The Role of e-Cigarette Packaging as a Health Communications Tool: A Focus Group Study With Adolescents and Adults in England and Scotland.

INTRODUCTION: In the United Kingdom, e-cigarette and refill packaging must display a nicotine addiction warning. This study explored how this message is perceived, responses to alternative on-pack messages, and other options for using e-cigarette packaging to discourage youth and people who neither smoke nor use e-cigarettes while encouraging smokers to switch. AIMS AND METHODS: Between August and September 2022, 16 focus groups (n = 70) were conducted to explore these topics with adolescents (n = 31, aged 11-17 years) and adults (n = 39, nonsmokers, smokers that use e-cigarettes, smokers that do not use e-cigarettes) in England and Scotland. RESULTS: While several participants thought the current nicotine addiction warning could help increase awareness of nicotine addiction, most reported that it failed to capture attention and was not a deterrent. Alternative messages shown on packs (about harm, toxicity, wellness, litter, or relative risk) received mixed responses. Relative risk messages were perceived as most beneficial for smokers switching but also thought to potentially encourage uptake among nonsmokers. Some participants considered certain harm and toxicity messages to potentially dissuade uptake. Participants proposed several ideas to reduce the appeal of e-cigarette packaging and devices to deter youth uptake, including more prominent warnings, standardized packaging, and devices that are plain or include health messages. CONCLUSIONS: Packaging can play a crucial role in communicating product and health messages to different consumer groups. Further consideration of how packaging and labeling can meet the needs of non-nicotine users while simultaneously reaching those who may benefit from using e-cigarettes to stop smoking is warranted. IMPLICATIONS: While some viewed the nicotine addiction warning required on e-cigarettes and refill packaging in the United Kingdom as helpful in raising awareness of nicotine addiction, it did not resonate with most of our sample of adolescents and adults. The findings suggest that e-cigarette packaging could be better used to encourage smokers to switch to a less harmful alternative, with relative risk messages showing promise. Furthermore, strengthening on-pack messaging (eg increasing salience and rotating messages) and reducing the appeal of packaging (eg drab colors) and devices (eg including warnings) may help increase awareness of e-cigarette harms while deterring use among adolescents and nonsmokers.

Impact of standardised packaging in the UK on warning salience, appeal, harm perceptions and cessation-related behaviours: a longitudinal online survey.

INTRODUCTION: In the UK, since 20 May 2017, tobacco companies must sell cigarettes and rolling tobacco in standardised packs. METHODS: Three waves of a longitudinal online survey with smokers (≥16) before standardised packaging (wave 1 (W1): April to May 2016) and after standardised packaging (wave 2 (W2): September to November 2017; wave 3 (W3): May to July 2019). Of the 6233 smokers at W1, 4293 responded at W2 and 3175 at W3. We explored smokers' response to warning salience, appeal (appeal, quality, value, satisfaction and taste compared with a year ago), harm (harmfulness compared with a year ago, harm compared with other brands and whether some brands have more harmful substances), and quit plans, attempts and quitting. RESULTS: Compared with W1, the proportions noticing warnings first on packs, and rating cigarettes/rolling tobacco less appealing and worse value than a year ago, were higher at W2 and W3. Disagreeing that some brands contain more harmful substances was higher at W2. Interactions between social grade and survey wave for warning salience, and each appeal and harm outcome, were non-significant. Smokers switching from not noticing warnings first at W1 to noticing warnings first at W2, or who had a lower composite appeal score at W2, were more likely to plan to quit and to have made a quit attempt at W2. Smokers who switched to disagreeing that some brands contain more harmful substances at W2, after giving a different response at W1, were more likely to quit at W3. CONCLUSIONS: Standardised packaging appears to be having the intended impacts.

Reasons for Using Roll-Your-Own Tobacco and Perceptions of Health-Promoting Pack Inserts: A Focus Group Study with Roll-Your-Own Tobacco Smokers in Scotland.

