Warning Labels as a Public Health Intervention: Effects and Challenges for Tobacco, Cannabis, and Opioid Medications.

Warning labels help consumers understand product risks, enabling informed decisions. Since the 1966 introduction of cigarette warning labels in the United States, research has determined the most effective message content (health effects information) and format (brand-free packaging with pictures). However, new challenges have emerged. This article reviews the current state of tobacco warning labels in the United States, where legal battles have stalled pictorial cigarette warnings and new products such as electronic cigarettes and synthetic nicotine products pose unknown health risks. This article describes the emerging research on cannabis warnings; as more places legalize recreational cannabis, they are adopting lessons from tobacco warnings. However, its uncertain legal status and widespread underestimation of harms impede strict warning standards. The article also reviews opioid medication warning labels, suggesting that lessons from tobacco could help in the development of effective and culturally appropriate FDA-compliant opioid warning labels that promote safe medication use and increased co-dispensing of naloxone.

Perceptions of a reduced nicotine policy and predictors of policy support: A nationally representative U.S. survey.

BACKGROUND: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is considering a policy to reduce nicotine in cigarettes to non-addictive levels. Although current evidence supports the public-health benefits of a reduced-nicotine policy, almost half of people who smoke (∼ 40%) do not support the policy. This study estimates the factors most strongly associated with support or opposition toward the policy, including tobacco use status, perceived effects of a reduced nicotine policy, trust in the FDA, and psychological distress. The study aims to inform messaging campaigns and policy makers. METHODS: Data were collected in 2021 with nationally representative samples of U.S. adults (n = 1763). After receiving information about the reduced nicotine policy, participants indicated their beliefs and support for or opposition to the policy, along with other individual difference characteristics. Univariate population parameters and multinomial logistic regression coefficients were estimated. RESULTS: In adjusted models, people who formerly or never smoked were less likely to oppose the policy compared to those who currently smoke; people with higher psychological distress and those who believe the policy will promote switching to e-cigarettes were more likely to oppose the policy. In addition, people were more likely to support the policy if they believed it would make quitting easier or that the FDA is trustworthy. CONCLUSIONS: Educational campaigns about reduced nicotine policy should expect higher impact by targeting prevalent perceptions and those more strongly associated with policy sentiment. In anticipation of the policy rollout, there may be a critical window to shape public opinion.

Reactions to Messages About a Nicotine Reduction Policy: A Focus Group Study Among People Who Use Little Cigars and Cigarillos.

INTRODUCTION: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has proposed rulemaking to reduce the nicotine content in cigarettes and other combusted tobacco products to non-addictive levels. This qualitative study documents reactions to messages communicating this policy among people who use little cigars and cigarillos (LCCs). AIMS AND METHODS: We conducted eight focus groups with participants from four populations with the highest prevalence of cigar use (African American males and females, white males and females). Participants described their reactions to eight messages about the policy: Three messages about the equal risk of LCCs with regular and low nicotine levels; three quit efficacy messages about low nicotine LCCs being easier to quit; one "compensation" message to correct misperceptions about the policy causing people to smoke more to get desired nicotine; and one message about using alternative nicotine sources (eg, e-cigarettes). RESULTS: Participants perceived risk messages as the most motivating to quit, whereas efficacy messages made some participants feel that the policy would cause former users of LCCs to relapse. Many participants expressed favorable responses to the compensation message. The message about using alternative nicotine sources sparked intense responses, with many participants expressing outrage and mistrust of the message. Participants' beliefs that they were not addicted to LCCs dampened their perceptions of the effectiveness of the policy. CONCLUSIONS: Perceptions of the addictiveness and relative harms of LCCS influenced responses to policy messages. The FDA should consider using different messages to communicate with people who use LCCs because they perceive LCCs as different from cigarettes. IMPLICATIONS: This is the first study to document affective and cognitive responses to the FDA's reduced nicotine policy among people who use LCCs. The false belief that cigar products are less harmful than cigarettes may be influencing people's lack of support for the reduced nicotine policy and difficulty in understanding its potential positive impact. To maximize the public health benefit of the reduced nicotine policy, the FDA should include LCC products in the policy; however, it is crucial that they use educational messaging to clarify misperceptions regarding nicotine and harm as it applies to LCCs.

Nicotine beliefs and perceptions of low nicotine labels and mitigating statements among people who do and do not smoke: a cross-sectional study from Aotearoa New Zealand.

