Public Perception of the Tobacco 21 Amendment on Twitter in the United States: Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Following the signing of the Tobacco 21 Amendment (T21) in December 2019 to raise the minimum legal age for the sale of tobacco products from 18 to 21 years in the United States, there is a need to monitor public responses and potential unintended consequences. Social media platforms, such as Twitter (subsequently rebranded as X), can provide rich data on public perceptions. OBJECTIVE: This study contributes to the literature using Twitter data to assess the knowledge and beliefs of T21. METHODS: Twitter data were collected from November 2019 to February 2021 using the Twitter streaming application programming interface with keywords related to vaping or e-cigarettes, such as "vape," "ecig," etc. The temporal trend of the T21 discussion on Twitter was examined using the mean number of daily T21-related tweets. Inductive methods were used to manually code the tweets into different sentiment groups (positive, neutral, and negative) based on the attitude expressed toward the policy by 3 coders with high interrater reliability. Topics discussed were examined within each sentiment group through theme analyses. RESULTS: Among the collected 3197 tweets, 2169 tweets were related to T21, of which 444 tweets (20.5%) showed a positive attitude, 736 (33.9%) showed a negative attitude, and 989 (45.6%) showed a neutral attitude. The temporal trend showed a clear peak in the number of tweets around January 2020, following the enactment of this legislation. For positive tweets, the most frequent topics were "avoidance of further regulation" (120/444, 27%), "Enforce T21" (110/444, 24.8%), and "health benefits" (81/444, 18.2%). For negative tweets, the most frequent topics were "general disagreement or frustration" (207/736, 28.1%) and "will still use tobacco" (188/736, 25.5%). Neutral tweets were primarily "public service announcements (PSA) or news posts" (782/989, 79.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, we find that one-third of tweets displayed a negative attitude toward T21 during the study period. Many were frustrated with T21 and reported that underage consumers could still obtain products. Social media data provide a timely opportunity to monitor public perceptions and responses to regulatory actions. Continued monitoring can inform enforcement efforts and potential unintended consequences of T21.

What Are E-Cigarettes?

This JAMA Patient Page describes e-cigarettes and the potential health effects of vaping.

Controversial FDA Decision Authorizes Menthol-Flavored E-Cigarettes Despite Risks to Youth.

This Medical News story examines the controversy surrounding the FDA's first authorization of flavored e-cigarettes, in this case menthol.

Urgent action needed: addressing the regulatory gap in e-cigarette trade and usage.

Tobacco use is associated with serious health problems. Global efforts, such as the World Health Organization's Framework for Tobacco Control, have reduced tobacco use, but challenges remain. Initially perceived as aids for smoking cessation, e-cigarettes have gained popularity among young people and non-smokers. Government approaches to regulating e-cigarettes range from treating them like tobacco, requiring a prescription for their use to outright bans. Although touted as a valuable alternative, evidence suggests that increased e-cigarette use carries potential direct and indirect health risks, necessitating urgent regulatory measures on a global scale. Lack of defined and uniform regulations poses substantial public health risks, compounded by marketing targeting vulnerable groups. Immediate interventions, public awareness, and research are essential to effectively control the current e-cigarette epidemic.

Coverage of Indoor Smoking and Vaping Restrictions in the U.S., 1990-2021.

INTRODUCTION: Secondhand smoke exposure increases the risk of premature death and disease in children and non-smoking adults. As a result, many U.S. states and local jurisdictions have enacted comprehensive indoor smoking restrictions (ISR). Indoor vaping restrictions (IVR) have also been adopted to protect against exposure to secondhand e-cigarette aerosol. This study aimed to quantify state and national U.S. coverage of policies restricting indoor cigarette and e-cigarette use over time. METHODS: Data from the American Nonsmokers Rights' Foundation on U.S. ISR from 1990 to 2021 and IVR from 2006 to 2021 were analyzed. Combining these data with 2015 U.S. Census population estimates, the percentage of state and national residents covered by partial and comprehensive restrictions in bars, restaurants, and workplaces, were calculated (analysis in 2023-2024) over time. RESULTS: Between 1990 and 2021, national coverage of comprehensive ISR increased for bars (0% to 67.3%), restaurants (0%-78.2%), and workplaces (0%-77.5%). Partial ISR coverage decreased for bars (14.8%-13.9%), restaurants (40.2%-15.4%) and workplaces (40.2%-22.5%). From 2006 to 2021, comprehensive IVR coverage increased for bars (0%-43.5%), restaurants (0%-51.5%), and workplaces (0%-53.2%). Despite these increases in coverage, by the end of 2021, <50% of the population was protected by comprehensive ISR for bars, restaurants, and workplaces in 19, 12, and 14 states, respectively. DISCUSSION: The percentage of the U.S. population protected by ISR and IVR has increased over time. However, gaps in coverage remain, which may contribute to disparities in tobacco-related disease and death.

