Illicit purchasing and use of flavour accessories after the European Union menthol cigarette ban: findings from the 2020-21 ITC Netherlands Surveys.

BACKGROUND: The 2020 European Union (EU) menthol cigarette ban increased quitting among pre-ban menthol smokers in the Netherlands, but some reported continuing to smoke menthol cigarettes. This study examined three possible explanations for post-ban menthol use-(i) illicit purchasing, (ii) use of flavour accessories and (iii) use of non-menthol replacement brands marketed for menthol smokers. METHODS: Data were from the ITC Netherlands Cohort Surveys among adult smokers before the menthol ban (Wave 1: February-March 2020, N = 2067) and after the ban (Wave 2: September-November 2020, N = 1752; Wave 3: June-July 2021, N = 1721). Bivariate, logistic regression and generalized estimating equation model analyses were conducted on weighted data. RESULTS: Illicit purchasing remained low from pre-ban (2.4%, 95% CI: 1.8-3.2, Wave 1) to post-ban (1.7%, 1.2-2.5%, Wave 3), with no difference between menthol and non-menthol smokers from Wave 1 to Wave 3. About 4.4% of post-ban menthol smokers last purchased their usual brand outside of the EU and 3.6% from the internet; 42.5% of post-ban menthol smokers and 4.4% of smokers overall reported using flavour accessories, with greater odds among those aged 25-39 years vs. 55+ (aOR = 3.16, P = 0.002). Approximately 70% of post-ban smokers who reported using a menthol brand were actually using a non-menthol replacement brand. CONCLUSIONS: There was no increase in illicit purchasing or of smuggling outside the EU among menthol and non-menthol smokers in the Netherlands 1 year after the EU menthol cigarette ban. Use of flavour accessories and non-menthol replacement brands best explain post-ban menthol use, suggesting the need to ban accessories and ensure industry compliance.

Smokers' strategies to reduce tobacco spending: self-reported use and differences across subgroups. Findings from the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Netherlands Survey.

BACKGROUND: The cost of tobacco is one of the most reported reasons for smoking cessation. Rather than quitting, smokers can use also strategies to reduce tobacco expenditure while continuing smoking, such as smoking less or using price-minimising strategies. The Netherlands announced to increase the price of a pack cigarettes from seven (2018) to ten euros (2023), to reduce tobacco prevalence and consumption. This study explores the self-reported strategies to reduce tobacco spending among Dutch smokers, and whether this differed per age, income, and education. Additionally, we analysed among quitters in these subgroups whether price played a role in their decision to quit. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey data from the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Netherlands Wave 2 (September-November 2020, N = 1915) was used. Strategies to reduce spending among smokers (N = 1790) were: reducing consumption, bulk buying, switching to cheaper products or buying from low-taxed sources. These were collapsed into: reducing consumption (solely or in combination with other behaviours), solely price-minimising behaviours (such as buying cheaper brands), or no strategies to reduce spending. Associations between strategies and characteristics were analysed through multinomial and binary logistic regression models. Second, we explored which subgroups were more likely to report that price played a role in their decision to quit among quitters (N = 125). RESULTS: The majority of smokers used strategies to reduce tobacco spending: 35.6% reduced consumption and 19.3% used solely price-minimising strategies. 82.1% of quitters reported that price played a role in their decision to quit. Low-income individuals were more likely to report price as a reason for quitting and reduce consumption, but also to buy cheaper products. Highly nicotine dependent smokers were more likely to use price-minimising behaviours, and less likely to reduce consumption. CONCLUSIONS: The majority reported using strategies to reduce spending or that price played a role in their decision to quit. Reducing consumption was the most reported strategy. Low-income smokers were more likely to reportedly reduce consumption, buy cheaper products, or quit. Price policies have the potential to reduce socioeconomic inequalities in smoking. To discourage price-minimising behaviours, such as switching to cheaper products, reducing price differences between products should be prioritized.

Smoking Cessation Among Gender Minority Populations, Cis-women, and Cis-men: Findings From the International Tobacco Control Netherlands Survey.

INTRODUCTION: Little is known about smoking cessation among gender minority populations compared to cisgender individuals (whose gender matches their sex assigned at birth). We examined differences between smokers from gender minority populations, cis-women, and cis-men in the heaviness of smoking, quit intentions, use of cessation assistance, quit attempts (ever tried and number), and triggers for thinking about quitting. AIMS AND METHODS: We used cross-sectional data from the 2020 International Tobacco Control Netherlands Survey. Among smoking respondents, we distinguished (1) cis-women (female sex, identified as women, and having feminine gender roles; n = 670), (2) cis-men (male sex, identified as men, and having masculine gender roles; n = 897), and (3) gender minorities (individuals who were intersex, who identified as nonbinary, genderqueer, had a sex/gender identity not listed, whose gender roles were not feminine or masculine, or whose gender identity and/or roles were not congruent with sex assigned at birth; n = 220). RESULTS: Although gender minorities did not differ from cis-women and cis-men in the heaviness of smoking, plans to quit smoking, and quit attempts, they were significantly more likely to use cessation assistance (20% in the past 6 months) than cis-women (12%) and cis-men (9%). Gender minorities were also significantly more likely to report several triggers for thinking about quitting smoking, for example, quit advice from a doctor, an anti-smoking message/campaign, and the availability of a telephone helpline. CONCLUSION: Despite equal levels of quit attempts and heaviness of smoking, gender minority smokers make more use of smoking assistance, and respond stronger to triggers for thinking about quitting smoking. IMPLICATIONS: Smoking cessation counselors should be sensitive to the stressors that individuals from any minority population face, such as stigmatization, discrimination, and loneliness, and should educate their smoking clients on effective coping mechanisms to prevent relapse into smoking after they experience these stressors. Developing tailored smoking cessation programs or campaigns specifically for gender minority populations can also be useful. Based on the results of our subgroup analyses, programs or campaigns for younger gender minority smokers could focus on the availability of telephone helplines and on how friends and family think about their smoking behavior.