BACKGROUND: Aotearoa New Zealand proposed a new maximum nicotine content of 0.8 mg/g for smoked tobacco products, although the new government plans to repeal this legislation. Requiring 'Very low nicotine' (VLN) messages on cigarettes meeting this standard may reinforce misperceptions that they are less harmful than cigarettes currently sold. METHODS: To explore knowledge of nicotine and very low nicotine cigarettes (VLNCs), and perceptions of cigarette packs featuring different low nicotine messages (eg, 'Very low nicotine') and mitigating statements (eg, 'No cigarettes are safe'), we surveyed 354 people who smoked, 142 who formerly smoked, and 214 people who had never smoked regularly. RESULTS: Around half of all respondents believed VLNCs were less harmful than regular cigarettes and around two-thirds incorrectly thought nicotine causes most of the related health problems resulting from smoking. Nearly a third thought VLNCs would be less harmful than regular cigarettes; 34% believed they would be just as harmful. Mitigating statements did not affect perceptions of people who smoked, although people who formerly, or who had never smoked regularly, perceived mitigating statements referring to poisons and cancer as significantly more likely than the VLN message to discourage smoking. CONCLUSIONS: Misunderstanding of VLNCs as less harmful than regular cigarettes is widespread; VLN messages may reinforce this misperception, which mitigating statements did not correct among people who smoke. As an alternative to VLN messages, policy makers could consider introducing VLNCs on a specified date and developing public information campaigns; these measures would avoid phase-in confusion and obviate the need for VLN messaging.

Independent and combined effects of very low nicotine cigarette messages and e-cigarette messages: a randomised clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: USA is considering reducing nicotine in cigarettes to non-addictive levels, coupled with promoting alternative nicotine delivery products (eg, e-cigarettes). However, effective communication is needed to reduce misperceptions about very low nicotine cigarettes (VLNCs) being less harmful than regular cigarettes. METHODS: In 2022-2023, we conducted a four-group randomised clinical trial with a national probability sample from an online panel (971 adults who smoked cigarettes exclusively, 472 adults who dual used cigarettes and e-cigarettes and 458 adults aged 18-29 who had never smoked). Participants were randomised (parallel assignment) to one message condition: (1) VLNCs as harmful but easier to quit than regular cigarettes (n=468), (2) those who are not ready to quit should consider switching to e-cigarettes as less harmful alternatives (n=484), (3) combined (VLNC and e-cigarette messages; n=476) or (4) control condition (ie, water ads), n=473. The primary outcome was perceived absolute harm of VLNCs. RESULTS: Perceived harm of VLNCs was higher in the VLNC condition compared with the e-cigarette and control conditions, and higher in the combined condition compared with the e-cigarette condition (adjusted p<0.05). Among adults who dual used, intention to switch to e-cigarettes was higher in the VLNC condition than the e-cigarette, combined or control conditions (adjusted p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: VLNC messages reduced the misperception that VLNCs are less harmful than cigarettes, but adding messages about e-cigarettes did not enhance desired outcomes. These VLNC messages can be considered during the rollout of a reduced nicotine policy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05506046.

"I Get the Flavors and It Makes Me Love Vaping More": How and Why Youth Users Modify Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems.

INTRODUCTION: Youth in the United States are using electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) at a high rate. Modifications to ENDS by youth can introduce additional health hazards which have not been previously considered. To better understand these risks, we need more information on what these modifications are, the motivations behind them, and the sources of information on modifications. AIMS AND METHODS: Utilizing a trained moderator, in 2020-2021, we conducted one-on-one interviews with 19 youth ENDS users aged 16-17 living in the United States and analyzed their responses using a qualitative description approach. RESULTS: The most prominent modification was to the e-liquid; youth indicated they mixed e-juices to create new flavors and added substances not intended for vaping, including illicit drugs such as cannabis and cocaine. Few youths from our sample were interested in achieving a specific nicotine level to vape, and modifications to the battery, coil and wick were less frequently mentioned. Some of these modifications were motivated by a desire to achieve specific experiences with their device. At other times, modifications were made due to necessity because of limited access to ENDS devices and supplies. YouTube and peers were the main sources of information about modifying. CONCLUSIONS: Youth are making modifications that are both intended and unintended by the manufacturer. Adding illicit drugs and other substances not made for vaping is of particular concern. Understanding how youth modify ENDS and how that changes their use is important to guide regulatory policy intended to reduce harm to youth from ENDS use. IMPLICATIONS: Youth from our study indicated that they make modifications to the ENDS devices, specifically to the e-liquid. These modifications are both intended by the manufacturer, such as changing the e-liquid and replacing coils, and unintended, such as adding substances not meant for vaping. Future policies aimed at reducing youth ENDS use should consider mandating better safeguards against modifications that appeal to youth.