INTRODUCTION: Use of roll-your-own (RYO) tobacco is increasing in most regions, but few qualitative studies have explored why RYO smokers use this product, and no study has considered their views of health-promoting pack inserts. METHODS: Eight focus groups were conducted with 18-35-year-old RYO smokers (n = 50) in Greater Glasgow (Scotland) in February-March 2020 to explore reasons for using RYO and perceptions of health-promoting inserts. Participants were shown four inserts adapted from those required in cigarette packs in Canada, with all encouraging quitting, and two RYO-specific inserts explaining that RYO is not less harmful than cigarettes. RESULTS: Lower price, better taste, the pleasure of rolling and ability to customize roll-ups, and the belief that RYO was less harmful than cigarettes were drivers for use. There were mixed perceptions of the extent to which inserts would capture attention if included in RYO packs. The positive messaging used on the Canadian inserts was considered motivational and inspirational, and contrasted with the on-pack warnings. The messaging on the RYO inserts, in comparison, was viewed unfavorably and generally dismissed. Participants, most of whom were not interested in quitting, did not feel that inserts would lead them to change their smoking behavior. However, some felt that the Canadian inserts could be helpful for those thinking about quitting and young people contemplating smoking. CONCLUSIONS: Inserts with positive messaging about quitting, rather than messaging explicating the harms of RYO, were preferred by RYO smokers. What, if any, RYO-specific messaging resonates with RYO smokers merits further attention. IMPLICATIONS: Aside from price, taste, and the pleasure associated with rolling and ability to individualize roll-ups, the erroneous belief that RYO is less harmful than cigarettes was a key reason for use. While inserts with positive messaging about quitting, as used on the Canadian inserts, were viewed as potentially helpful, inserts that challenged the idea that RYO was not less harmful than cigarettes were generally dismissed. Research is needed to understand what types of RYO-specific messaging could most effectively be used on inserts, or indeed in other media, to challenge the misperceptions that many RYO smokers hold.

Prevalence of Menthol and Menthol Capsule Cigarette Use Among 11-16 Year Olds in Wales Prior to a Ban on Characterizing Flavors in Cigarettes: Findings From the 2019 Student Health and Wellbeing Survey.

INTRODUCTION: The use of flavored cigarettes has increased in many countries because of the inclusion of one or more frangible flavor-changing capsules in the filter. Research suggests that these "capsule" cigarettes appeal most to youth, but little is known about how prevalent their use is among children. METHODS: A cross-sectional school survey was conducted between September and December 2019 with 11-16 year-olds (N = 119 388) from 198 secondary schools across Wales; the sample represented approximately two-thirds of all 11-16 year-olds in the country. The sample was asked about smoking behavior, with a quarter (N = 26 950) also asked about awareness of menthol cigarettes, and use of menthol and menthol capsule cigarettes if a current smoker (N = 1447). RESULTS: Current smoking prevalence was 5.7% among the entire sample and 5.9% among the analytical sample (those also asked about menthol and menthol capsule cigarettes). For the analytical sample, almost all current smokers (93.2%) were aware of menthol cigarettes, with three-fifths (60.5%) reporting having used menthol cigarettes in the past 30 days (42.3% capsule cigarettes, 18.2% noncapsule cigarettes). In comparison to nonmenthol smokers, those using menthol cigarettes (capsule and noncapsule) were more likely to be frequent smokers, with those using menthol capsule cigarettes more likely to have smoked for longer. CONCLUSIONS: While past research suggests that flavored cigarettes appeal to youth, this study shows just how popular these products, and capsule cigarettes, in particular, were among young smokers in Wales. It also raises questions about why capsule cigarettes have received such limited public health attention. IMPLICATIONS: That three in five 11-16 year-old smokers reported using menthol cigarettes in the past 30 days highlights how appealing these products are to young people, particularly capsule cigarettes, used by seventy percent of menthol smokers. Capsule cigarettes are one of the most successful tobacco product innovations in decades, even in countries with comprehensive bans on tobacco marketing and standardized packaging. The dearth of research on capsule cigarettes is a failure of global public health. Evaluation of the ban on characterizing flavors in the United Kingdom and across the European Union is critical.

