Search

Introduction: Sales data analyses are increasingly used to guide tobacco regulatory science. However, such data do not cover specialist retailers like vape shops or tobacconists. Understanding the extent of the cigarette and electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) markets covered by sales data is critical to establishing such analyses' generalizability and potential biases., Methods: Using retail sales data from Information Resources Incorporated (IRI) and Nielsen, we conduct tax gap analyses comparing states' cigarette and ENDS tax revenue to tax collection estimates based on retail sales data. For the 23 US states in both retail sales datasets, cigarette tax gap analyses were conducted for each year from 2018 to 2020. Four (Louisiana, North Carolina, Ohio, and Washington) of those 23 states levied per-unit ENDS taxes and provided monthly tax revenue data covering January 2018 to October 2021, where we conducted monthly tax gap analyses for both cigarettes and ENDS., Results: Across states covered by both sales datasets, annual mean cigarette sales in IRI and Nielsen account for 92.3% (95% CI = 88.3% to 96.2%) and 84.0% (95% CI = 79.3% to 88.7%) of state cigarette tax revenue, respectively. Monthly average coverage rates for ENDS sales were lower, ranging from 42.3% to 86.1% for IRI and 43.6% to 88.5% for Nielsen, but remained stable over time., Conclusions: IRI and Nielsen sales data capture almost the entire US cigarette market and a substantial but lower portion of the US ENDS market. With proper care to address shortcomings, sales data analyses can capture changes in the US market for these tobacco products., Implications: Policy evaluations and analyses using e-cigarette and cigarette sales data are often criticized because these data do not cover online sales or sales by specialty retailers like tobacconists. Cigarette sales data consistently cover nearly 90% of taxed sales, while e-cigarette sales data cover around 50% of taxed volumes. Retail sales data capture nearly all cigarette sales and a substantial portion of ENDS sales with relatively stable rates of coverage over time, supporting their continued use in tobacco surveillance and policy evaluation work., (© The Author(s) 2023. 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.)

Philip Morris International's recent purchase of Swedish Match may prove to be a vital tobacco industry development. We focus on PMIs potential progress in moving from primarily selling cigarettes toward primarily selling noncombustible nicotine delivery products (NCNDPs). We also consider the potential contribution of the acquisition to industry transformation whereby other cigarette firms may potentially move toward primarily selling NCNDPs. We examine the potential impact on noncombustible nicotine delivery product use, including nicotine pouches (a major Swedish Match product), e-cigarettes, heated tobacco products, and, most importantly, on sales of the industry's staple, combustible cigarettes. We focus on the United States as a special case, where PMI is limited from entering the cigarette market. Implications: Philip Morris International's purchase of Swedish Match and policies regarding nicotine pouches (NPs) have been overlooked in the tobacco control literature. The acquisition indicates the importance of the NP market to the largest nonstate-owned tobacco company. The acquisition has the potential through pricing and marketing tactics to either encourage or discourage the use of NPs, e-cigarettes, heated tobacco products, and most importantly cigarettes. Due to its inability to sell cigarettes in the United States, PMI will have incentives to use its alternative nicotine delivery products, including its newly acquired NPs, to reduce the sale of cigarettes by other companies. However, the potential effects in other countries, where PMI does sell cigarettes, are less clear. Monitoring and analyzing tobacco company acquisitions is essential to studying future transitions in using different kinds of tobacco products, especially from cigarettes to lower-risk alternative nicotine delivery products., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Introduction: While much of the concern with tobacco industry marketing has focused on direct media advertising, a less explored form of marketing strategy is to discount prices. Price discounting is important because it keeps the purchase price low and can undermine the impact of tax increases., Methods: We examine annual US marketing expenditures from 1975 to 2019 by the largest cigarette and smokeless tobacco companies as reported to the Federal Trade Commission. We consider three categories: direct advertising, promotional allowances and price discounting. In addition to considering trends in these expenditures, we examine how price discounting expenditures relate to changes in product prices and excise taxes., Results: US direct advertising expenditures for cigarettes fell from 80% of total industry marketing expenditures in 1975 to less than 3% in 2019, while falling from 39% in 1985 to 6% in 2019 for smokeless tobacco. Price discounting expenditures for cigarettes became prominent after the Master Settlement Agreement and related tax increases in 2002. By 2019, 87% of cigarette marketing expenditures were for price discounts and 7% for promotional allowances. Smokeless marketing expenditures were similar: 72% for price promotions and 13% for promotional allowances. Price discounting increased with prices and taxes until reaching their currently high levels., Conclusions: Between 1975 and 2019, direct advertising dramatically fell while price discounting and promotional expenditures increased. Local, state and federal policies are needed that apply non-tax mechanisms to increase tobacco prices and restrict industry contracts to offset industry marketing strategies. Further study is needed to better understand industry decisions about marketing expenditures., 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.)

