Search

Introduction: Effective in August 10, 2018, FDA requires advertisements for electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) that meet the definition of a "covered tobacco product" to feature a standard nicotine warning statement. To date, limited data exist on the presence of warning statements in ENDS advertising.Methods: We acquired ENDS ads (n = 459) that first ran six months before (February 10, 2018-August 9, 2018) and after (August 10, 2018-February 9, 2019) the effective date. The sample included online, print, and outdoor static ads (ie, without video or animated graphics) (n = 166 before, n = 198 after), online and television video ads (n = 16 before, n = 49 after), and radio ads (n = 9 before, n = 21 after). We coded ads for the presence of the verbatim FDA warning. Ads with verbatim warnings were coded for required formatting and additional features.Results: Overall, 28% of static (n = 46/166), 62% of video (n = 10/16), and 67% of radio (n = 6/9) ads that ran before the effective date contained the verbatim warning versus 84% (n = 167/198, p < .001), 96% (n = 47/49, p = .002), and 86% (n = 18/21, p =.329) of ads that ran after, respectively. Following the effective date, nearly all static ads placed the warning as required at the top of the ad (76% [n = 35/46] before, 97% [n = 162/167] after, p < .001), and many video ads featured the warning statement for the entire ad duration (0% [n = 0/10] before, 60% [n = 28/47] after, p < .001). Half (n = 9/18) of radio warnings running after the effective date were read faster than the other promotional content.Conclusions: The presence of the nicotine warning statement on paid promotional static, video, and radio ENDS ads in this sample increased after August 10, 2018, but a notable number still lacked the warning.Implications: Results from this study provide initial insights into the extent to which required nicotine warning statements appear in ENDS ads in the study sample across traditional (eg, magazines, television, radio) and digital (eg, online/mobile ads) advertising mediums. Following the August 10, 2018, effective date, we observed a substantial increase in the presence of the required FDA warning statement on the ENDS ads in this sample. However, a notable number of ads in the study lacked the required warning and warnings did not always include the required formatting displays. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Pharmacy stores are positioned to cultivate health and wellness among patrons. This study assessed attitudes toward prohibiting tobacco product sales in pharmacy stores among U.S. adults.Methods: Data from the 2014 Summer Styles, an Internet survey of U.S. adults aged ≥18 years (n=4,269), were analyzed in 2015. Respondents were asked: Do you favor or oppose banning the sale of all tobacco products in retail pharmacy stores? Responses were: strongly favor, somewhat favor, somewhat oppose, and strongly oppose. Prevalence ratios were calculated using multivariate Poisson regression to determine sociodemographic correlates of favorability (strongly or somewhat).Results: Among all adults, 66.1% "strongly" or "somewhat" favored prohibiting tobacco product sales in pharmacy stores. Favorability was 46.5% among current cigarette smokers, 66.3% among former smokers, and 71.8% among never smokers. Favorability was 47.8% among current non-cigarette tobacco users, 63.2% among former users, and 71.4% among never users. Following adjustment, favorability was more likely among women compared with men (p<0.05). Conversely, favorability was less likely among the following: adults aged 25-44 years and 45-64 years compared with those aged ≥65 years, those with annual household income of $15,000-$24,999 compared with ≥$60,000, current cigarette smokers compared with never smokers, and current and former non-cigarette tobacco users compared with never tobacco users (p<0.05).Conclusions: Most U.S. adults favor prohibiting tobacco sales in retail pharmacy stores. Eliminating tobacco product sales in these settings may reinforce pharmacy stores' efforts to promote wellness, and further cultivate social climates that reduce the desirability, acceptability, and accessibility of tobacco. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVES: Globally, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has affected how children learn. We evaluated the impact of Test to Stay (TTS) on secondary and tertiary transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and potential impact on in-person learning in 4 school districts in the United States from September 13 to November 19, 2021. METHODS: Implementation of TTS varied across school districts. Data on index cases, schoolbased close contacts, TTS participation, and testing results were obtained from 4 school districts in diverse geographic regions. Descriptive statistics, secondary and tertiary attack risk, and a theoretical estimate of impact on in-person learning were calculated. RESULTS: Fifty-one schools in 4 school districts reported 374 coronavirus disease COVID-19 index cases and 2520 school-based close contacts eligible for TTS. The proportion participating in TTS ranged from 22% to 79%. By district, the secondary attack risk and tertiary attack risk among TTS participants ranged between 2.2% to 11.1% and 0% to 17.6%, respectively. Nine clusters were identified among secondary cases and 2 among tertiary cases. The theoretical maximum number of days of in-person learning saved by using TTS was 976 to 4650 days across jurisdictions. CONCLUSIONS: TTS preserves in-person learning. Decisions to participate in TTS may have been influenced by ease of access to testing, communication between schools and families, testing logistics, and school resources. Tertiary attack risk determination became more complicated when numbers of close contacts increased. Minimizing exposure through continued layered prevention strategies is imperative. To ensure adequate resources for TTS, community transmission levels should be considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Efforts to disrupt tobacco sales to minors through age of sale restrictions can contribute to reductions in youth tobacco use. The objective of this study was to assess attitudes toward raising the minimum tobacco age of sale to 21 years among U.S. adults.Methods: Data from the 2014 Summer Styles, an Internet survey of U.S. adults aged ≥18 years (N=4,219), were analyzed in 2014. Respondents were asked: Do you favor or oppose raising the legal minimum age to purchase all tobacco products from 18 to 21? Responses included: strongly favor, somewhat favor, somewhat oppose, and strongly oppose. ORs and 95% CIs were calculated using logistic regression; covariates included sex, age, race/ethnicity, education, income, region, and cigarette smoking status.Results: Among all adults, 50.4% strongly and 24.6% somewhat favored raising the age to 21 years; 77.5% of never smokers, 74.6% of former smokers, and 69.9% of current smokers strongly or somewhat favored it. Adjusted odds of strongly or somewhat favoring raising the age were higher among adults aged 25-44 (OR=1.8, 95% CI=1.3, 2.5), 45-64 (OR=2.3, 95% CI=1.7, 3.2), and ≥65 (OR=3.1, 95% CI=2.2, 4.5) years, and lower among former (OR=0.7, 95% CI=0.6, 0.9) and current (OR=0.7, 95% CI=0.5, 0.8) smokers.Conclusions: Three quarters of adults favor raising the minimum tobacco age of sale to 21 years, including seven in ten smokers. Raising the minimum age of sale, along with proven tobacco control strategies, could prevent youth tobacco use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]