"I'm Bored and I'm Stressed": A Qualitative Study of Exclusive Smokers, ENDS Users, and Transitioning Smokers or ENDS Users in the Time of COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: To better understand the various influences of COVID-19 on tobacco use, we examined three different tobacco user groups using qualitative methods. METHODS: Ten online focus groups with 61 adults from the Atlanta, GA area were held in October-November 2020: four with exclusive smokers (n = 16), three with Electronic Nicotine Delivery System (ENDS) users (dual and exclusive, n = 22), and three with transitioning (recently quit or currently quitting) smokers and/or ENDS users (n = 23). RESULTS: Exclusive smokers reported smoking more frequently, driven by COVID-19-related stress, time at home, and boredom. They were not motivated to quit during the pandemic, and some considered smoking to be protective against COVID-19. ENDS users reported vaping less, with dual users often increasing their smoking; many were concerned about health effects of smoking and ENDS use during the pandemic. Transitioning smokers/ENDS users worried about their health and wanted to quit, but many found the stress of COVID-19 unbearable without tobacco use. CONCLUSIONS: There were some similarities among the groups, but also pronounced differences. Educational campaigns should capitalize on the teachable moment of COVID-19 to increase perceived risk of smoking. Smokers need access to more adaptive ways to deal with stress (such as mindfulness training) in lieu of smoking and systems-level approaches should address structural determinants of health that cause high levels of stress. The proposed policy to lower nicotine in combusted tobacco products might help smokers choose other means of coping instead of cigarettes by reducing the stress-relieving properties of smoking particularly salient during the pandemic. IMPLICATIONS: Smokers believe that cigarettes help them deal with the stresses and challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic. This needs to be counteracted by educational campaigns to increase perceived harm of smoking, alternative stress-relief strategies, and mandated changes to the combusted tobacco products to make them less appealing.

Brief report on IQOS point-of-sale marketing, promotion and pricing in IQOS retail partner stores in Atlanta, Georgia, USA.

OBJECTIVES: Philip Morris has a history of aggressive marketing tactics in its global pursuit of IQOS sales, which extant literature suggests may appeal to non-smokers and young adults. This study was the first to examine point-of-sale (POS) marketing and pricing of IQOS after it entered the US market in October 2019. METHODS: Trained field staff assessed 75 retail partner stores selling IQOS/HeatSticks in the Atlanta area in February-November 2020 using an IQOS-tailored, standardised assessment tool. The tool assessed store characteristics, product availability and accessibility, marketing and promotions and pricing for each store. RESULTS: All stores assessed sold HeatSticks in at least one of the three flavours (tobacco, smooth menthol, fresh menthol), but did not sell the IQOS device. IQOS/HeatSticks marketing was present inside 98.5% and outside 17.3% of stores assessed. Marketing for other tobacco products was present inside 98.5% and outside 32% of stores. The average price per HeatSticks pack was US$6.40 compared with US$6.08 for Marlboro Red cigarettes. CONCLUSION: Our study revealed a considerable amount of POS marketing and promotion for IQOS/HeatSticks at retail partner locations, visible to all retail consumers, including youth and non-smokers. This study was the first to examine IQOS POS marketing and promotion in the US context and findings add to the extant literature on IQOS global marketing strategies. As additional novel tobacco/nicotine products continue to enter the market, targeted monitoring of the POS marketing and promotion for these new products is warranted.

Support for nicotine reduction in cigarettes: findings from the 2016 and 2020 ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Surveys.