Specialist vape store audit reveals poor compliance with new e-cigarette regulations.

AIM: Regulations announced in mid-2023 aimed to reduce youth vaping by curtailing the availability of cheap high-nicotine e-cigarettes (vapes). This study tested compliance with the new regulations for single-use vapes, which came into force on 21 December 2023. METHODS: A 20-year-old "mystery shopper" visited 96% of specialist vape retailers (SVRs) in Wellington, Porirua, Lower Hutt and Upper Hutt (N=74) in January 2024, and observed i) R18 signage, ii) age verification practices, and ii) prices and brands of the cheapest available vaping products. Low-price vapes were purchased and inspected for compliance with new nicotine limits and safety regulations. RESULTS: All but three stores (96%) displayed an R18 sign; however, signage in 29 stores (39%) was suboptimal. Only one store (1.4%) requested age identification (ID) on entry to the R18 premises. In 50% of stores, ID was requested when a purchase was made; however, a third of those retailers proceeded with the sale despite the buyer not providing ID. Single-use vapes remained available for NZ$10 or less in most stores, and reusable starter kits were also widely available for NZ$10-20. Discounted high-nicotine products were sold for as little as NZ$2.50 each. Most low-price products did not comply with the updated regulations. CONCLUSION: Cheap, high-nicotine vaping products remained widely available following the introduction of stricter regulations in December 2023; products for sale included discounted and non-compliant vapes. The majority of SVRs had poor age verification practices. There is an urgent need to clarify rules, increase enforcement efforts and disallow discounting and giveaways of vapes.

A systematic review of the modelling and economic evaluation studies assessing regulatory options for e-cigarette use.

BACKGROUND: Governments around the world are considering regulating access to nicotine e-cigarettes to prevent uptake among youth however people that smoke tobacco may use them to assist with smoking cessation. The health and cost implications of regulating e-cigarette use among populations are unknown but have been explored in modelling studies. We reviewed health economic evaluation and simulation modelling studies that assessed long-term consequences and interpret their potential usefulness for decision-makers. METHODS: A systematic review with a narrative synthesis was undertaken. Six databases were searched for modelling studies evaluating population-level e-cigarette control policies or interventions restricting e-cigarette use versus more liberalized use. Studies were required to report the outcomes of life years, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and/or healthcare costs. The quality of the studies was assessed using two quality assessment tools. RESULTS: In total, 15 studies were included with nine for the United States and one each for the United Kingdom, Italy, Australia, Singapore, Canada, and New Zealand. Three studies included cost-utility analyses. Most studies involved health state transition (or Markov) closed cohort models. Many studies had limitations with their model structures, data input quality and transparency, and insufficient analyses handling model uncertainty. Findings were mixed with 11 studies concluding that policies permitting e-cigarette use lead to net benefits and 4 studies concluding net losses in life-years or QALYs and/or healthcare costs.Five studies had industry conflicts of interest. CONCLUSIONS: While authors did conclude net benefit than net harm in more of the studies so far conducted, the significant limitations that we identified with many of the studies in this review, make it uncertain whether or not countries can expect net population harms or benefits of restrictive versus unrestrictive e-cigarette policies. The generalizability of the findings is limited for decision-makers. In light of the deep uncertainty around the health and economic outcomes of e-cigarettes, simulation modelling methods and uncertainty analyses should be strengthened.