Background: The E-cigarette, or Vaping Product-Use Associated Lung Injury (EVALI) Outbreak of 2019 hospitalised thousands and killed dozens of people in the USA and raised perceptions of the dangers posed to health by electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes). These illnesses along with continued increases in youth vaping rates lead to the passage of many state and federal laws intended to curtail the sale of flavoured e-cigarettes. Little is known about the impact of these events on US e-cigarette and cigarette retail sales., Methods: Using Nielsen Scantrack sales data from January 2014 to January 2020 for 23 US states, we evaluate the effect of the EVALI outbreak. First-differenced state-panel regressions tracking unit sales of total-level and category-level e-cigarettes and cigarette sales controlling for price, Tobacco 21 policy coverage, product distribution, seasonality, EVALI-attributable deaths, and state-level e-cigarette policies affecting the availability of e-cigarettes (non-tobacco flavoured and total) were employed., Results: Dollar sales of e-cigarettes declined 29% from their pre-EVALI peak by January 2020. Total sales of e-cigarettes declined in response to EVALI deaths and the total e-cigarette sales ban put in place in Massachusetts adopted in its wake. Cigarette sales were largely unchanged by either the direct or indirect policy effects of the EVALI outbreak, except for in Massachusetts, where cigarette sales-particularly those smoked by young people-rose temporarily after a total ban on e-cigarette sales., Conclusion: Sales of e-cigarettes declined in response to the EVALI outbreak and from the most restrictive regulatory policies that were adopted in response, while sales of cigarettes were affected less., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: The US Food and Drug Administration most recently announced its intention to ban menthol cigarettes and cigars nationwide in April 2021. Implementation of the ban will require evidence that it would improve public health. This paper simulates the potential public health impact of a ban on menthol in cigarettes and cigars through its impacts on smoking initiation, smoking cessation and switching to nicotine vaping products (NVPs)., Methods: After calibrating an established US simulation model to reflect recent use trends in cigarette and NVP use, we extended the model to incorporate menthol and non-menthol cigarette use under a status quo scenario. Applying estimates from a recent expert elicitation on the behavioural impacts of a menthol ban, we developed a menthol ban scenario with the ban starting in 2021. We estimated the public health impact as the difference between smoking and vaping-attributable deaths and life-years lost in the status quo scenario and the menthol ban scenario from 2021 to 2060., Results: As a result of the ban, overall smoking was estimated to decline by 15% as early as 2026 due to menthol smokers quitting both NVP and combustible use or switching to NVPs. These transitions are projected to reduce cumulative smoking and vaping-attributable deaths from 2021 to 2060 by 5% (650 000 in total) and reduce life-years lost by 8.8% (11.3 million). Sensitivity analyses showed appreciable public health benefits across different parameter specifications., Conclusions and Relevance: Our findings strongly support the implementation of a ban on menthol in cigarettes and cigars., 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.)

