Reactions to a Hypothetical Ban of Open-System Electronic Cigarettes Among People Who Currently Use Electronic Cigarettes.

INTRODUCTION: Policies limiting electronic cigarette (ECIG) device and liquid characteristics have been considered to prevent dependence potential and youth product appeal. "Open-system" ECIGs allow people to adjust device and liquid characteristics, which may undermine these policies. This study examined anticipated reactions to a policy prohibiting the sale of open-system ECIG devices in the United States using concept mapping. METHODS: In 2020, adults who reported ECIG use in the past 30 days (n = 70; 45.1% women; mean age = 33.0, SD = 10.6) recruited from a research registry of individuals from across the United States provided statements into a shared list that completed a prompt: "If open-system vaping devices were no longer sold in the US and only closed-system vaping devices were available, what is a specific reaction or response you would have?" at a study website. Participants rated statements (1-7) on how true the statements were for them. Multidimensional scaling and hierarchical cluster analyses were used to identify thematic clusters. Mean ratings of statements were calculated and compared based on the type of ECIG used and current cigarette smoking status. RESULTS: Participants generated 85 unique statements. The analysis identified eight themes that were organized into two broad groups. The first group of five clusters described behavioral responses to the hypothetical policy (Loopholes, Switch to Closed-System ECIGs, Legal Approaches to Use Open-System ECIGs, ECIG Use Cessation, Switch to non-ECIG Products). The second group of three clusters described psychological responses to the hypothetical policy (Closed-System ECIG Cons, Psychological Responses, Policy Outcome Concerns). CONCLUSIONS: While a ban on open-system ECIG devices may have positive impacts on public health, policy loopholes, and consumer behaviors may undermine the policy. Efforts to support policy enforcement could increase policy effectiveness. IMPLICATIONS: Open-system electronic cigarettes (ECIGs) that allow people who use ECIGs to modify ECIG device and liquid characteristics may limit the effectiveness of policies that establish product standards which attempt to limit nicotine delivery and flavor content in ECIG liquids. This study identified predicted reactions to a hypothetical policy prohibiting the sale of open-system ECIGs in the United States. Results suggest that people who use ECIGs may view a policy prohibiting open-system ECIGs unfavorably, but would be willing to use closed-system ECIGs. However, many ECIG users may attempt to find loopholes in the policy or alternative sources to purchase open-system ECIGs if open-systems were banned. Future research should identify strategies for tobacco regulatory policy enforcement to increase effectiveness.

Hidden flaws in e-cigarette industry-funded studies.

Electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) use has increased since e-cigarettes were introduced to the market nearly 20 years ago. Researchers continue to conduct studies to understand the health risks and benefits of e-cigarettes to inform health education and promotion efforts as well as public policy. Studies funded by the tobacco industry examining the potential risks and benefits of e-cigarettes have also been conducted and are sometimes published in the scientific literature. Frequently, tobacco and e-cigarette industry-funded researchers report findings that contradict research funded by other sources. While many industry-funded studies may appear methodologically sound at first glance, in some cases, industry-funded studies include methodological flaws that result in misleading conclusions. The tobacco industry's use of biased research to influence tobacco-related policy decisions in the past is well-documented. This commentary provides specific examples of recent e-cigarette research funded by the tobacco/e-cigarette industry in which methodological flaws result in misleading conclusions that support industry goals. Given the long history of biased research conducted by the tobacco industry, there is a need to assess whether research funded by the e-cigarette industry similarly contains methodological flaws. We emphasise the need for tobacco and e-cigarette-funded research to be scrutinised by non-industry-funded subject matter experts and call for journals to not consider manuscripts that have received support from the tobacco or e-cigarette industry.

Waterpipe Tobacco Brands and Flavors Sold Online in the USA.

