotine exposure rather than health. Only 22.4% of bottles used a warning statement that indicated the product "contained nicotine." Of bottles that advertised a nicotine-based concentration of 12 mg/ml, 26% had a warning statements stated that the product "contains nicotine." None of the statements that indicated that the product "contained nicotine" stated that nicotine was "addictive." All bottles had a safety cap and 12% were in plastic shrink-wrap. Fifty-six percent of the websites had a minimum age requirement barrier that prevented under-aged persons from entering.ConclusionsMost manufacturers/distributors printed a warning statement on electronic cigarette liquid bottles, but avoided warning consumers about the presence and the addictiveness of nicotine. Studies are needed to examine manufacturer/distributor modifications to product packaging and how packaging affects consumer behaviors.ImplicationsThese data can inform future FDA requirements related to the packaging and advertising of e-cigarette liquids; regulation related to the content of warning statements, including exposure warning statements, which are not currently mandated; and requirements on websites or language on packaging to help manufacturers adhere to the minimum age of purchase regulation. The data can also be used to help FDA develop additional guidance on the framing of statements on packaging that helps consumers make informed decisions about purchasing the product or protecting young people from use or unintentional exposure to the product.

Introduction Electronic cigarettes (ECIGs) heat a nicotine-containing liquid to produce an inhalable aerosol. ECIG power (wattage) and liquid nicotine concentration are two factors that predict nicotine emission rate ("flux"). These factors can vary greatly across devices and users. Aims and Methods The purpose of this study was to examine ECIG device and liquid heterogeneity in "real world" settings and the association with predicted nicotine flux, nicotine yield, and total particulate matter (TPM) emissions. Past 30-day ECIG users (n = 84; mean age = 23.8 years [SD = 9.6]) reported device and liquid characteristics. Device power was measured via multimeter, device display screens, or obtained via labeling. Liquid nicotine concentration was obtained via labeling or through chemical analysis. Predicted nicotine flux, nicotine yield, and TPM associated with 10 4-second puffs were calculated for participants' primary devices. Results Participants' primary devices were box mods (42.9%), disposable vapes (20.2%), and pod mods (36.9%). Most participants (65.5%) reported not knowing their primary device wattage. Rebuildable/box mods had the greatest power range (11.1–120.0 W); pod mod power also varied considerably (4.1–21.7 W). Unlike device wattage, most participants (95.2%) reported knowing their liquid nicotine concentration, which ranged from 3.0 to 86.9 mg/ml (M = 36.0, SD = 29.3). Predicted nicotine flux varied greatly across products (range =12.0–160.1 μg/s, M = 85.6 μg/s, SD = 34.3). Box mods had the greatest variability in wattage and predicted nicotine flux, nicotine yield, and TPM yield. Conclusions ECIG device and liquid heterogeneity influence nicotine and other toxicant emissions. Better measurement of ECIG device and liquid characteristics is needed to understand nicotine and toxicant emissions and to inform regulatory policy. Implications ECIG device and liquid heterogeneity cause great variability in nicotine flux and toxicants emitted. These data demonstrate the need to examine device and liquid characteristics to develop empirically informed, health-promoting regulatory policies. Policies may include setting product standards such that ECIG products cannot (1) have nicotine fluxes much greater than that of a cigarette to decrease the risk of dependence, (2) have nicotine fluxes that are very low and thus would have minimal appeal to cigarette smokers and may serve as starter products for youth or nontobacco users, and (3) emit large amounts of particulate matter and other toxicants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]