Search

Introduction Many people remove the tobacco leaf from cigars and replace it with cannabis (ie, blunts), but few studies have examined whether messages about the risks of cigars, like warnings on cigar packages, can affect blunt use. Methods Participants were 438 U.S. adults who reported past 30-day cigar use and ever blunt use, recruited from a probability-based national panel to take an online survey. In a 2 × 2 experiment with a between-subjects design, we manipulated two cigar warning characteristics: (1) warning type: text-only versus pictorial (ie, text + image) and (2) warning size: 30% (smaller) versus 50% (larger) of the product package. Participants then viewed six different warnings on a fictious cigarillo package, within their randomly assigned condition. After evaluating all stimuli, participants were asked the extent to which the warnings discouraged them from wanting to use cigars to smoke cannabis (ie, blunt perceived warning effectiveness). Response options ranged from "not at all" (1) to "a great deal" (5). Results We observed no main effects of warning type or size on blunt perceived warning effectiveness. However, a significant interaction existed between the two experimental manipulations (p =.009). Whereas adding images made no difference to blunt perceived warning effectiveness when warnings were smaller (simple effect: −0.22, p =.28), images mattered for larger warnings. Specifically, adding images increased blunt perceived warning effectiveness when warnings were 50% of the product package (simple effect: 0.52, p =.008). Conclusions This experiment provides preliminary evidence that larger pictorial cigar warnings may discourage blunt use relative to larger but text-only warnings. Implications Blunts, which are hollowed out cigars with tobacco leaf wrappers that are filled with cannabis leaf, are one of the most common ways in which tobacco and cannabis are used simultaneously, yet few studies have examined whether messages about the risks of cigars can affect blunt use. We conducted an online experiment concerning the perceived effectiveness of cigar warnings among people who use blunts recruited from a probability-based panel. Results provide novel, preliminary evidence that larger pictorial cigar warnings may discourage blunt use, relative to larger but text-only warnings. More research evaluating cigar warnings on blunt use is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction For cigars sold individually without packaging, including many premium cigars, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) proposed that retailers display six warning statements on a sign at the point-of-sale (POS). Aims and Methods To examine the potential effectiveness of cigar warning signs, we conducted a between-subjects online experiment. Participants were 809 U.S. adults who reported using cigars (78% ever large cigar use, 49% past 30-day large cigar use) recruited from a probability-based panel. Participants viewed an image of a cigar store countertop with randomization to one of four conditions: (1) no warning sign, (2) a sign with six FDA proposed text-only warnings, (3) a sign with six novel text-only warnings, or (4) a sign with six novel text + image warnings. We used analysis of variance (ANOVA) models and post hoc Tukey tests to examine the results. Results The FDA-proposed text-only warning sign was perceived as less effective in discouraging participants from smoking cigars (M : 3.26, SD: 1.39; scale range: 1–5, where five indicates higher discouragement) compared with the novel text-only warning sign (M = 3.38, SD = 1.40) and the novel text + image warning sign (M = 3.65, SD = 1.34). The novel text + image warning sign increased discouragement from smoking cigars versus the FDA-proposed text-only warning sign (p =.02) and decreased the perceived satisfaction of smoking cigars versus no warning sign (p =.04). In a sensitivity analysis, the novel text + image warning sign decreased the perceived satisfaction of smoking cigars (p =.01), decreased cigar purchase intentions (p =.03), decreased the urge to smoke (p =.03), and increased discouragement from smoking cigars (p =.006) compared with all other study conditions. Conclusions Results provide new evidence that policymakers, such as the FDA, could use when proposing POS warning signs for cigars. Implications The US FDA proposed that retailers display a warning sign at the POS for cigars sold individually without packaging. We conducted an online experiment concerning the potential effectiveness of this regulatory policy with people who use cigars recruited from a probability-based panel. Results provide the first evidence that the FDA-proposed text-only warning sign was perceived as less effective than other types of warning signs and that adding images could potentially increase the effectiveness of warning signs. These findings are particularly relevant for premium cigars, which are often sold individually in brick-and-mortar retail settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Many people incorrectly think that very low nicotine content (VLNC) cigarettes are less carcinogenic than current cigarettes. This risk misperception by people who smoke could reduce motivation to quit under a nicotine reduction policy. We qualitatively examined perspectives on campaign messages designed to reduce misperceptions.Aims and Methods: Adults who smoke from North Carolina participated in online interviews. After being introduced to the idea of a VLNC policy, participants were shown VLNC messages and asked about their perceptions on the clarity, understandability, persuasiveness, and meaning of the messages. We conducted a thematic content analysis of the transcripts.Results: Thirty adults who smoke cigarettes participated (15 females, 13 males, 2 nonbinary) with a mean age of 43 years. Central themes that emerged were: (1) Confusion about the proposed VLNC cigarette policy affected