INTRODUCTION: Flavor additives are commonly used in combustible tobacco products to mask harshness and increase appeal. However, research on the availability of flavored waterpipe tobacco (WT) is lacking, yet is important to support implementation of policies. METHODS: We completed a comprehensive online search in 2020 to identify WT brands and flavors sold online in the USA. We conducted a descriptive content analysis categorizing flavors as explicit (i.e., clear taste/flavor) or concept (i.e., no clear taste/flavor); and coded for 23 flavor descriptors (e.g., fruit, mint/menthol, tobacco). Flavor names were double-coded and discrepancies were resolved by a third coder. RESULTS: We identified 66 WT brands with 118 product lines (i.e., sub-brands). We found 2953 flavors, including 1871 unique flavors. Brands averaged 45 flavors (range: 1-183). Almost three quarters (73.5%, n = 2171) used explicit flavor names and 26.5% (n = 782) used concept flavor names. Concept flavors varied widely, and included names such as 1001 Nights and California Dream. The most common flavor descriptors were fruit (54.1%) and mint/menthol (12.5%). Tobacco was rarely (0.2%) used as a flavor descriptor. Flavor descriptors also included location (10.7%), color (11.1%), candy (6.3%), cool/ice (5.3%), and alcohol (5.5%). CONCLUSIONS: WT is available in 1871 unique flavors, likely contributing to product appeal and use. Like other tobacco products, fruit and mint/menthol are common flavors. Given the significant health consequences associated with WT smoking and the role of flavors in product use, regulatory action specifically targeting WT flavors is urgently needed.

Electronic Cigarette Nicotine Flux, Nicotine Yield, and Particulate Matter Emissions: Impact of Device and Liquid Heterogeneity.

INTRODUCTION: Electronic cigarettes (ECIGs) heat a nicotine-containing liquid to produce an inhalable aerosol. ECIG power (wattage) and liquid nicotine concentration are two factors that predict nicotine emission rate ("flux"). These factors can vary greatly across devices and users. AIMS AND METHODS: The purpose of this study was to examine ECIG device and liquid heterogeneity in "real world" settings and the association with predicted nicotine flux, nicotine yield, and total particulate matter (TPM) emissions. Past 30-day ECIG users (n = 84; mean age = 23.8 years [SD = 9.6]) reported device and liquid characteristics. Device power was measured via multimeter, device display screens, or obtained via labeling. Liquid nicotine concentration was obtained via labeling or through chemical analysis. Predicted nicotine flux, nicotine yield, and TPM associated with 10 4-second puffs were calculated for participants' primary devices. RESULTS: Participants' primary devices were box mods (42.9%), disposable vapes (20.2%), and pod mods (36.9%). Most participants (65.5%) reported not knowing their primary device wattage. Rebuildable/box mods had the greatest power range (11.1-120.0 W); pod mod power also varied considerably (4.1-21.7 W). Unlike device wattage, most participants (95.2%) reported knowing their liquid nicotine concentration, which ranged from 3.0 to 86.9 mg/ml (M = 36.0, SD = 29.3). Predicted nicotine flux varied greatly across products (range =12.0-160.1 µg/s, M = 85.6 µg/s, SD = 34.3). Box mods had the greatest variability in wattage and predicted nicotine flux, nicotine yield, and TPM yield. CONCLUSIONS: ECIG device and liquid heterogeneity influence nicotine and other toxicant emissions. Better measurement of ECIG device and liquid characteristics is needed to understand nicotine and toxicant emissions and to inform regulatory policy. IMPLICATIONS: ECIG device and liquid heterogeneity cause great variability in nicotine flux and toxicants emitted. These data demonstrate the need to examine device and liquid characteristics to develop empirically informed, health-promoting regulatory policies. Policies may include setting product standards such that ECIG products cannot (1) have nicotine fluxes much greater than that of a cigarette to decrease the risk of dependence, (2) have nicotine fluxes that are very low and thus would have minimal appeal to cigarette smokers and may serve as starter products for youth or nontobacco users, and (3) emit large amounts of particulate matter and other toxicants.

Impact of Canada's menthol cigarette ban on quitting among menthol smokers: pooled analysis of pre-post evaluation from the ITC Project and the Ontario Menthol Ban Study and projections of impact in the USA.