INTRODUCTION: The USA and New Zealand have sought to establish a product standard to set a maximum nicotine level for cigarettes to reduce their addictiveness. This study examined support for very low nicotine cigarettes (VLNCs) in Australia, Canada, England and the USA between 2016 and 2020. METHODS: Repeated cross-sectional data were analysed from participants who currently smoke, formerly smoked or vaped and/or currently vape in the 2016 (n=11 150) and/or 2020 (n=5432) International Tobacco Control (ITC) Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey. Respondents were asked if they would support a law that reduces the amount of nicotine in cigarettes to make them less addictive. Adjusted and weighted logistic regression analyses estimated the prevalence and predictors of support, such as country, age, sex, education, income, race and smoking/vaping status for VLNCs (support vs oppose/do not know). RESULTS: A majority of respondents supported a VLNC law, with support highest in Canada (69%; 2016 and 2020 combined), followed by England (61%), Australia (60%) and the USA (58%). Overall, support decreased from 62% in 2016 to 59% in 2020 (p=0.004), which did not differ by country. Levels of support differed by smoking/vaping status, where those who exclusively smoked daily showed the lowest level of support (59%) and those who exclusively vaped non-daily had the highest level of support (72%). CONCLUSION: More than half of respondents in all four countries-including those who smoked daily-supported a hypothetical VLNC standard to render cigarettes less addictive. It is important to examine if support is sustained after policies are implemented.

Before Omicron's Arrival: Effects of Negative Emotions and Comparative Optimism on COVID-19 Protection and Detection Behaviors.

This study examined the associations of emotions, cognitions, and behavioral intentions in response to exposure to news stories reporting on the arrival of Omicron variant in Vietnam. Outcomes included fear, anxiety, anger, comparative optimism, intentions to conduct prevention behavior (wash hands with soap), detection behavior (test for Omicron infection), and share health information. Two experiments were conducted with participants being randomized to either low-risk or high-risk condition that contained information promoting hand-washing with soap (Experiment 1, N = 303), or information promoting COVID-19 testing (Experiment 2, N = 303). Results indicated that viewing high-risk news stories led to higher fear, anxiety, and anger than low-risk news stories. Fear fully mediated the effect of news exposure on intentions to test for Omicron infection and share health information. Comparative optimism moderated the indirect effect of news exposure on intentions to wash hands with soap and share information about COVID-19 testing. Theoretical and practical implications were discussed.

Perceptions of Nicotine Reduction Policy in the United States: A Qualitative Study.

INTRODUCTION: Several countries are considering a reduced nicotine policy that would make cigarettes minimally or nonaddictive. This qualitative study documents reactions to the policy that should be addressed by future communication efforts. METHODS: In 2020, we recruited participants in Atlanta, GA and San Francisco, CA (27 people who exclusively smoke, 25 who dual use cigarettes and e-cigarettes, 32 who formerly smoked, and 31 young adults who do not smoke). We held 16 focus groups: 2 focus groups for each smoking status in each city. Participants viewed messages about very low nicotine content cigarettes (VLNCs) and were asked about their reactions to each message and their overall response to the reduced nicotine policy. RESULTS: While responses to the policy were predominantly positive, focus group discussion also revealed concerns, questions, and misunderstandings (referred to here collectively as "perceptions") that may need to be addressed if a reduced nicotine policy is enacted. Participants expressed perceptions related to the policy intent, including that the FDA has ulterior motives, adoption/ implementation, including that nicotine would have to be replaced with other chemicals if removed or that the policy would be unfeasible to implement, and effectiveness, including concern that VLNCs would still be addictive or the policy would backfire. CONCLUSIONS: Addressing perceptions about reduced nicotine policy intent, adoption/implementation, and effectiveness could be key in creating public support and political motivation to move forward with such a policy. Countries contemplating adopting such a policy should consider pairing it with communications that address these perceptions. IMPLICATIONS: This study is one of very few to use qualitative methods to explore potentially problematic perceptions about nicotine reduction policy among US adults. Results illuminated new policy-specific concerns, questions, and misunderstandings about the reduced nicotine policy intent, adoption/implementation, and effectiveness. Identifying, studying, and addressing relevant perceptions may play a key role in generating support in countries contemplating such a policy.

Effects of modified risk tobacco product claims on consumer comprehension and risk perceptions of IQOS.