'I'm killing myself, but I'm saving the planet': rolling tobacco smokers' perceptions of rolling papers.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the global growth of rolling tobacco, we are unaware of any research that has explored smokers' perceptions of the types of rolling papers available, or plain rolling papers, which are now required in Canada and Israel. METHODS: Eight focus groups were conducted with rolling tobacco smokers (n=50) in Greater Glasgow (Scotland) between February and March 2020. Participants were shown a number of packs of promotional rolling papers (natural, transparent, prerolled cones, flavoured) and plain rolling papers. RESULTS: Rolling papers were often viewed as functional, a necessity for making roll-ups. The appeal of papers was based on the packaging, with a booklet-style pack of natural papers viewed very positively, as well as novelty, usability and taste/smell. Participants often associated papers with particular users, with prerolled cones and some flavoured papers thought to be used by cannabis smokers or younger people and those just starting to smoke. In terms of harm perceptions, natural papers were viewed as a healthier choice than standard papers and more environmentally friendly, whereas transparent papers raised concerns about safety to both the user and the environment. Participants were generally ambivalent towards plain papers, which they did not feel would alter their purchasing or smoking behaviour, although some felt they may be less appealing to youth as the branding would be diminished. CONCLUSIONS: The panoply of rolling papers available offers consumers considerable choice. As some promotional papers can increase appeal or create misperceptions of harm then standardising papers would help to counter this.

Plain tobacco packaging: progress, challenges, learning and opportunities.

The aim of this paper is to overview progress made with respect to the adoption of plain (or standardised) packaging, key challenges faced, evaluative evidence and opportunities for extending this policy. It has been a decade since Australia became the first country to require tobacco products to be sold in plain packaging; after slow initial uptake, 16 countries have now fully implemented this policy. Since 2020, plain packaging laws have become more comprehensive in some countries, expanding coverage beyond traditional tobacco products to include heated tobacco, tobacco accessories (rolling papers) and other nicotine-containing products (e-cigarettes). Laws have also become more innovative: some now ban non-biodegradable filters, include provision for a periodic change of the pack colour or require both plain packaging and health-promoting pack inserts. The tobacco industry has and will continue to use multi-jurisdictional strategies to oppose this policy. Evaluations suggest that plain packaging has improved health outcomes and has not burdened retailers, although research is limited to early policy adopters and important gaps in the literature remain. While the power of packaging as a sales tool has diminished in markets with plain packaging, tobacco companies have exploited loopholes to continue to promote their products and have increasingly focused on filter innovations. Opportunities exist for governments to strengthen plain packaging laws.

Awareness of alcohol marketing one year after initial implementation of Ireland's Public Health (Alcohol) Act and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The Republic of Ireland is introducing new controls on alcohol marketing, starting in November 2019 with restrictions on some outdoor and cinema advertising, and a ban on public transport advertising. We examined changes in marketing awareness one year after initial implementation and during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Repeat online cross-sectional surveys with adults in Ireland conducted October 2019 (n = 1,007) and October 2020 (n = 1,020). Participants self-reported past-month awareness of alcohol marketing and completed the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Concise (AUDIT-C). Current drinkers were categorised as those reporting heavy episodic drinking at least monthly and higher-risk drinkers (≥5 AUDIT-C). RESULTS: In both waves, most participants recalled some marketing awareness (94.1% vs. 93.8%). For 9/13 activities measured in both waves, there were decreases in the proportion reporting any awareness and frequency of awareness, including for the newly restricted activities. For example, any awareness of public transport advertising decreased between waves (ORAdj = 0.66, 95%CI: 0.53-0.81). In both waves, higher past-month awareness was associated with at least monthly heavy episodic drinking and higher-risk consumption. CONCLUSION: We recommend a precautionary interpretation. It is plausible that both Ireland's initial controls and COVID-19 restrictions contributed to decreases in awareness, but longer-term evaluation is required to determine relative contribution.

Youth perceptions of Brand variant names on standardised cigarette packs, and responses to replacing these with numbers: a focus group study in Britain.