Objective: To synthesize the outcomes of policy evaluations of flavoured electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) restrictions., Data Sources: PubMed, Scopus, Embase and Web of Science before May 3, 2022., Study Selection: Studies that report sales, behaviour, or compliance outcomes related to implemented or hypothetical ENDS flavour restrictions., Data Extraction: Restriction details, whether implemented or hypothetical, whether additional products were restricted, jurisdictional level, study locations, and outcomes classified by sales, behaviour, and compliance., Data Synthesis: We included 30 studies. Of those, 26 were conducted exclusively in the US, two in India, and two surveyed respondents in multiple countries, including the US. Twenty-one evaluated implemented restrictions, while nine considered hypothetical restrictions. Five studies evaluated product sales, 17 evaluated behaviour, and 10 evaluated compliance, with two studies reporting multiple outcomes. Two studies reported an increase and one a reduction in cigarette sales following restrictions, while three reported reductions in ENDS sales. Behavioural studies presented a mixed view of the impacts of regulations on ENDS and cigarette use. However, the use of disparate outcomes limits the comparability of studies. Studies of hypothetical restrictions suggest decreased ENDS use, increased cigarette use, and increased use of illicit markets. Studies of compliance with flavoured product restrictions that included ENDS found that 6-39% of stores sold restricted flavoured products post-restrictions. Online stores remain a potential source of restricted products., Conclusion: Our findings highlight the need for additional research on the impacts of ENDS restrictions. Research should further evaluate the impact of restrictions on youth and adult use of nicotine and tobacco products in addition to the effects of restrictions in countries beyond the US to enable a robust consideration of the harm-benefit trade-off of restrictions., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Markets for nicotine vaping products (NVPs) and heated tobacco products (HTPs) have grown as these products became positioned as harm-reduction alternatives to combusted tobacco products. Herein, we present a public health decision-theoretic framework incorporating different patterns of HTP, NVP, and cigarette use to examine their impacts on population health. Our framework demonstrates that, for individuals who would have otherwise smoked, HTP use may provide public health benefits by enabling cessation or by discouraging smoking initiation and relapse. However, the benefits are reduced if more harmful HTP use replaces less harmful NVP use. HTP use may also negatively impact public health by encouraging smoking by otherwise non-smokers or by encouraging initiation or relapse into smoking. These patterns are directly influenced by industry behavior as well as public policy towards HTPs, NVPs, and cigarettes. While substantial research has been devoted to NVPs, much less is known about HTPs. Better information is needed to more precisely define the health risks of HTPs compared to cigarettes and NVPs, the relative appeal of HTPs to consumers, and the likelihood of later transitioning to smoking or quitting all products. While our analysis provides a framework for gaining that information, it also illustrates the complexities in distinguishing key factors.

Introduction: Tobacco couponing continues to be part of contemporary tobacco marketing in the United States. We performed a systematic review of the evidence of tobacco product coupon receipt and redemption to inform regulation., Aims and Methods: We searched EMBASE OVID and Medline databases for observational (cross-sectional and longitudinal) studies that examined the prevalence of tobacco coupon receipt and coupon redemption across different subpopulations, as well as studies of the association between coupon receipt and redemption with tobacco initiation and cessation at follow-up. We extracted unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios for the associations between coupon exposure (receipt, redemption) and tobacco use outcomes (initiation, cessation) and assessed each studies' potential risk of bias., Results: Twenty-seven studies met the criteria for inclusion. Of 60 observations extracted, 37 measured coupon receipt, nine measured coupon redemption, eight assessed tobacco use initiation, and six assessed cessation. Tobacco product coupon receipt and redemption tended to be more prevalent among younger adults, women, lower education individuals, members of sexual and gender minorities, and more frequent tobacco users. Coupon receipt at baseline was associated with greater initiation. Coupon receipt and redemption at baseline were associated with lower cessation at follow-up among tobacco users. Results in high-quality studies did not generally differ from all studies., Conclusions: Tobacco product coupon receipt and redemption are often more prevalent among price-sensitive subpopulations. Most concerning, our results suggest coupon receipt may be associated with higher tobacco initiation and lower tobacco cessation. Couponing thereby increases the toll of tobacco use and could prove to be a viable public health policy intervention point., Implications: A systematic review was conducted of the scientific literature about the receipt, redemption, and effects on tobacco initiation and cessation of tobacco product couponing. This review found that tobacco coupons are more often received by price-sensitive persons and these coupons serve to increase tobacco initiation and decrease tobacco cessation. Policy efforts to address these consequences may help curb tobacco's harms and address health inequities., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: In May 2020, the European Union Tobacco Products Directive mandated that EU member states, including Poland, ban the sale of menthol cigarettes. With menthol making up 28% of cigarette sales before the ban, Poland is the country with likely the largest menthol cigarette sales share in the world to ban their sale. We analyze how this ban changed the Polish tobacco market., Methods: We use monthly NielsenIQ data (May 2018-April 2021) on sales of cigarettes and roll-your-own tobacco by menthol and standard flavor in eight regions of Poland. We set up a bite-style regression model controlling for pre-ban menthol share, climate, border opening status, and Apple movement data to estimate the effect of the May 2020 menthol ban., Results: We find menthol cigarette sales fell at least 97% after the menthol cigarette ban across Poland and standard cigarette sales replaced them. Regression modeling indicates that total cigarette sales fell, after the ban, an average of 2.2 sticks per capita per month, equal to a 2.9% decline, however, results were not significant (P = 0.199). The bite component of our model reveals total cigarette sales did decline significantly in the regions with the highest pre-ban menthol sales shares. Roll-your-own tobacco sales increased by a statistically insignificant 0.03 stick-equivalents after the ban (P = 0.798). Product prices also fell in the wake of the menthol ban., Conclusions: In Poland, the EU state with the one of the largest pre-ban menthol shares, we find mixed evidence that the ban is working as intended., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Public Health Association.)