how messages were interpreted; (2) Messages that promote self-efficacy for quitting rather than guilt or fear were better received; and (3) Direct and succinct messages were seen as more able to grab attention and inform people who smoke. Some participant concerns focused on whether VLNC cigarettes would relieve their nicotine cravings and whether they would need to smoke more VLNC cigarettes to feel satisfied.Conclusion: Campaign messages to educate the public about the harmful effects of smoking VLNC cigarettes may be more effective if people who smoke are informed about the policy's rationale to understand why nicotine is removed rather than the other harmful chemicals. Messages should also acknowledge the difficulty of quitting and be short and direct to capture attention.Implications: Adults who smoke have some confusion about nicotine reduction in cigarettes and this affects how they perceive potential communication campaign messages about the risk of smoking VLNC cigarettes. In our qualitative research, we found that adults who smoke prefer messages about VLNC cigarettes that acknowledge the challenge of quitting and that are direct and succinct. With further development, campaign messages may be able to reduce misperceptions about VLNC cigarettes and maximize the public health benefit of a nicotine reduction policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Little systematic evidence exists about the effectiveness of cigar warnings. This study examined the perceived message effectiveness (PME) of warning statements about different health consequences caused by cigars. PME is a validated self-report scale of how effectively a health message discourages smoking.Aims and Methods: We conducted an online study from April to May 2020 with adults in the United States who used cigars in the past 30 days (n = 777). Participants were randomly assigned to view and rate PME (three items, range 1-5) for seven out of 37 text warning statements about different health consequences from cigar use. Linear mixed effects models evaluated the most effective warning characteristics (eg, type of health consequence), controlling for repeated measures and participant demographics.Results: Analyses showed that health consequences about the cardiovascular system (B = 0.38), mouth (B = 0.40), other digestive (B = 0.45), respiratory system (B = 0.36), and early death (B = 0.36) were associated with higher PME scores than reproductive health consequences (all p values <.001). Similar results were found for these health consequences compared with addiction (all p values p < .001). We also observed that awareness of the health consequence was associated with higher PME scores (B = 0.19, p < .001) and length of the warning message (number of characters) was associated with lower PME scores (B = -0.007, p = .03). No differences were observed between cancer and noncancer health consequences (p = .27) or health consequences that used plain language versus medical jargon (p = .94).Conclusions: Our study provides new evidence about the perceived effectiveness of different cigar health warning statements and identifies features that may strengthen statements.Implications: Our study with cigar smokers from across the United States provides much-needed evidence concerning the perceived effectiveness of different cigar health warning statements and features that may strengthen such statements. Mandated cigar warnings in the United States could be strengthened by including health consequences that were perceived as more effective in our study (eg, early death), using health consequences that participants were aware of, and using short warning statements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is required under the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act to communicate the risks of tobacco use to the public. Little research exists about methods to communicate the constituents of tobacco in a media campaign. This research examines specific strategies to increase effectiveness of a media campaign for cigarette smoking adults about tobacco constituents by including engagement text about smoking cessation and FDA as the source of the campaign. Methods: In an eye tracking study of 211 current cigarette smokers, participants randomly viewed 4 cigarette constituent messages that varied engagement text for quitting (benefits of quitting and quitline number, presence, absence) and by FDA source (presence, absence). After the eye tracking session, participants were asked about recall of the national quitline number and the source of message. Results: Participants in conditions with engagement text were significantly more likely than those in the no engagement conditions to recall the national quitline number. Few participants saw or recalled the FDA source. Conclusions: Engagement text for smoking cessation on constituent communication campaign messages significantly increases recall of the quitline, an important resource for smokers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) now has regulatory authority over all tobacco products. Little is known about public awareness and perceptions of the FDA in its new role as a tobacco regulator. This research utilizes focus groups to examine perceptions of the FDA as a tobacco regulator so that the FDA can communicate better with the public about this role. Methods: We conducted 6 focus groups in 2014 in a diverse sample of smokers and non-smokers. Participants were asked if they had heard of the FDA, what they knew about the FDA, if they associated the FDA with tobacco, and their thoughts about this FDA role. Results: A total of 41 individuals participated. Although nearly all participants had heard of the FDA, most were not aware of the FDA's regulatory authority over tobacco products, did not associate the role of the FDA with tobacco, and some drew comparisons between the FDA's work in tobacco and its work regulating