Tobacco companies use brand variant name on cigarette packaging to differentiate, and create interest in, their products. We explored young peoples' reactions to brand variant names on cigarette packs and perceptions of replacing these with numbers, a proposed policy in Turkey. Twelve focus groups, segmented by gender, age (11-12, 13-14, 15-16) and social grade (ABC1, C2DE), were conducted across Britain from May-July 2018 (n = 89). Participants were asked what they thought about brand names in general, and on cigarette packs, and perceptions of replacing the brand variant name on cigarette packs with a number. Brand (variant) name was considered important for products, including cigarettes, and thought to communicate information about the product, image, price, and taste, and encourage purchase. Although replacing brand variant names on cigarette packs with numbers caused confusion, several participants mentioned that it would eliminate any remaining marketing power that the pack may have. They thought that numbered cigarette packs could be off-putting due to the absence of a familiar brand name, although the impact on smokers was considered negligible. Although adolescents were not clear on the rationale for numbered cigarette packs, some suggested that this would reduce one of the few remaining promotional features on standardised packs.

The Impact of Including Cessation Resource Information on Health Warnings on Standardized Tobacco Packaging on Awareness and Use: A Longitudinal Online Survey in the United Kingdom.

INTRODUCTION: Since May 2017, all cigarettes and roll-your-own (RYO) tobacco in the United Kingdom must be sold in standardized packs with pictorial warnings displaying, for the first time, a stop-smoking website. AIMS AND METHODS: Data come from three waves of a longitudinal online survey with smokers and ex-smokers conducted pre- and post-standardized packaging, with Wave 1 (W1) in April-May 2016, Wave 2 (W2) in September-November 2017, and Wave 3 (W3) in May-July 2019. Only smokers are included in the analysis: W1 (N = 6233), W2 (N = 3629), and W3 (N = 2412). We explored any change in citing warnings on packs as a source of information about a stop-smoking website, and whether citing warnings as a source was associated with use of a stop-smoking website. As the warnings, and therefore the stop-smoking website, are larger on RYO packs than on cigarette packs due to the larger pack size, we explored differences in awareness of a stop-smoking website among exclusive cigarette smokers (W1 = 3142, W2 = 1884, W3 = 1247) and exclusive RYO smokers (W1 = 2046, W2 = 1119, W3 = 814). RESULTS: Among smokers recalling seeing information about a stop-smoking website, citing warnings as a source increased between waves (W1 = 14.0%, W2 = 24.2%, W3 = 25.1%) and was associated with having visited a stop-smoking website (odds ratio = 11.81, 95% confidence interval 8.47-16.46). Citing warnings as a source of a stop-smoking website increased among exclusive RYO smokers at each wave (W1 = 15.5%, W2 = 26.3%, W3 = 32.1%), while for exclusive cigarette smokers it only increased at W2 (W1 = 10.5%, W2 = 22.4%, W3 = 19.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Warnings are an important source of cessation resource information. Making this information more prominent may help sustain awareness. IMPLICATIONS: The findings support the inclusion of a stop-smoking website on warnings as awareness among smokers increased and citing warnings as a source of information about a stop-smoking website was associated with having visited a stop-smoking website. We also explored whether the stop-smoking website on warnings on RYO packs, which is larger than on cigarette packs as a function of the larger size of RYO packs, would have any impact on awareness of this information. That exclusive RYO smokers were more likely than exclusive cigarette smokers to notice a stop-smoking website on warnings suggests that this information should be more prominent.

Regulatory Compliance of Health Warnings on Tobacco Packs in Karnataka, India.

INTRODUCTION: In September 2014, the Government of India introduced legislation requiring all tobacco packaging to display a health warning covering 85% (60% pictorial, 25% text) of the principal display area of the pack, of at least 4 cm in height and 3.5 cm width, with legible text in a white font on a black background and in English and/or the same Indian language as the language used on the pack. We evaluated compliance with this legislation in the Udupi district of Karnataka, India. METHODS: We procured one example of every tobacco pack of cigarettes, beedis, chewing tobacco, and snuff sold by a convenience sample of retailers in one urban and two rural areas in each of the five administrative blocks of the Udupi district between June and August 2018. For each pack we measured the size of the health warning, calculated the proportion of the pack covered, and assessed the legibility. RESULTS: A total of 365 packs were collected from retailers, with 357 of these branded and eight, all packs of snuff, unbranded. Warnings on 320 (87.3%) packs did not reach the legally required proportional magnitude, warnings on 140 (38.4%) packs were not legible, and warnings on 117 packs (32.1%) did not meet the language requirement. Only 45 packs (12.3%) were fully compliant. CONCLUSIONS: Compliance with warning legislation in this district of India is low, highlighting the need for more effective enforcement. IMPLICATIONS: Warnings on tobacco packaging are an important and inexpensive means of communicating the harms associated with tobacco use. However, relatively few studies have explored regulatory compliance with warnings. We collected all unique tobacco packs from 66 retailers in a district in Karnataka in India and assessed whether each met the legislative requirements in terms of warning size and proportion of the pack covered, legibility, and the language used. Of the 365 packs collected, only one in eight was compliant with the legislative requirements. This study highlights the importance of assessing warning compliance and the need for enforcement in India.

