An Experimental Study of Nicotine Warning Statements in E-cigarette Tweets.

INTRODUCTION: It is unclear whether warnings on electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) advertisements required by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will apply to social media. Given the key role of social media in marketing e-cigarettes, we seek to inform FDA decision making by exploring how warnings on various tweet content influence perceived healthiness, nicotine harm, likelihood to try e-cigarettes, and warning recall. METHODS: In this 2 × 4 between-subjects experiment participants viewed a tweet from a fictitious e-cigarette brand. Four tweet content versions (e-cigarette product, e-cigarette use, e-cigarette in social context, unrelated content) were crossed with two warning versions (absent, present). Adult e-cigarette users (N = 994) were recruited via social media ads to complete a survey and randomized to view one of eight tweets. Multivariable regressions explored effects of tweet content and warning on perceived healthiness, perceived harm, and likelihood to try e-cigarettes, and tweet content on warning recall. Covariates were tobacco and social media use and demographics. RESULTS: Tweets with warnings elicited more negative health perceptions of the e-cigarette brand than tweets without warnings (p < .05). Tweets featuring e-cigarette products (p < .05) or use (p < .001) elicited higher warning recall than tweets featuring unrelated content. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to examine warning effects on perceptions of e-cigarette social media marketing. Warnings led to more negative e-cigarette health perceptions, but no effect on perceived nicotine harm or likelihood to try e-cigarettes. There were differences in warning recall by tweet content. Research should explore how varying warning content (text, size, placement) on tweets from e-cigarette brands influences health risk perceptions. IMPLICATIONS: FDA's 2016 ruling requires warnings on advertisements for nicotine-containing e-cigarettes, but does not specify whether this applies to social media. This study is the first to examine how e-cigarette warnings in tweets influence perceived healthiness and harm of e-cigarettes, which is important because e-cigarette brands are voluntarily including warnings on Twitter and Instagram. Warnings influenced perceived healthiness of the e-cigarette brand, but not perceived nicotine harm or likelihood to try e-cigarettes. We also saw higher recall of warning statements for tweets featuring e-cigarettes. Findings suggest that expanding warning requirements to e-cigarette social media marketing warrants further exploration and FDA consideration.

Exposure to Potentially Harmful E-Cigarette Emissions via Vape Tricks: Protocol for a Mixed-Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: The number of adolescents and adults using e-cigarettes, referred to as vaping, has dramatically increased. E-cigarettes can be used to perform vape tricks by inhaling and exhaling the e-cigarette aerosol in patterns to create visual effects or large clouds. To create these effects, the puffing patterns associated with vape tricks may be different than standard ad-lib e-cigarette usage. The prevalence of vape tricks and the harm associated with exposure to e-cigarette emissions when performing vape tricks is currently unknown. OBJECTIVE: Our objectives are to characterize duration, heart rate, respiratory rate, tidal volume, minute volume, and physical activity metrics associated with the performance of vape tricks and to characterize the emission of e-cigarettes when performing vape tricks in a manner suitable to inform novel exposure modeling. METHODS: The study will recruit e-cigarette users with a history of performing vape tricks. Data collection will occur in two different sessions. In the first session, participants will be asked to puff on their e-cigarette as they normally would for 20 minutes. The second session will be a vape tricks session, where users will be asked to perform a series of up to five different vape tricks with their e-cigarette. Data will be collected through screener surveys, in-person interviews, video recordings, a personal exposure monitor, and a biometric garment. RESULTS: Data analysis is pending and scheduled to take place in the fall of 2019. CONCLUSIONS: This study will be used to assess the feasibility of using a biometric garment to complement environmental and observational data. The approach may provide greater insight into the health risks of performing vape tricks compared to typical e-cigarette use. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/12304.