INTRODUCTION: Between 2015 and 2018, Canada banned menthol cigarettes. This study pooled data from two pre-post cohort studies (the Ontario Menthol Ban Study, and the International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation (ITC) Canada Survey, conducted in seven provinces) to derive more precise estimates of the impact of Canada's menthol ban on quitting and to apply these estimates to project the impact of a menthol ban in the USA. METHODS: Weighted multivariable logistic analyses compared post-ban quit success of menthol smokers with non-menthol smokers (for daily smokers and for all (daily + non-daily) smokers), controlling for sex, age, ethnicity, education, baseline smoking status, baseline cigarettes per day and study regions. Projections to the USA were created by multiplying the effect size of the Canadian menthol ban on quitting (percentage of increased quitting among menthol smokers) by the number of menthol smokers overall and among African Americans, from the 2019 National Survey on Drug Use and Health. RESULTS: After the menthol cigarette ban, menthol smokers were more likely than non-menthol smokers to have quit smoking among daily smokers (difference=8.0%; 95% CI: 2.4% to 13.7%,p=0.005) and all (daily+non-daily) smokers (difference=7.3%; 95% CI: 2.1% to 12.5%,p=0.006). The projected number of smokers who would quit after a US menthol ban would be 789 724 daily smokers (including 199 732 African Americans) and 1 337 988 daily+non-daily smokers (including 381 272 African Americans). CONCLUSIONS: This pooled analysis of Canada's menthol cigarette ban provides the foundation for estimating the impact of menthol bans in the USA and other countries. Projections suggest that a US menthol cigarette ban would have a substantial impact on increasing quitting.

Electronic Cigarette Users' Reactions and Responses to a Hypothetical Nicotine Concentration Reduction in Electronic Cigarette Liquids.

Background: Regulations limiting nicotine in electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) have been proposed or implemented. Little is known about e-cigarette users' reactions to reducing e-cigarette liquid nicotine concentration. Methods: We used concept mapping to describe e-cigarette users' reactions to a 50% reduction in the nicotine concentration of their e-cigarette liquids. In 2019, current e-cigarette users who used e-cigarette liquid with greater than 0 mg/ml nicotine concentration completed an online study. Participants (n = 71, mean age = 34.9 (SD = 11.0), 50.7% women), brainstormed statements completing a prompt: "If the e-liquid that I use now in my e-cigarette/vaping device was only available in half the nicotine concentration or amount that I use now, a specific action I would take or a specific reaction I would have is…", Participants then sorted a final list of 67 statements into piles of similar content and rated statements on how true the statements would be for them. Multidimensional scaling and hierarchical cluster analyses identified thematic clusters. Results: Eight clusters were identified: (1) Replacement Product Seeking, (2) Mental Preparations and Expectations, (3) Use the New Liquid, (4) Information Seeking, (5) Compensation Behaviors, (6) Opportunity for E-Cigarette Reduction, (7) Physical and Psychological Effects, and (8) Replacement with non-E-Cigarette Products and Behaviors. Cluster ratings suggested many participants would search for other e-cigarette products/liquids to replace their current liquids, but using other tobacco products (e.g., cigarettes) may be less likely. Conclusions: If nicotine concentrations were decreased in e-cigarette liquids, e-cigarette users may attempt to purchase different e-cigarette products or modify their products to achieve desired effects.

Increased JUUL Emissions from Initial Puffs after Removing and Reinserting Pod.

Standard laboratory electronic cigarette (ECIG) puffing protocols that do not consider user behaviors, such as removing and resinserting a pod, may underestimate emissions. This study compared JUUL emissions from four 10-puff bout procedures. We generated ECIG aerosol in a chamber using a JUUL device and measured concentrations of particulate matter ≤2.5 µm in diameter (PM2.5). The JUUL pod was removed and reinserted 0 times, 1 time, 4 times, and 9 times in experiments 1-4, respectively. Mean real-time PM2.5 concentration was 65.06 µg/m3 (SD = 99.53) for experiment 1, 375.50 µg/m3 (SD = 346.45) for experiment 2, 501.94 µg/m3 (SD = 450.00) for experiment 3, and 834.69 µg/m3 (SD = 578.34) for experiment 4. In this study, removing and reinserting a JUUL pod resulted in greater PM2.5 concentrations compared to puffing protocols in which the JUUL pod was not removed and reinserted. ECIGs should be examined and evaluated based on ECIG users' real-world behaviors.

Electronic cigarette users' reactions and responses to a hypothetical ban of flavoured electronic cigarette liquids.