INTRODUCTION: Tobacco industry studies on consumers' perceptions of modified risk claims (MRCs) often had important omissions (eg, no control group, not investigating whether consumers understand what 'switching completely' means). This study examined the effects of IQOS MRCs on risk perceptions and behavioural intentions. METHOD: Based on tobacco companies' MRCs, we manipulated three MRC language features: explanation about 'switching completely' (absent vs present), number of diseases (single vs multiple) and language certainty (hypothetical vs certain). In an online experiment, we randomised 1523 US adult current smokers and 1391 young adult non-smokers to 1 of 9 conditions following a 2×2×2+1 control design. People reported their comprehension of 'switching completely', IQOS risk perceptions and behavioural intentions after message exposure. RESULTS: More smokers exposed to MRCs that included an explanation about 'switching completely' (22.2%) (vs explanation absent (11.2%) and control (10.7%)) mentioned that 'switching completely' meant smoking 0 cigarettes. Compared with the control, several MRCs (eg, certain language) produced lower perceived risk of IQOS, including for diseases not mentioned in the MRCs. MRCs using certain and hypothetical language did not differ on any outcomes. MRCs highlighting reduced risk for a single disease and multiple diseases did not differ on any outcomes. MRCs did not influence behavioural intentions. CONCLUSION: The Food and Drug Administration should ensure that consumers understand what 'switching completely' means in an MRC and recognize that some language features may mislead consumers into believing that a product reduces the risk of diseases not mentioned in an MRC.

Analysis of on-pack messages for e-liquids: a discrete choice study.

BACKGROUND: Policymakers wishing to encourage smokers unable to quit to switch to using electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) also need to consider how to deter ENDS use among non-smokers. We examined whether reduced-risk messages could increase ENDS' appeal among smokers and if increased-risk messages could decrease appeal among susceptible non-smokers, occasional and former smokers. METHODOLOGY: An online discrete choice experiment tested three attributes: information message, nicotine content (0 mg or 3 mg) and flavour (tobacco, menthol or fruit). The sample comprised 352 current smokers, 118 occasional and former smokers, and 216 ENDS-susceptible never smokers. Smokers viewed reduced-risk messages that encouraged switching to ENDS, while other groups viewed increased-risk messages that discouraged ENDS use. All groups saw a typical addiction warning. We analysed the data by estimating multinomial logit regression and adjusted latent class analysis models. RESULTS: Relative to no message, reduced risk-messages increased the appeal of ENDS uptake among one class of smokers (33.5%) but decreased appeal among other smokers. However, among all smokers, reduced-risk messages increased preference more than a dissuasive addiction warning. By contrast, among occasional or former smokers, and susceptible non-smokers, all information messages discouraging ENDS use, including an addiction warning, decreased preference relative to no message. CONCLUSIONS: On-pack relative-risk messages about ENDS could make transition more attractive to smokers while increased-risk messages could deter ENDS uptake among susceptible non-smokers, occasional and former smokers. Communicating diverse messages via discrete channels could recognise heterogeneity among and between smokers and non-smokers.

'It brings light to what you really put into your body': a focus group study of reactions to messages about nicotine reduction in cigarettes.

OBJECTIVE: In 2017, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced a proposed regulation to lower nicotine in cigarettes to minimally addictive levels to help smokers quit. We sought to explore effective message strategies communicating about nicotine reduction in cigarettes across the different key audiences that the regulation is most likely to influence. METHODS: We designed four types of messages: efficacy messages, risk messages, a message about alternative sources of nicotine and a compensation message. Sixteen virtual focus groups were conducted in Atlanta and San Francisco in April-May 2020. Data were analysed in NVivo 12.0 using a thematic analysis approach. FINDINGS: Exclusive smokers were receptive to both efficacy messages and risk messages. Dual users were the only group that was open to resorting to alternative sources of nicotine. Former smokers were critical of these messages as promoting the new kinds of cigarettes and potentially encouraging initiation and relapse of smoking. Non-smokers felt that efficacy messages downplayed the risks of smoking and did not scare people away from smoking. Presenting information that very low nicotine cigarettes (VLNCs) still contain harmful chemicals made smokers question continued smoking in the absence of nicotine and view VLNCs as harmful. CONCLUSIONS: Messages communicating about nicotine reduction in cigarettes might help to motivate smokers to quit and can correct the misperceptions that VLNCs are less harmful. The FDA should consider specific target audiences and use different messages that complement each other in communicating about this regulation.

Messaging about very low nicotine cigarettes (VLNCs) to influence policy attitudes, harm perceptions and smoking motivations: a discrete choice experiment.