Policy Points The commercial determinants of health (CDoH) concept, which currently focuses on markets that harm health, should be expanded to refer to the interface between commerce and health, which can sometimes have positive public health consequences. The regulatory stances framework helps us classify public health preferences for regulating specific markets related to CDoH, based on the intended effects of regulations on market size. The regulatory stances a jurisdiction can adopt can be classified as ranging from prohibitionist through contractionist, permissive, and expansionist, to universalist. The regulatory stances framework increases the usefulness of the CDoH concept by expanding the conversation beyond negative determinants of health and providing a fuller view of the tools at the disposal of society to alter markets and improve health., Context: The effects of commerce on the public health are omnipresent. The commercial determinants of health (CDoH) represent a burgeoning area of scholarly debate and activist policymaking to redress markets that adversely affect public health. The CDoH debate is a logical extension of the tobacco control movement, but, to its detriment, the CDoH conversation remains primarily focused policies and proposals that are analogous to historical tobacco control strategies., Methods: This paper argues that for the CDoH to develop further and broaden its appeal, it should expand to cover markets with conditional and positive impacts on health. To explain and order this conversation, a comparative framework for regulatory policy is introduced: the regulatory stances. The regulatory stances classify a regulatory policy based on the intended effect of policy on the size of a market in the future relative to the present., Findings: Some markets that interface between commerce and health do not inherently harm health. Regulatory policy toward these markets should be different in intent than regulatory policy for markets with negative health effects., Conclusions: By using the regulatory stances framework to encompass markets that have positive or conditional effects on health as well as those that have adverse health effects, the CDoH conversation can shift away from the exclusive focus on strategies to shrink markets with adverse health impacts to consider a wider array of policy options., (© 2022 Milbank Memorial Fund.)

Growth in the market for electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) raises complex questions about the devices' public health implications and, hence, challenging policy issues. We propose a policy agenda addressing concerns about preventing youth uptake of e-cigarettes and the desire to realize the potential of e-cigarettes to increase adult cigarette smoking cessation. We organize interventions according to the "four Ps" of marketing: product, price, place, and promotion. Policies include decreasing the addictiveness of combusted tobacco products while ensuring the availability of consumer-acceptable reduced-risk nicotine products, imposing large taxes on combustible products and smaller taxes on e-cigarettes, limiting the sale of all tobacco and (nonmedicinal) nicotine products to adult-only retailers, and developing communications that accurately portray e-cigarettes' risks to youth and benefits for inveterate adult smokers. All members of the public health community should unite to pursue a shared commitment to the principle that both youth and adults deserve a future free of tobacco-related disease.