BackgroundRegulations have been proposed to limit e-cigarette flavours, but limited research has examined potential impacts of such policies. This study examined adult e-cigarette users' reactions to a hypothetical e-cigarette flavour ban. METHODS: In 2019, a convenience sample of current e-cigarette users in the USA (n=81, 53.1% women, mean age=37.6, 59.3% dual users of cigarettes) completed an online concept mapping study. Participants provided statements describing anticipated reactions to a hypothetical policy in which only tobacco, menthol or unflavoured e-cigarettes were available for purchase. Seventy-one unique statements were generated. Participants sorted statements into thematic groups and rated statements on how likely they would be to have each reaction. Multidimensional scaling was used to identify thematic clusters of statements. RESULTS: Twelve clusters were identified: negative reaction, take action against flavour limitation, youth prevention effectiveness perception, tolerance, acceptance, willingness to try new flavours, maintain vaping, reduce vaping, new flavours as vaping cessation transition, alternative sources for banned flavours, do-it-yourself mixing behaviours and alternative tobacco products. The highest rated cluster (negative reaction) described being angry or upset that flavours were banned, while the lowest rated clusters related to quitting/reducing e-cigarette use or switching to other tobacco products. Non-tobacco or non-menthol/mint flavoured e-cigarette users had higher ratings for clusters describing negative sentiment for the hypothetical policy. CONCLUSIONS: Some e-cigarette users may dislike an e-cigarette flavour ban; however, some e-cigarette users would likely be willing to use tobacco, menthol or unflavoured e-cigarette liquids with lower likelihood of quitting vaping or switching to other tobacco products.

Assessing toxicant emissions from e-liquids with DIY additives used in response to a potential flavour ban in e-cigarettes.

SIGNIFICANCE: Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) aerosolise liquids that contain nicotine, propylene glycol, glycerol and appealing flavours. In the USA, regulations have limited the availability of flavoured e-cigarettes in pod-based systems, and further tightening is expected. In response, some e-cigarette users may attempt to make their e-liquids (do-it-yourself, DIY). This study examined toxicant emissions from several aerosolised DIY e-liquids. METHODS: DIY additives were identified by reviewing users' responses to a hypothetical flavour ban, e-cigarette internet forums and DIY mixing internet websites. They include essential oils, cannabidiol, sucralose and ethyl maltol. E-liquids with varying concentrations and combinations of additives and tobacco and menthol flavours were prepared and were used to assess reactive oxygen species (ROS), carbonyl and phenol emissions in machine-generated aerosols. RESULTS: Data showed that adding DIY additives to unflavoured, menthol-flavoured or tobacco-flavoured e-liquids increases toxicant emissions to levels comparable with those from commercial flavoured e-liquids. Varying additive concentrations in e-liquids did not have a consistently significant effect on the tested emissions, yet increasing power yielded significantly higher ROS, carbonyl and phenol emissions for the same additive concentration. Adding nicotine to DIY e-liquids with sucralose yielded increase in some emissions and decrease in others, with freebase nicotine-containing e-liquid giving higher ROS emissions than that with nicotine salt. CONCLUSION: This study showed that DIY additives can impact aerosol toxicant emissions from e-cigarettes and should be considered by policymakers when restricting commercially available flavoured e-liquids.

Health Claims, Marketing Appeals, and Warnings on Popular Brands of Waterpipe Tobacco Packaging Sold in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Waterpipe tobacco (WT) smoking is associated with misperceptions of harm, especially among users. WT packaging contains imagery, flavor descriptors, and text claims that may contribute to misperceptions. The study goal was to characterize visual and text elements of WT packaging. AIMS AND METHODS: Using data from the U.S. Population Assessment on Tobacco and Health Study Wave 2 (October 2014-October 2015), we identified the 10 most popular WT brands. For each brand, we identified available flavors, including flavor collections with unique packaging elements. We randomly selected 10 flavors per brand for purchase (March-April 2018). We conducted descriptive content analysis to code all textual and visual design elements of each package. RESULTS: Over half (54%) of WT packages had modified risk tobacco product (MRTP) claims prohibited by federal law, including substance-free MRTP claims (43%) and the descriptor "natural" (11%). No MRTP reduced exposure or reduced risk claims were found. Over a quarter (26%) of packaging including one or more of terms that may imply reduced harm including "fresh," "premium," "quality," and "pure." All packages included a text-only warning, yet none appeared on the primary display panel. Almost all packaging (99%) included imagery, with 72% including flavor imagery. The majority of packages (72%) included a smoking cue. The most popular marketing appeals were "well-made" (57%), "enjoyable" (55%), and "patriotic" (47%). CONCLUSIONS: Prohibited MRTP claims, other descriptors, and flavor imagery are common on WT packaging, despite federal law. Future research is needed to evaluate if this marketing contributes to misperceptions of reduced harm. IMPLICATIONS: Tobacco packaging is used to convey health-related messages, both explicitly and implicitly; however, information about WT packaging is virtually nonexistent. We conducted a content analysis of WT packaging from the 10 most popular US brands. Over half (54%) of packages had prohibited MRTP claims and over a quarter (26%) included one or more descriptors that may be perceived as implying reduced harm. Use of imagery, including smoking cues, was common. The widespread use of prohibited MRTP claims, other descriptors, and imagery on WT packaging may contribute to misperceptions of reduced harm.