BACKGROUND: To reduce smoking and the harms it causes, countries, including the USA, are considering policies to reduce nicotine in combustible tobacco to minimally addictive levels. Effective messages about very low nicotine cigarettes (VLNCs) and this policy are crucial in combating misperceptions threatening the policy's effectiveness. DATA AND METHODS: A discrete choice experiment assessed messages about VLNCs. Participants were 590 adults who smoked exclusively, 379 adults who both smoked and used e-cigarettes, 443 adults who formerly smoked and 351 young adults who never smoked (total n=1763). Seven message attributes were varied systematically (source, harm, chemicals, nicotine, satisfaction, addictiveness and quitting efficacy). Outcomes were selection of messages that generated the most positive attitude towards reduced nicotine policy, the greatest perceived harmfulness of VLNCs, and most strongly motivated quitting and initiating behaviour for VLNCs. RESULTS: Information about specific harms and chemicals of VLNCs had the largest effects on selection of messages as eliciting more negative attitudes towards VLNCs policy, increasing perceived VLNC harmfulness, increasing motivation to quit VLNCs and decreasing motivation to try VLNCs. Messages with information about quitting efficacy were selected as more motivating to quit among those who smoke, but also more motivating to try VLNCs among those who do not smoke. CONCLUSION: Harm and chemical information can be prioritised to ensure VLNCs are not misperceived as less harmful than regular cigarettes. Messages about increased quitting efficacy and reduced addictiveness associated with VLNCs may backfire if presented to those who do not smoke.

A Content Analysis of U.S. Adults' Open-Ended Responses to E-Cigarette Risk Messages.

To better understand the processing of e-cigarette prevention messages, we conducted a content analysis of 1,968 participants' open-ended responses to one of four messages, which focused on industry manipulation (Big tobacco), financial and psychological cost of vaping (Can't afford), harmful chemicals in e-cigarettes (Formaldehyde), or uncertainty about the ingredients of e-liquids (Top secret). Health Belief Model (HBM) and perceived message effectiveness (PME) constructs were coded and the frequency of each variable was compared across message conditions. Among the HBM constructs, perceived health threat had the most mentions overall (38.8%). Self-efficacy of staying away from vaping had the fewest mentions across all messages (0.56%). For PME, participants more frequently mentioned message perceptions (15.75% positive message perceptions, 8.38% negative) than effect perceptions (3.46% positive effect perceptions, 1.37% negative). Big tobacco received the highest number of mentions for positive message perceptions and Formaldehyde received the highest number of mentions for positive effect perceptions. Future anti-vaping messages are recommended to address the efficacy element and to combine different themes to communicate harms of e-cigarettes.

Which tobacco control policies do smokers support? Findings from the International Tobacco Control Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey.

As governments consider policy action to reduce smoking, a key factor in creating political will is the level of public support, particularly among smokers who are most affected by the policies. The goal of this paper is to assess and compare the level of support in Canada, the United States, England, and Australia for five smoking control policies: 1) banning menthol in cigarettes, 2) banning cigarette additives, 3) reducing nicotine in cigarettes to make them less addictive, 4) raising the minimum age to purchase cigarettes to 21 years and older, and 5) requiring pictorial warning labels on cigarette packs (examined in the US only). Data for these analyses come from 8165 daily cigarette smokers who responded to the 2016 International Tobacco Control Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey. In all countries, the highest level of support was for raising the legal age for purchase to 21 years and older (62-70%) and reducing the nicotine content of cigarettes to make them less addictive (57-70%). Smokers who were less dependent on cigarettes and those expressing interest in quitting were more likely to support all policies. When asked how they would respond to a nicotine reduction policy, the most common response given was to try the non-nicotine cigarettes to see how they liked them (42-48%), with the next most common response being to quit smoking entirely (16-24%). The high level of support for these proposed policies among daily smokers provides important evidence for policymakers to counteract claims that such policies would be unpopular.

Do Young Adults Attend to Health Warnings in the First IQOS Advertisement in the U.S.? An Eye-Tracking Approach.