Introduction: Policies raising the minimum age of sale of tobacco products to 21 (T21) proliferated at state and local levels across the USA before a federal policy was adopted. Evidence of the effectiveness of these policies is building and lags implementation. This study exploits demographic patterns of cigarette brand purchasing to evaluate the effectiveness of T21., Methods: To capture the effect of T21 implementation on cigarette sales, we used universal product code-level data from Nielsen Scantrack data covering January 2015 to October 2019. We used the 2015 to 2018 National Survey on Drug Use and Health to identify cigarette brands where smokers under 21 comprised a disproportionately high (young) and low (old) share of consumption. We fit fixed-effects linear regressions in Nielsen designated market areas to test if sales of young or old cigarette brands were changed by T21. Unadjusted models controlled for time and T21 implementation date. Adjusted models controlled for price, seasonality and unemployment. A permutation test of 5000 randomised placebo T21 policies were fit to determine how well the true date of implementation fit sales data stratified by brand group., Results: Sales of disproportionately young brands declined after T21 implementation. T21 policy implementation dates fit disproportionately young brand sales trends better than 99% of adjusted randomised placebo models. T21 implementation fit disproportionately old brand sales trends better than just 1% of adjusted randomised placebo models., Conclusion: This study adds compelling empirical evidence that T21 decreased purchases of the cigarette brands consumed disproportionately by young people, the policy's target demographic., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Heated tobacco products (HTPs) have received excise tax rates that are lower than combusted cigarettes in most of the countries in which the products are sold as tobacco companies claimed their purported reduced risk products deserved such light touch treatment. This study sought to determine if HTPs are cheaper to use than combusted cigarettes when the cost of purchasing an expensive heating device upfront was considered., Methods and Data: Product price data for tobacco heating devices, as well as cobranded heated tobacco and combusted cigarettes for 2014-2017 for 34 countries was obtained from Euromonitor International., Results: Only in 17 of 46 country-year cases with adequate data were HTPs less expensive to use than combusted cigarettes over a year., Discussion: The tax advantages being given to HTPs may instead of providing a price signal to a consumer looking to switch, be providing a profit signal to tobacco companies to switch over to selling more HTPs and fewer combusted cigarettes. The implications of these dynamics for public health are unclear., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Some scholars suggest that price differences between combustible cigarettes and e-cigarettes could be effective in moving current combustible smokers to e-cigarettes, which could reduce tobacco-related death and disease. Currently, in most jurisdictions, e-cigarettes are not subject to the same excise taxes as combustible cigarettes, potentially providing the category with a price advantage over combustible cigarettes. This paper tests whether e-cigarettes tax advantage has translated into a price advantage., Methods: In a sample of 45 countries, the price of combustible cigarettes, disposable e-cigarettes and rechargeable cigarettes were compared., Results: Comparable units of combustible cigarettes cost less than disposable e-cigarettes in almost every country in the sample. While the e-liquids consumed in rechargeable e-cigarettes might cost less per comparable unit than combustible cigarettes, the initial cost to purchase a rechargeable e-cigarette presents a significant cost barrier to switching from smoking to vaping., Discussion: Existing prices of e-cigarettes are generally much higher than of combustible cigarettes. If policymakers wish to tax e-cigarettes less than combustibles, forceful policy action-almost certainly through excise taxation-must raise the price of combustible cigarettes beyond the price of using e-cigarettes., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.)

In 2014, few health insurance plans sold in the Affordable Care Act's Federally Facilitated Marketplaces had age-dependent tobacco surcharges, possibly because of a system glitch. The 2015 tobacco surcharges show wide variation, with more plans implementing tobacco surcharges that increase with age. This underscores concerns that older tobacco users will find postsubsidy health insurance premiums difficult to afford. Future monitoring of enrollment will determine whether tobacco surcharges cause adverse selection by dissuading tobacco users, particularly older users, from buying health insurance.

Objectives: Study the effects of the 2011 Malaysian minimum price law (MPL) on prices of licit and illicit cigarette brands. Identify barriers to the MPL achieving positive public health effects., Methods: The International Tobacco Control Project's Southeast Asia survey collected information on Malaysian smokers' cigarette purchases (n=7520) in five survey waves between 2005 and 2012. Consumption-weighted comparisons of proportions tests and adjusted Wald tests were used to evaluate changes over time in violation rates of the inflation-adjusted MPL, the proportion of illicit cigarette purchases and mean prices., Results: After the passage of the MPL, the proportion of licit brand cigarette purchases that were below the inflation-adjusted 2011 minimum price level fell substantially (before 3.9%, after 1.8%, p=0.002), while violation of the MPL for illicit brand cigarette purchases was unchanged (before 89.8%, after 91.9%, p=0.496). At the same time, the mean real price of licit cigarettes rose (p=0.006), while the mean real price of illicit cigarettes remained unchanged (p=0.134). The proportion of illicit cigarette purchases rose as well (before 13.4%, after 16.5%, p=0.041)., Discussion: The MPL appears not to have meaningfully changed cigarette prices in Malaysia, as licit brand prices remained well above and illicit brand prices remained well below the minimum price level before and after MPL's implementation. The increasing proportion of illicit cigarettes on the market may have undermined any positive health effects of the Malaysian MPL. The illicit cigarette trade must be addressed before a full evaluation of the Malaysian MPL's impact on public health can take place. The authors encourage the continued use of specific excise tax increases to reliably increase the price and decrease the consumption of cigarettes in Malaysia and elsewhere., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.)