The Response of Smokers to Health Warnings on Packs in the United Kingdom and Norway Following the Introduction of Standardized Packaging.

INTRODUCTION: Standardized packaging was phased in between May 2016 and May 2017 in the United Kingdom and July 2017 and July 2018 in Norway. In both countries, the health warnings on packs prior to standardized packaging being implemented were from the former Tobacco Products Directive library of warnings (text warnings covering 43% of the pack front and pictorial warnings covering 53% of the pack reverse). The warnings on packs, postimplementation, were from the current Tobacco Products Directive library of warnings (novel pictorial warnings covering 65% of the pack front and reverse) for the United Kingdom but unchanged in Norway. AIMS AND METHODS: Longitudinal online surveys were conducted prior to standardized packaging (United Kingdom: April-May 2016; Norway: May-June 2017) and postimplementation (United Kingdom: September-November 2017 and May-July 2019; Norway: August-September 2018). We explored smokers' response to the on-pack warnings (salience, cognitive reactions, and behavioral reactions). RESULTS: In the United Kingdom, noticing warnings on packs, reading or looking closely at them, thinking about them, thinking about the health risks, avoidant behaviors, forgoing cigarettes, and being more likely to quit due to the warnings significantly increased from waves 1 to 2, and then decreased from waves 2 to 3, but remained higher than at wave 1. In Norway, noticing warnings, reading or looking closely at them, thinking about them, thinking about the health risks, and being more likely to quit due to the warnings significantly decreased from waves 1 to 2; avoidant behaviors and forgoing cigarettes remained unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: The inclusion of large novel pictorial warnings on standardized packs increases warning salience and effectiveness. IMPLICATIONS: Two longitudinal online surveys in the United Kingdom and Norway explored the impact of standardized packaging on warning salience and effectiveness. That warning salience and effectiveness only increased in the UK postimplementation, where standardized packaging was implemented alongside new larger pictorial warnings on the pack front and reverse, and not in Norway, where standardized packaging was introduced but older smaller text warnings (pack front) and pictorial warnings (pack reverse) were retained, highlights the importance of removing full branding and introducing stronger warnings simultaneously.

Reactions to, and trial intentions for, three dissuasive cigarette designs: a cross-sectional survey of adolescents in Scotland.

OBJECTIVES: There has been growing academic and policy interest in opportunities to decrease the appeal of cigarette sticks, such as making them an unattractive colour or requiring them to display a health warning. We therefore explored reactions to, and trial intentions for, three 'dissuasive' cigarette designs among adolescents in Scotland. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey with 12-17 year olds in Scotland (n=594) was conducted between November 2017 and November 2018. Participants were shown one 'standard' cigarette (imitation cork filter with white paper casing) and three dissuasive cigarettes: (1) a cigarette with the warning 'smoking kills'; (2) a cigarette with the warning 'toxic' and a skull and cross-bones image and (3) a dark green cigarette. Participants rated each cigarette on nine five-point reaction measures (eg, appealing/unappealing or attractive/unattractive). A composite reaction score was computed for each cigarette, which was binary coded (overall negative reactions vs neutral/positive reactions). Participants also indicated whether they would try each cigarette (coded: Yes/No). Demographics, smoking status and smoking susceptibility were also measured. RESULTS: More participants had negative reactions to the dark green (93% of adolescents), 'smoking kills' (94%) and 'toxic' (96%) cigarettes, compared with the standard cigarette (85%). For all three dissuasive designs, Chi-square tests found that negative reactions were more likely among younger adolescents (vs older adolescents), never-smokers (vs ever smokers) and non-susceptible never-smokers (vs susceptible never-smokers). Most participants indicated that they would not try any of the cigarettes (range: 84%-91%). CONCLUSION: Dissuasive cigarettes present an opportunity to further reduce the appeal of smoking among adolescents.