INTRODUCTION: In October 2019, a heated tobacco product (HTP) IQOS debuted in the United States. This study examined young adults' attention and cognitions in response to an IQOS ad that carried two mandated textual health warnings (Surgeon General's warning and nicotine warning), and how their vaping and smoking status may interact with attention patterns to affect attitude and intention to use IQOS. METHODS: In November 2019, college students (N = 164) viewed IQOS' first U.S. magazine ad and two distractor ads. Viewing patterns were recorded with eye-tracking. Masked recall and aided recognition, attitude and intention towards IQOS use were later assessed with self-report. Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regressions and moderated mediation analyses examined the associations between visual attention and viewers' cognitions about IQOS use. RESULTS: Promotional content attracted significantly more attention compared to the warnings. Attention to the Surgeon General's warning but not to the nicotine warning was associated with recall and recognition of the warning's content. For ever-vapers, greater attention allocation to the promotional content in the IQOS ad was associated with more favorable attitude toward IQOS use, which was in turn positively associated with intention to use IQOS. Attention allocation to the warnings did not affect attitude or intentions, regardless of tobacco use status. CONCLUSIONS: The results revealed the effects of IQOS promotional content overshadowed the two health warnings in influencing young people's attitude and intention to use IQOS. Young adults who vaped were more vulnerable to HTP advertising with respect to future use and vaping may be a gateway to HTP use. IMPLICATIONS: This is the first eye-tracking study examining attention and cognitions associated with the new IQOS ad exposure among young adults. Promotional content in the ad attracted significantly more attention than the two warnings combined. Attention to the Surgeon General's warning but not to the nicotine warning was associated with recall and recognition of the warning's content. Greater attention allocation to the promotional content led to a more favorable attitude toward IQOS use which was associated with increased intention to use IQOS for ever-vapers. However, greater attention allocation to the warnings did not affect attitude or intentions to use IQOS.

It's Just Steam: a qualitative analysis of New Zealand ENDS users' perceptions of secondhand aerosol.

INTRODUCTION: Many smokers who begin using electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) report vaping in settings where they would not have smoked and believe secondhand aerosol (SHA) is simply steam. However, current understanding of how ENDS users differentiate between secondhand smoke and SHA, or how vaping norms develop, is limited. METHODS: We conducted in-depth, semi-structured interviews with 39 current ENDS users (dual users and former smokers, now exclusive ENDS users) from New Zealand to explore participants' perceptions of SHA. We probed how these perceptions arose and examined implications for vaping practices and policy. We managed the data using NVivo V.11 and used a thematic analysis approach to interpret the transcripts. RESULTS: Participants had limited understanding of SHA, its constituents or its possible effects on others. They drew on the absence of harm information, and their sensory experiences and perceptions of others' views of vaping, to support the conclusion that SHA posed few, if any, risks to bystanders. Yet despite this perception, some felt they should recognise others' rights to clean air and most would not vape around children to avoid setting an example. CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of trusted information, participants used sensory heuristics to rationalise their ENDS practices. Policy-makers face the challenge of correcting misperceptions about SHA without deterring full transition from smoking to ENDS use. They could consider including vaping in current smoke-free area policies; this measure would signal that SHA is not harmless, and could protect clean-air settings and reduce potential normalisation of vaping among non-smokers.

Communicating risk differences between electronic and combusted cigarettes: the role of the FDA-mandated addiction warning and a nicotine fact sheet.

INTRODUCTION: The US Food and Drug Administration requires e-cigarettes to carry a nicotine addiction warning. This research compared the effects of messages communicating comparative risk of electronic and combusted cigarettes (CR messages) with and without the mandated warning and tested the effects of showing a nicotine fact sheet (NFS) before exposure to CR messages with warning. METHOD: In an online experiment, 1528 US adult smokers were randomised to one of four conditions: (1) three CR messages, (2) three CR messages in condition one with an addiction warning, (3) an NFS followed by the three messages in condition 2 and (4) control messages. Outcomes included message reactions and perceived effectiveness, e-cigarette-related and cigarette-related beliefs and behavioural intentions and nicotine-related beliefs. RESULTS: CR messages with and without an addiction warning did not differ. The NFS condition produced higher odds of correctly understanding the risk of nicotine and stronger beliefs that switching to e-cigarettes could reduce health risks (response efficacy) than other treatments. Compared with control, all messages made it more likely for people to report e-cigarettes are less harmful than cigarettes and increased response efficacy and switch intentions to e-cigarettes. Only NFS condition increased correct beliefs about the risk of nicotine and self-efficacy about switching to e-cigarettes. CONCLUSION: Including an addiction warning on CR messages did not reduce intentions to switch to e-cigarettes. Communicating accurate risk of nicotine together with CR messages and addiction warning increased smokers' self-efficacy beliefs about switching completely to e-cigarettes, making it a potentially promising antitobacco communication strategy.