"Taking Up a New Problem": Context and Determinants of Pod-Mod Electronic Cigarette Use Among College Students.

In this article, we explore the context and determinants of pod-mod electronic cigarette (ECIG) use among college students aged 18 to 24 in the United States. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 55 students (M age = 20 years, 56% female, 65% White) on three campuses in the Northwest, Midwest, and Southeast. We performed a thematic analysis. Students described ECIG use by peers, increased ECIG exposure and prevalence in college, and school-related stress as reasons for vaping. Pod-mod features such as convenience, design, easy concealment, and flavors made vaping more appealing. Negative aspects of vaping included addiction, cost, and possible health consequences. Most viewed vaping as a college behavior and intended to quit after graduation. Our results show that the college environment plays a major role in young adult ECIG use. These findings can inform the development of targeted interventions to prevent and control uptake of ECIGs by young adults.

User-Perceived Negative Respiratory Symptoms Associated with Electronic Cigarette Use.

INTRODUCTION: Electronic cigarettes (ECIGs) expose users to an aerosol containing chemicals, which could affect the respiratory system negatively. This study examined negative respiratory symptoms associated with ECIG use. METHODS: In 2019, adult current ECIG users from 24 US states who reported experiencing negative respiratory symptoms from ECIG use (n = 49; 44.9% women; mean age = 35.2, SD = 11.5) completed an online survey and brainstormed statements that completed the prompt: "A specific negative effect or symptom related to my breathing, nose, mouth, throat, or lungs that I have experienced from vaping/using my e-cigarette is..." Participants sorted the final list of 56 statements into groups of similar content and rated statements on how true they were for them. Multidimensional scaling analysis identified thematic clusters. RESULTS: Eight ECIG use respiratory symptom clusters identified in analysis included Mucus and Congestion, Fatigue, Throat Symptoms, Breathing Problems, Mouth Symptoms, Chest Symptoms, Illness Symptoms, and Nose and Sinus Symptoms. Highly rated (ie, most common) symptoms included dry throat or mouth, fatigue during physical activity, coughing, shortness of breath, excessive phlegm, and bad taste in mouth. Mean cluster ratings did not differ based on lifetime cigarette smoking status (100 lifetime cigarettes smoked), but current cigarette smokers (ie, dual users) rated the Fatigue, Breathing Problems, Mucus and Congestion, and Nose and Sinus Symptoms clusters higher than noncurrent cigarette smokers. CONCLUSIONS: Participant-identified respiratory symptoms perceived to be ECIG related, many similar to cigarette smoking symptoms. Future research should assess if these symptoms are associated with other negative health outcomes. IMPLICATIONS: ECIG use exposes users to chemicals that may have negative health impacts on the respiratory system. Limited research has examined the broad range of negative respiratory symptoms associated with e-cigarette use. This study identified that ECIG-cigarette users perceive their ECIG use to be associated with negative respiratory symptoms. Many e-cigarette user-reported negative respiratory symptoms are similar to those associated with cigarette smoking, though some appear unique to e-cigarette use. Future research should continue to monitor respiratory symptoms reported by ECIG users and whether these are associated with health outcomes over time.

Longitudinal Analysis of Associations Between Reasons for Electronic Cigarette Use and Change in Smoking Status Among Adults in the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study.