Understanding the Broader Impacts Of Alcohol Marketing: Time For a Research Agenda Which Includes Adults.

Most research on alcohol marketing involves young people. Consequently, gaps remain in our understanding of how alcohol marketing reaches, engages and influences adults, who are the legitimate and primary targets for marketing communications. Responding to these lacunae in knowledge is necessary to help inform and evaluate population-level controls on alcohol marketing.

The impacts of including information about the number of carcinogens in smoke on standardized cigarette packs in the UK.

BACKGROUND: Since May 2017, standardized packaging has been mandatory in the UK, with packs required to display an 'information message' explaining that there are more than 70 carcinogens in tobacco smoke. METHODS: Three waves of a longitudinal online survey in the UK with smokers pre-standardized packaging (Wave 1: April-May 2016) and followed up post-standardized packaging (Wave 2: September-November 2017, Wave 3: May-July 2019). Of the 6233 smokers at Wave 1, 4293 responded at Wave 2 and 3175 at Wave 3. We explored knowledge of the number of carcinogens in smoke, and whether knowing that smoke contains more than 70 carcinogens mediated change in the belief that the dangers of smoking are exaggerated (risk perception), stubbing out cigarettes, quit intentions and quitting. As the information message is larger on roll-your-own packs than on cigarette packs, as the packs are larger, we also explored whether there was any difference in knowing that smoke contains more than 70 carcinogens between exclusive cigarette smokers and exclusive roll-your-own smokers. RESULTS: Knowledge that there are over 70 carcinogens in smoke increased among smokers across waves, with the increase from Waves 1 to 3 greater for exclusive roll-your-own smokers than exclusive cigarette smokers (adjusted odds ratio=1.44; 95% CI 1.03-2.03). Knowledge that there are over 70 carcinogens in smoke mediated higher risk perception but not stubbing cigarettes out, quit intentions or quitting. CONCLUSIONS: The information message improved knowledge of how many carcinogens are in smoke, particularly among exclusive roll-your-own smokers, and this was linked to higher risk perception.

Smokers' Perceptions of Cigarette Packaging With Audio Warning Messages: A Focus Group Study in Scotland.

AIMS: The use of audio pack cues or messages is a recent trend in packaging design. There is scope to use audio technology to communicate health and cessation messages via cigarette packaging. We explored how smokers responded to cigarette packs which played audio health messages. METHODS: Twenty focus groups were conducted in Scotland in 2015 with smokers (n = 120) segmented by age (16-17, 18-24, 25-35, 36-50, >50), gender and social grade. Perceptions of cigarette packs which played audio warnings were explored, with four messages used: (1) a cessation message with a quitline number, (2) mortality message, (3) fertility message, and (4) message about ageing skin. RESULTS: Audio warnings were thought to increase message impact, particularly among younger smokers, as they would be hard to ignore or avoid, and repetition may lead to the messages being memorized. The warnings were considered annoying or embarrassing, and participants suggested they may discard the packs and use alternative storage. Some participants suggested that the audio warnings were off-putting and may alter their smoking behavior, with the mortality message deemed most effective and was considered relatable and felt personal. Older smokers were least likely to believe that audio warnings would affect their smoking behavior, although some thought that they may enhance cessation attempts among smokers seeking to quit, and could deter new or potential smokers, for example, young people. CONCLUSIONS: Cigarette packs with audio messaging may have a role to play, now or in the future, as a novel way of communicating health and cessation information. IMPLICATIONS: There is a lack of research exploring smokers' perceptions of cigarette packs which play audio health messages. This focus group study provides an understanding of smokers' immediate responses to cigarette packs which played a short health message when opened. Smokers generally viewed them as annoying or embarrassing, and some suggested the use of alternative storage. Audio warnings were thought to increase message salience, memorability, and impact, for younger smokers in particular, and some suggested that they be off-putting for themselves or others.

