Search

Introduction: Menthol and filter ventilation (FV) contribute to cigarette appeal. This observational study examines the US prevalence of menthol versus non-menthol cigarette use by FV and how harm perceptions, cigarettes per day and biomarkers of exposure vary., Methods: Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study (2013-2014) was merged with FV levels of cigarettes and restricted to daily smoking adults who had a usual cigarette variety and did not regularly use other tobacco (N=1614). Weighted descriptive statistics identified the prevalence of menthol and non-menthol use by low (0.02%-10.04%), moderate (10.05%-23.40%), high (23.41%-28.12%) and very high FV (28.13%-61.10%). Weighted linear regression was used to examine differences in outcomes by menthol/FV adjusted for potential confounders., Results: The prevalence of a usual brand that was non-menthol, low FV was the lowest at 2.91%. Using non-menthol cigarettes with high and very high FV (≥23.4%) vs low FV (≤10.04%) was associated with a greater likeliness of misperceiving one's cigarette variety to be less harmful than other varieties (p values<0.05). Total nicotine equivalent, biomarker for nicotine exposure, was elevated (p values<0.05) among three non-menthol groups (low, moderate and very high FV) compared with two menthol groups (moderate, very high FV)., Conclusion: The well-documented harm misperception linked to higher FV is more apparent in those using non-menthol than menthol cigarettes. Increased exposures were observed among some non-menthol cigarette users compared with some menthol cigarette users. These results should by no means delay a menthol ban but rather motivate concerted public health efforts to accompany the menthol ban to maximise smoking cessation., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: While evidence demonstrates that the industry's marketing of cigarettes with higher filter ventilation (FV) misleads adults about their health risks, there is no research on the relationships between FV, risk perceptions and smoking trajectories among youth (ages 12-17) and young adults (ages 18-24)., Methods: Data on FV levels of major US cigarette brands/sub-brands were merged with the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study to examine whether FV level in cigarettes used by wave 1 youth/young adults (n=1970) predicted continued smoking at waves 2-4, and whether those relationships were mediated by perceived risk of their cigarette brand. FV was modelled based on tertiles (0.2%-11.8%, low; 11.9%-23.2%, moderate; 23.3%-61.1%, high) to predict daily smoking, past 30-day smoking and change in number of days smoking at successive waves., Results: The odds of perceiving one's brand as less harmful than other cigarette brands was 2.21 times higher in the high versus low FV group (p=0.0146). Relationships between FV and smoking outcomes at successive waves were non-significant (all p>0.05)., Conclusion: Youth and young adults who use higher FV cigarettes perceived their brand as less harmful compared with other brands. However, level of FV was not associated with continued smoking., Competing Interests: Competing interests: RJO’C reports personal fees and non-financial support from WHO and FDA outside the submitted work. KMC, PGS and VWR each report payment as an expert witness on behalf of plaintiffs in litigation against cigarette companies outside the submitted work., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)