food and drugs. Conclusion: Data suggest that although public awareness of the FDA's regulatory authority over tobacco is low, with proper public education, the public may find the FDA to be a trustworthy source of tobacco regulation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: As cannabis increasingly becomes a consumer product in the U.S., its product packaging has become critically important to regulators. This study examined the influence of recreational cannabis packaging characteristics.Methods: Five online between-subjects experiments were conducted in April 2021, and data were analyzed in May 2021-July 2021. Experiments randomized participants to view different (1) types of cannabis, (2) visual displays of tetrahydrocannabinol content, (3) cannabis packages designed around brand personality research, (4) health warnings, and (5) health claims. Outcomes included cognitive, affective, and behavioral responses.Results: A total of 841 adults from the U.S. (49% male, 50% young adults, 44% White, 17% Hispanic) were included in the study. Edible gummies were perceived as healthier (β=0.32, 95% CI=0.03, 0.62), less grown up (β= -0.58, 95% CI= -0.86, -0.28), and more socially acceptable to consume (β=0.30, 95% CI=0.01, 0.59) than cannabis concentrate in a medical dropper. Participants also had more interest in trying edible gummies (β=1.33, 95% CI=1.04, 1.62) and trying a free sample (β=1.30, 95% CI=1.01, 1.60) than trying cannabis concentrate. Cannabis packages with a helps-you-relax health claim elicited more happy (β=0.34, 95% CI=0.04, 0.64) and good (β=0.37, 95% CI=0.07, 0.67) feelings than cannabis packages without this claim. Minimal effects were found for visual displays of tetrahydrocannabinol content and health warnings.Conclusions: Edibles are a unique type of cannabis that should be given special consideration under state laws, and lawmakers should consider limiting and governing the use of both implicit and explicit health claims on recreational cannabis packages when implementing laws. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Studies of tobacco product warnings have focused primarily on the reach and effectiveness of cigarette warnings for adult smokers, whereas few observational studies have examined noncigarette tobacco product warnings among youth.Methods: High school students from the 2019 National Youth Tobacco Survey (n=10,094) reported the frequency of exposure to warnings on cigar, e-cigarette, and waterpipe tobacco packages and the perceived harm of occasionally using e-cigarettes and waterpipe tobacco. In 2020, results were analyzed for the entire sample and among subgroups, including never users, ever users, youth susceptible to using tobacco, and current users.Results: Reported high exposure to warnings was highest for cigars (22.3%), followed by that for e-cigarettes (20.8%) and that for waterpipe tobacco (7.0%). Youth who were susceptible to using cigars (AOR=1.53, 95% CI=1.29, 1.82), who ever used cigars (AOR=4.32, 95% CI=3.57, 5.22), or who currently used cigars (AOR=8.90, 95% CI=6.95, 11.39) were more likely to report high exposure to cigar warnings than youth who never used cigars. Similar findings were observed for e-cigarette and waterpipe tobacco warnings. For youth who ever used e-cigarettes, high exposure to warnings was associated with higher odds of perceiving e-cigarettes as harmful for occasional product use (AOR=1.50, 95% CI=1.05, 2.15), and high exposure to waterpipe tobacco warnings was associated with higher odds of perceiving waterpipe tobacco as harmful (AOR=1.21, 95% CI=1.00, 1.45).Conclusions: Warnings on noncigarette tobacco products reach some youth at risk for using these products, but these warnings may need to be strengthened to further reduce their use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Pictorial health warning labels (HWLs) can communicate the harms of tobacco product use, yet little research exists for cigars. We sought to identify the most effective types of images to pair with newly developed cigar HWLs., Aims and Methods: In September 2021, we conducted an online survey experiment with US adults who reported using little cigars, cigarillos, or large cigars in the past 30 days (n = 753). After developing nine statements about health effects of cigar use, we randomized participants to view one of three levels of harm visibility paired with each statement, either: (1) an image depicting internal harm not visible outside the body, (2) an image depicting external harm visible outside of the body, or (3) two images depicting both internal and external harm. After viewing each image, participants answered questions on perceived message effectiveness (PME), negative affect, and visual-verbal redundancy (VVR). We used linear mixed models to examine the effect of harm visibility on each outcome, controlling for warning statement., Results: Warnings with both and external harm depictions performed significantly better than the internal harm depictions across all outcomes, including PME (B = 0.21 and B = 0.17), negative affect (B = 0.26 and B = 0.25), and VVR (B = 0.24 and B = 0.17), respectively (all p < .001). Compared to both, the external depiction of harm did not significantly change PME or negative affect but did significantly lower VVR (B = -0.07, p = .01)., Conclusions: Future cigar pictorial HWLs may benefit from including images depicting both or external harm depictions. Future research should examine harm visibility's effect for other tobacco pictorial HWLs., Implications: The cigar health warning labels (HWLs) proposed by the US Food and Drug Administration are text-only. We conducted an online survey experiment among people who use cigars to examine the effectiveness of warnings with images depicting different levels of harm visibility. We found HWLs with images depicting both an internal and external depiction of cigar harm, or an external depiction of harm alone, performed