Reactions to Standardized Cigarette Packs With Varying Structural Designs, and the Association With Smoking Susceptibility: A Postimplementation Cross-Sectional Survey With Never-Smoking Adolescents in Scotland.

INTRODUCTION: From May 20, 2017, cigarettes in the United Kingdom must be sold in standardized (plain) packaging. We explore postimplementation reactions to standardized cigarette packaging among never-smokers in Scotland, whether reactions vary in relation to permitted variations in pack structure, and whether reactions are associated with susceptibility. AIMS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional survey with 12-17-year-old never-smokers (n = 507) in Scotland, conducted November 2017-November 2018. Participants were shown one "regular" standardized cigarette pack (flip-top lid and straight-edged pack, similar to designs in Australia) and three standardized packs with varied pack structures (beveled-edges, slim pack, and shoulder box), which are permitted postimplementation in the United Kingdom. Participants rated each pack on eight five-point reaction measures (eg, attractiveness). Participants also indicated which pack, if any, they would choose. Smoking susceptibility was the outcome. RESULTS: The mean reaction scores for all four packs were mostly negative, however the shoulder box was consistently rated less negatively than the regular, slim, or beveled-edge packs. Most participants (87%) said they would not select any of the four packs, although susceptible participants were more likely to select one than nonsusceptible participants (25% vs. 7%; χ 2 = 29.70; p < .001). For all four packs, not finding them off-putting was associated with susceptibility (Adjusted Odds Ratio range: 2.73-3.69), albeit only a minority of adolescents did not find each pack off-putting. CONCLUSIONS: Adolescents have negative reactions to the standardized cigarette packs implemented in the United Kingdom, albeit permitted variations in structure can reduce the extent of negativity. Most reactions to standardized packaging had no association with susceptibility. IMPLICATIONS: We provide the first empirical evidence that adolescents find the standardized cigarette packs implemented in the United Kingdom unappealing and that most pack reactions have no association with susceptibility among never-smokers, with the exception of the minority who did not think that they would put them off smoking. This suggests that the legislation is achieving one of its primary aims, to reduce the appeal of packaging. That permitted variations in pack structure (eg, shoulder boxes) somewhat reduce negative reactions suggests that the United Kingdom, and other countries introducing similar legislation, should ensure that all aspects of pack design are fully standardized.

Impact of a ban on the open display of tobacco products in retail outlets on never smoking youth in the UK: findings from a repeat cross-sectional survey before, during and after implementation.

BACKGROUND: In the UK, a ban on the open display of tobacco products at the point of sale (POS) was phased in between 2012 and 2015. We explored any impact of the ban on youth before, during and after implementation. METHODS: A repeat cross-sectional in-home survey with young people aged 11-16 years old in the UK was conducted preban (2011, n=1373), mid-ban (2014, n=1205) and postban (2016, n=1213). The analysis focuses on the never-smokers in the sample (n=2953 in total). Preban, we quantified the associations of noticing cigarettes displayed at POS and cigarette brand awareness with smoking susceptibility. We measured any change in noticing cigarettes displayed at POS, cigarette brand awareness and smoking susceptibility between preban, mid-ban and postban. Postban, we assessed support for a display ban, perceived appeal of cigarettes and perceived acceptability of smoking as a result of closed displays. RESULTS: Preban, noticing cigarettes displayed at POS (adjusted OR [AOR]=1.97, 95% CI 1.30 to 2.98) and higher brand awareness (AOR=1.15, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.29) were positively associated with smoking susceptibility. The mean number of brands recalled declined from 0.97 preban to 0.69 postban (p<0.001). Smoking susceptibility decreased from 28% preban to 23% mid-ban and 18% postban (p for trend <0.001). Postban, 90% of never-smokers supported the display ban and indicated that it made cigarettes seem unappealing (77%) and made smoking seem unacceptable (87%). CONCLUSIONS: Both partial and full implementation of a display ban were followed by a reduction in smoking susceptibility among adolescents, which may be driven by decreases in brand awareness.