INTRODUCTION: Electronic cigarette (ECIG) use and changes in cigarette smoking status may be influenced by self-reported reasons for using ECIGs. METHODS: We analyzed adult current and former cigarette smokers who were also current or former ECIG users at wave 1 (n = 3044) using wave 1 and wave 2 Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study data (2013-2015). Prevalence of reporting 13 reasons for ECIG use at wave 1 was examined and weighted logistic regressions were conducted predicting smoking status changes from wave 1 to wave 2. RESULTS: Reasons for ECIG use ranged from 18.1% (people in the media or public figures use them) to 82.5% (they might be less harmful to people around me than cigarettes). From wave 1 to wave 2, 27.2% of former smokers (n = 249) became current smokers and 11.6% of current smokers (n = 246) became former smokers. Among wave 1 former smokers, using ECIGs because of the availability of flavors (AOR = 0.57, 95% CI = 0.39-0.85) or because they don't smell (AOR = 0.64, 95% CI = 0.42-0.97) was associated with lower odds of relapse to smoking, but using ECIGs because using them helps people quit smoking (AOR = 1.55, 95% CI = 1.01-2.38) was associated with greater odds of relapse. Among wave 1 current smokers, using ECIGs because they can be used where smoking is not allowed (AOR = 0.56, 95% CI = 0.38-0.85) was associated with reduced odds of quitting cigarettes. CONCLUSIONS: Some reasons for ECIG use are associated with changes in self-reported smoking status. Researchers should examine ECIG user characteristics when assessing associations between ECIG use and smoking status transitions. IMPLICATIONS: Given that certain reasons for ECIG use, such as using ECIGs in locations are where smoking is not allowed, may inhibit smoking reduction, policies may be developed to prevent ECIG use in locations where smoking is banned. In addition, because certain reasons for ECIG use may aid in relapse prevention, such as availability of desired flavors, efforts should be made to identify ECIG device characteristics that are appealing to smokers but not youth or nontobacco users. These results provide support for future research on reasons for ECIG use to inform regulatory policies.

Electronic cigarette explosion/burn and poisoning related emergency department visits, 2018-2019.

BACKGROUND: Electronic cigarette (ECIG) use has increased dramatically in recent years. Negative ECIG-related acute health effects have included explosion/burn injuries from battery failure and child ingestion/poisoning of liquid nicotine. However, there is an urgent need for continued surveillance of ECIG health effects to determine whether these outcomes change as ECIG devices and liquids rapidly evolve. This study updates national estimates of ECIG-related emergency department (ED) visits and describes the context of these injuries. METHODS: A keyword search of case narrative text was used to identify ECIG-related ED visits in the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) data. These cross-sectional data are designed to be weighted to provide national estimates of consumer product-related injuries treated in EDs. ECIG-related injuries were described and categorized, and sampling weights applied to model national estimates. RESULTS: From 2015 to 2019 there were an estimated 3369 ED visits from ECIG explosion/burn injuries (95% CI = 2020, 4718), and an estimated 676 visits from 2019 alone (95% CI = 315, 1036). In 2018-2019, there were an estimated 1550 cases of children <5 years old ingesting ECIG liquids (95% CI = 778, 2322). CONCLUSIONS: Despite a notable shift in the US market towards ECIG devices that use lower electrical power and disposable "pods" (e.g., JUUL), liquid chemical ingestion among young children and ECIG explosion/burn injuries persist. Improved product regulations are urgently needed to prevent negative health effects caused by ECIGs, as well as prevent their ingestion and use by children.

Orthodox and Unorthodox Uses of Electronic Cigarettes: A Surveillance of YouTube Video Content.

INTRODUCTION: Open electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) systems are customizable by consumers and often allow for potential "unorthodox" use of the product; that is, use not as intended by the manufacturer. Little is known about the types and prevalence of unorthodox uses and how these practices are transmitted via popular social media. METHODS: Monthly searches of YouTube were conducted from June through November 2016 using the following search terms: "e-cigarettes," "vaping," and "e-juice." After collecting static and dynamic data on the 150 videos identified, two coders independently coded videos for general information, unorthodox use behaviors, health claims, and production quality and characteristics for orthodox and unorthodox use. Intercoder reliability was high (Cohen's κ 0.81, p < .001). RESULTS: One hundred fifty videos were included in the study with a total of 115 551 563 views. We identified nine categories of unorthodox uses of e-cigarettes. Unorthodox use was three times as prevalent as orthodox use. Seventy-seven percent of the unorthodox use videos included recreational e-cigarette use, 57% included modification of mechanical parts and components, and 44.6% included unorthodox substance application (dripping). There were more than twice as many social media links in videos depicting unorthodox compared to orthodox use, but the level of engagement was lower for unorthodox use. CONCLUSIONS: E-cigarette unorthodox use on YouTube is more prevalent than orthodox use, suggesting the need to further investigate the prevalence of unorthodox use among e-cigarette users and the influence of social media on consumer uptake of unorthodox and orthodox uses of e-cigarettes. IMPLICATIONS: The US Food and Drug Administration has regulatory authority over e-cigarettes, parts and components. Many e-cigarettes currently marketed are open systems. Closed systems may allow less manipulation and may influence the safety of these products. This study provides valuable information on ways that open system e-cigarettes are used and it can inform safety tests that can be conducted by the US Food and Drug Administration to determine whether or not these products should remain on the market. In addition, our definitions of unorthodox use can be incorporated into the Population Assessment of Tobacco on Health Study to better understand the prevalence of these behaviors.