The underbelly of E-cigarette advertising: regulating online markets on social media platforms.

Australia prohibits the sale of nicotine-vaping products unless prescribed by medical practitioners. Significant policy reforms were announced on the 28th of November 2023 including a ban on single-use disposable vapes with and without nicotine, and the removal of the personal importation scheme. Despite stringent regulations, loopholes exist such that e-cigarette vendors are getting around it, and online markets provide a route to do so. We discuss strategies used by vendors to covertly market e-cigarettes online through social media. In this perspective, we highlight three proposed policies to strengthen social media regulations that may be feasible to implement. Our proposed strategies to regulate e-cigarette product listings on social media involve implementing robust age verification measures, enhancing the system for flagging and reporting prohibited content, and developing a more effective system to identify and flag content related to e-cigarettes.

Use of Menthol Cigarettes and Accessories Among Youth Who Smoked After the Menthol Cigarette Ban in England and Canada, 2021: Implications for Health Equity.

INTRODUCTION: This study examined menthol cigarette use among youth who smoked, after menthol cigarette bans were implemented in England (May 2020) and Canada (October 2017). AIMS AND METHODS: Cross-sectional data come from 2021 ITC Youth Tobacco and Vaping Survey respondents aged 16-19 who smoked in the past 30 d in England (N = 715) and Canada (N = 419). Adjusted logistic regression models, estimated separately for each country, examined sociodemographic correlates of usually smoking menthol cigarettes (reporting currently most often smoking menthol cigarettes) overall, and by past 30-d use of any menthol accessories (e.g., filters, capsules). Youth reported the cigarette variety they smoked most often, coded as menthol or nonmenthol. RESULTS: Almost no youth who smoked in the past 30 d reported most often smoking a cigarette variety coded as menthol. However, 34.5% (95% CI: 30.4% to 38.9%) of youth who smoke in England and 30.9% (26.0%-36.3%) in Canada reported usually smoking menthol cigarettes, with greater odds of use among those identifying as black, or other race/ethnicity, respectively, compared to white in England (60.0%, aOR = 3.08, p = .001; 47.4%, aOR = 2.27, p = .011) and Canada (43.6%, aOR = 2.44, p = .046; 51.2%, aOR = 2.92, p = .001). Among those who reported usually smoking menthol cigarettes in England (N = 223) and Canada (N = 108), 71.7% (64.0%-78.2%) and 51.5% (41.1%-61.7%) reported using menthol accessories. CONCLUSIONS: After menthol cigarette bans in England and Canada, approximately one-third of youth who smoked reported usually smoking menthol cigarettes, with disproportionately higher use among those identifying as black and other race/ethnicity. Menthol accessories accounted for most menthol cigarette use. Closing regulatory loopholes is critical to advancing public health equity. IMPLICATIONS: Use of menthol cigarette accessories (eg, filters, cards, capsules) among youth who smoked was prevalent after implementation of menthol cigarette bans in England and Canada, and there was disproportionately higher use among those who identified as black and any other race/ethnicity. Efforts are therefore required to close regulatory loopholes of menthol cigarette bans. Findings further support countries, such as the United States, proposing menthol cigarette bans which extend coverage to accessories. More comprehensive menthol bans that also restrict accessories are likely to be more effective in reducing flavored tobacco use among young people and in advancing health equity.

A prescription model for vapes: the way we 'do' medicines policy in Australia.

On 2 May 2023, the Australian Federal Government announced a suite of reforms aimed at ensuring the effectiveness of the prescription model of regulation of vaping (or e-cigarette) products in Australia. These reforms are intended to protect Australians, particularly young people, from the harms of vaping and nicotine dependence. The ensuing public debate on the issue has often created the impression that the options under consideration are to either retain 'recently introduced' prescription regulation or to 'revert to' a retail supply approach. However, the sale of nicotine vapes by retailers such as tobacconists and convenience stores has never been lawful in Australia. The reforms do not seek to change the way nicotine vaping products are regulated, but rather to ensure that the existing prescription model can be effectively enforced and can function as originally intended. This paper describes the historical context and rationale for strengthening prescription regulation of vapes in this country.