Objectives: To monitor and analyse impacts of the interaction between tobacco excise tax policy and industry price strategy, on the price level and variation of cigarettes sold in five Southeast Asian countries (Indonesia, Cambodia, Lao PDR, the Philippines and Vietnam)., Methods: Prices of cigarette sold by sticks and packs were collected through an in-person survey of retailers during 2011. Mean cigarette prices and price variation were calculated in each study country for single cigarettes, whole packs and brand groups., Results: Price variation of whole packs was greater in countries with ad-valorem excise tax structures (Cambodia, Lao PDR and Vietnam) than in countries with multitiered specific excise taxes (Indonesia and the Philippines). The price variation for single sticks appeared to be driven by local currency denomination. Cigarettes sold individually cost more per stick than cigarettes sold in whole packs in every brand group except for Indonesia's domestic brands., Conclusions: Tobacco industry strategy and excise tax structure drove the price level and variation of cigarettes sold in packs, while currency denominations influence the selling price of single sticks. To maximise the effectiveness of tobacco tax policies, countries should adopt specific excise tax structures to decrease cigarette price variation, which would minimise opportunities for smokers to 'trade down' to a cheaper brand to avoid a tax-driven price increase., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.)

Background In May 2020, the European Union Tobacco Products Directive mandated that EU member states, including Poland, ban the sale of menthol cigarettes. With menthol making up 28% of cigarette sales before the ban, Poland is the country with likely the largest menthol cigarette sales share in the world to ban their sale. We analyze how this ban changed the Polish tobacco market. Methods We use monthly NielsenIQ data (May 2018–April 2021) on sales of cigarettes and roll-your-own tobacco by menthol and standard flavor in eight regions of Poland. We set up a bite-style regression model controlling for pre-ban menthol share, climate, border opening status, and Apple movement data to estimate the effect of the May 2020 menthol ban. Results We find menthol cigarette sales fell at least 97% after the menthol cigarette ban across Poland and standard cigarette sales replaced them. Regression modeling indicates that total cigarette sales fell, after the ban, an average of 2.2 sticks per capita per month, equal to a 2.9% decline, however, results were not significant (P  = 0.199). The bite component of our model reveals total cigarette sales did decline significantly in the regions with the highest pre-ban menthol sales shares. Roll-your-own tobacco sales increased by a statistically insignificant 0.03 stick-equivalents after the ban (P  = 0.798). Product prices also fell in the wake of the menthol ban. Conclusions In Poland, the EU state with the one of the largest pre-ban menthol shares, we find mixed evidence that the ban is working as intended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Answer questions and earn CME/CNE Over the last decade, the use of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS), including the electronic cigarette or e-cigarette, has grown rapidly. More youth now use ENDS than any tobacco product. This extensive research review shows that there are scientifically sound, sometimes competing arguments about ENDS that are not immediately and/or completely resolvable. However, the preponderance of the scientific evidence to date suggests that current-generation ENDS products are demonstrably less harmful than combustible tobacco products such as conventional cigarettes in several key ways, including by generating far lower levels of carcinogens and other toxic compounds than combustible products or those that contain tobacco. To place ENDS in context, the authors begin by reviewing the trends in use of major nicotine-containing products. Because nicotine is the common core-and highly addictive-constituent across all tobacco products, its toxicology is examined. With its long history as the only nicotine product widely accepted as being relatively safe, nicotine-replacement therapy (NRT) is also examined. A section is also included that examines snus, the most debated potential harm-reduction product before ENDS. Between discussions of NRT and snus, ENDS are extensively examined: what they are, knowledge about their level of "harm," their relationship to smoking cessation, the so-called gateway effect, and dual use/poly-use. CA Cancer J Clin 2017;67:449-471. © 2017 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]