Electronic cigarette explosion and burn injuries, US Emergency Departments 2015-2017.

BACKGROUND: Electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) battery failure can result in explosions and burn injuries. Previous attempts to quantify these events has been limited to compilations of case studies, federal agency reports and media reports. Although e-cigarette explosions and burn injuries are thought to be rare, current surveillance methods likely underestimate actual occurrences. METHODS: Analyses were conducted on cross-sectional data from the US Consumer Product Safety Commission's (CPSC) National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS). A keyword search of case narrative text was used to identify e-cigarette-related explosion and burn injuries presenting to US emergency departments from 2015 to 2017. Sampling weights were applied to make conservative national incidence estimates. RESULTS: From 2015 to 2017, there were an estimated 2035 e-cigarette explosion and burn injuries presenting to US hospital emergency departments (95% CI 1107 to 2964). CONCLUSIONS: There are more e-cigarette explosion and burn injuries in the USA than estimated in the past reports. Improved surveillance of e-cigarette injuries and regulation of e-cigarette devices is urgently needed. NEISS could be a valuable resource for e-cigarette injury surveillance.

Implications and challenges for implementation of the FDA's final deeming rule for waterpipe tobacco.

For the first time, the Food and Drug Administration's (FDAs) Center for Tobacco Products now has regulatory authority over all tobacco products, including waterpipe tobacco. In the rule expanding its authority to cover all tobacco products, the FDA uses largely a one-size-fits-all approach. However, several aspects of waterpipe tobacco smoking make it unique from other tobacco products, which may require more specific, tailored rules. This paper describes the distinct features of waterpipe tobacco products and accessories, and identifies unique challenges to the current regulation posed by this form of tobacco use. Additionally, we highlight the need for further research-generated evidence to support additional rulemaking.

Patterns and Correlates of Tobacco and Cannabis co-use by Tobacco Product Type: Findings from the Virginia Youth Survey.

BACKGROUND: Cannabis use is more common among tobacco users than nonusers, and co-use (i.e., use of both substances individually) may be increasing. Better understanding of patterns and correlates of co-use is needed. The current study aimed to compare rates and correlates of tobacco and cannabis co-use by tobacco product among youth. METHODS: High school students who completed the 2013 Virginia Youth Survey and reported past 30-day tobacco use (cigarette, smokeless tobacco, cigar) were included (n = 1390). Prevalence of past 30-day tobacco-only and cannabis co-use was calculated. Demographic, tobacco, and other substance use characteristics were compared by co-use status. Multivariate logistic regression models examined correlates of co-use overall and by tobacco product. RESULTS: Over half of tobacco users were co-users. Poly-tobacco use, particularly combusted tobacco, was more prevalent among co-users. Past 30-day alcohol use and lifetime other illegal drug use/prescription drug misuse were common correlates of co-use. Black Non-Hispanic (NH) race/ethnicity was associated with co-use when restricted to cigarette users. "Other" race/ethnicity was associated with co-use in the overall model and when restricted to cigar users. Past 30-day cigarette smoking was associated with co-use in all models except among cigar smoking co-users. Conclusions/Importance: Rates and correlates of tobacco and cannabis co-use were not uniform and differed by tobacco product type. Tobacco and cannabis co-users may be at greater risk for negative health effects associated with inhaled tobacco and other risky substance use. The efficacy of prevention efforts may be improved if risk factors associated with product-specific co-use are considered.