Awareness of product-related information, health messages and warnings on alcohol packaging among adolescents: a cross-sectional survey in the United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol packaging can be used to communicate product-related information, health messages and health warnings to consumers. We examined awareness and recall of such information and messaging among adolescents in the United Kingdom. METHOD: A cross-sectional survey was conducted with 11-19 year olds in the United Kingdom (n = 3399), with participants asked if they had seen any information, health messages or warnings on alcohol packaging in the past month (Yes/No) and, if so, what they recalled. We also assessed higher-risk drinking among current drinkers (≥5 Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption) and susceptibility to consume among never-drinkers. RESULTS: One-third (32%) of participants had seen information, health messages or warnings on alcohol packaging. Chi-Square tests showed awareness was greater for current drinkers than non-drinkers (46% vs. 19%; P < 0.001), higher-risk drinkers than lower-risk drinkers (55% vs. 39%; P < 0.001), and susceptible never-drinkers than non-susceptible never-drinkers (21% vs. 16%; P = 0.01). Ten messages were recalled, with drinking responsibly (18%) and not drinking during pregnancy (13%) most recalled. CONCLUSION: Most young drinkers, including almost half of higher-risk drinkers, did not recall seeing any information, health messages or warnings on alcohol packaging in the past month, suggesting that current labelling is failing to reach this key audience.

How did smokers respond to standardised cigarette packaging with new, larger health warnings in the United Kingdom during the transition period? A cross-sectional online survey.

INTRODUCTION: In the United Kingdom, standardised packaging for cigarettes was phased in between May 2016 and May 2017. We assessed whether there was an association between using standardised packs and warning salience, thoughts about the risks of smoking, thoughts about quitting, and awareness and use of stop-smoking websites. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional online survey with current smokers aged 16 and over (N = 1865) recruited in two regions of England between February-April 2017, when both standardised and fully-branded packs were on the market. Participants were asked about use of standardised packs, warning salience (noticing, reading closely), and whether the packs they were using increased thoughts of the risks of smoking and quitting. They were also asked about awareness of stop-smoking websites, source of awareness (including warnings on packs), and whether they had visited a stop-smoking website. RESULTS: Most participants reported currently using standardised packs (76.4%), 9.3% were not currently using them but had previously used them, and 14.3% had never used them. Compared with never users, current users were more likely to have noticed the warnings on packs often/very often (AOR (95%CI) = 2.76 (2.10, 3.63)), read them closely often/very often (AOR(95%CI) = 2.16 (1.51, 3.10)), thought somewhat/a lot about the health risks of smoking (AOR(95%CI) = 1.92 (1.38, 2.68)), and thought somewhat/a lot about quitting (AOR(95%CI) = 1.90 (1.30, 2.77)). They were also more likely to have noticed a stop-smoking website on packs. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with the broad objectives of standardised packaging, we found that it was associated with increased warning salience and thoughts about risks and quitting.

Extending health messaging to the consumption experience: a focus group study exploring smokers' perceptions of health warnings on cigarettes.

Introduction: While most countries require health warnings on cigarette packs, the Scottish and Canadian Governments are considering requiring health warnings on cigarette sticks. Methods: Twenty focus groups were conducted in Glasgow and Edinburgh (Scotland) with smokers (n = 120) segmented by age (16-17, 18-24, 25-35, 36-50, >50), gender and social grade, to explore perceptions of cigarettes displaying the warning 'Smoking kills' on the cigarette paper and any demographic differences in how smokers responded to these. Results: A warning on each cigarette was thought to prolong the health message, as it would be visible when a cigarette was taken from a pack, lit, left in an ashtray, and with each draw, and make avoidant behavior more difficult. That it would be visible to others was perceived as off-putting for some. It was felt that a warning on each cigarette would create a negative image and be embarrassing. Within several female groups they were viewed as depressing, worrying and frightening, with it suggested that people would not feel good smoking cigarettes displaying a warning. Within every group there was mention of warnings on cigarettes potentially having an impact on themselves, others or both. Some, mostly younger groups, mentioned stubbing cigarettes out early, reducing consumption or quitting. The consensus was that they would be off-putting for young people, nonsmokers and those starting to smoke. Conclusions: Including a warning on each cigarette stick is a viable policy option and one which would, for the first time, extend health messaging to the consumption experience.