better overall than images portraying internal depictions of harm. These findings provide important regulatory evidence regarding what type of images may increase warning effectiveness and offer a promising route for future cigar HWL development., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Little is known about how nicotine pouch products are perceived by people who smoke, including if they are perceived as a cessation aid or a substitute for when they cannot smoke. We qualitatively investigated the reactions and perceptions about On!, a leading brand of nicotine pouches., Methods: We conducted online semistructured interviews with 30 adults who smoke cigarettes. Participants viewed an On! brochure and an image of an opened nicotine pouch and were asked about their initial impression, who the intended user is, and how they thought of the product's safety compared with other tobacco and cessation products. Transcripts were independently coded and the data were analysed using thematic content analysis., Results: Among the participants, half identified as female and slightly more than half were white (n=16). The mean age was 43 years old. The following are the central themes that emerged: (1) participants perceived the concealability, flavours and packaging of On! as appealing to youth and young adults; (2) participants perceived nicotine pouches as a product that would supplement rather than replace tobacco use; and (3) the product raised health concerns, which decreased interest in trying nicotine pouches., Conclusions: Participants believed that the On! nicotine pouch promotional material may promote youth and young adult nicotine product initiation and dual product use for people who smoke. Most viewed On! as a product to use with cigarettes, rather than a way to quit cigarettes. Increased surveillance of nicotine pouches is warranted to monitor the trajectory of this emerging tobacco product and prevent youth initiation., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: Many countries have adopted warning labels for combustible tobacco products, yet little research exists describing tobacco warning characteristics globally and to what extent they meet the WHO Framework Convention for Tobacco Control (FCTC) Guidelines. This study evaluates characteristics of combustible tobacco warnings., Design: We conducted a content analysis to describe the overall landscape of warnings using descriptive statistics and compared to the WHO FCTC Guidelines., Setting: We searched existing warning databases for combustible tobacco warnings from English-speaking countries. We compiled warnings meeting inclusion criteria and coded for message and image characteristics using a pre-defined codebook., Primary and Secondary Outcomes Measures: Characteristics of combustible tobacco warning text statements and warning images were the primary study outcomes. There were no secondary study outcomes., Results: We identified a total of 316 warnings from 26 countries or jurisdictions worldwide. Of these warnings, 94% included warning text and an image. Warning text statements most often described health effects to the respiratory (26%), circulatory (19%) and reproductive systems (19%). Cancer was the most frequently mentioned health topic (28%). Fewer than half of warnings included a Quitline resource (41%). Few warnings included messages about secondhand smoke (11%), addiction (6%) or cost (1%). Of warnings with images, most were in colour and showed people (88%), mostly adults (40%). More than 1 in 5 warnings with images included a smoking cue (ie, cigarette)., Conclusions: While most tobacco warnings followed WHO FCTC guidance on effective tobacco warnings, such as communicating health risks and inclusion of images, many did not include local Quitline or cessation resources. A sizeable minority include smoking cues that could inhibit effectiveness. Full alignment with WHO FCTC guidelines will improve warnings and better achieve the WHO FCTC objectives., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Importance: Skin cancer is the most common cancer in the United States, and men experience higher rates of skin cancer than women. Despite publicized preventative measures, men are less likely than women to use sunscreen., Objective: To assess men's motivations, behaviors, and preferred product characteristics towards daily sunscreen use., Design and Setting: Cross-sectional online survey of 705 men, administered July&ndash; August 2019, using Survey Monkey and distributed through Amazon Mechanical Turk., Participants: Men ages 20&ndash;70, having completed at least High School/GED, and living in the United States were eligible. Sampling strategy ensured diversity in terms of race, ethnicity, and sexual orientation. Main Outcome(s) and Measures: Men&rsquo;s sunscreen use, behaviors, and preferred skincare product characteristics., Results: Final participants included 705 men. The most frequent skincare products used regularly were liquid soap/body wash (65%), bar soap (47%), and moisturizers (32%). Most men (n=612; 83%) reported not using sunscreen daily, and 38% reported using sunscreen weekly. Income was related to daily and weekly sunscreen use, as males who earned between $40-$50,000 annually used sunscreen less often compared to people who earned $100,000 annually (OR 0.54%, 95% CI &minus;0.34% to .88%; P = .01). Age, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, and region were not related to daily or weekly sunscreen use. Main motivators for daily sunscreen use included reducing skin cancer risk (n=575; 82%) and looking younger (n=299; 42%)., Conclusions and Relevance: This survey shows lapses in evidenced-based sunscreen behaviors to reduce skin cancer among men. Campaigns to reduce skin cancer should focus on increasing men's interest in daily sunscreen use and adherence to wearing sun-protective products. J Drugs Dermatol. 2021;20(1):88-93. doi:10.36849/JDD.5470.