Trends in Individualized Affordability of Factory-Made Cigarettes: Findings of the 2008-2020 International Tobacco Control Netherlands Surveys.

INTRODUCTION: Cigarette affordability, the price of tobacco relative to consumer income, is a key determinant of tobacco consumption. AIMS AND METHODS: This study examined trends over 12 years in individualized factory-made cigarette affordability in the Netherlands, and whether these trends differed by sex, age, and education. Data from 10 waves (2008-2020) of the International Tobacco Control Netherlands Surveys were used to estimate individualized affordability, measured as the percentage of income required to buy 100 cigarette packs (Relative Income Price [RIP]), using self-reported prices and income. The higher the RIP, the less affordable cigarettes are. Generalized estimating equation regression models assessed trends in individualized affordability over time and by sex, age, and education. RESULTS: Affordability decreased significantly between 2008 and 2020, with RIP increasing from 1.89% (2008) to 2.64% (2020) (p ≤ .001), except for 2008-2010, no significant year-on-year changes in affordability were found. Lower affordability was found among subgroups who have a lower income level: Females (vs. males), 18-24 and 25-39-year-olds (vs. 55 years and over) and low or moderate-educated individuals (vs. highly educated). Interactions between wave and education (p = .007) were found, but not with sex (p = .653) or age (p = .295). A decreasing linear trend in affordability was found for moderately (p = .041) and high-educated (p = .025), but not for low-educated individuals (p = .149). CONCLUSIONS: Cigarettes in the Netherlands have become less affordable between 2008 and 2020, yet this was mostly because of the decrease in affordability between 2008 and 2010. There is a need for more significant increases in tax to further decrease affordability. IMPLICATIONS: Our findings suggest that cigarettes have become less affordable in the Netherlands between 2008 and 2020. But, this appears to be the result of a steep decrease in affordability between 2008 and 2010. Affordability was lower among groups who have on average lower incomes (females, young adults, and low- and moderate-educated individuals), and differences in trends across education levels could be explained by per capita income changes. Our individualized measure indicated lower affordability than published aggregate affordability estimations. Future tax increases should be large enough to result in a lower affordability.

Price minimizing behaviours by smokers in Europe (2006-20): evidence from the International Tobacco Control Project.

BACKGROUND: Effectiveness of tobacco taxation can be undermined through smokers applying price-minimizing behaviours rather than quitting or reducing consumption. Common price-minimizing strategies are buying cheaper tobacco [discount brands or roll-your-own (RYO) tobacco], bulk buying and cross-border purchasing. This study analyses trends in and factors associated with such behaviours in four European countries from 2006 to 2020. METHODS: Data came from adult smokers participating in the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Surveys conducted between 2006 and 2020 in England (9 waves, n = 768-4149), France (4 waves, n = 1415-1735), Germany (5 waves, n = 513-1515) and the Netherlands (10 waves, n = 1191-2177). Country-specific generalized estimating equation regression models were fit to assess trends in smoking RYO tobacco, discount brands, bulk buying and cross-border purchasing within the European Union. RESULTS: Buying discount brands or RYO tobacco was the most common strategy in all countries, except France. Except for buying discount brands, estimates of price-minimizing behaviours were highest in France (2019: RYO = 27.2%, discount brands = 17.3%, bulk buying = 34.1%, cross-border purchasing = 34.2%), and lowest in Germany (2018: RYO = 18.6%, discount brands = 43.7%, bulk buying = 8.0%, cross-border purchasing = 9.8%). Direction and magnitude of trends differed by country, and behaviour. Young smokers were less likely to buy in bulk. Low-income and low-education smokers were more likely to purchase RYO tobacco or discount brands. The association with discount brands was not found for French low-income smokers. CONCLUSIONS: Smoking cheaper tobacco is the most prevalent price-minimizing strategy in three countries (England, Germany and Netherlands), and more prevalent among low-income individuals. Harmonizing prices across products and countries would reduce switching to cheaper tobacco.

Impact of the European Union's menthol cigarette ban on smoking cessation outcomes: longitudinal findings from the 2020-2021 ITC Netherlands Surveys.

INTRODUCTION: To reduce the appeal of tobacco, the European Union (EU) banned menthol as a characterising flavour in cigarettes in May 2020. This pre/post-study evaluated the impact of the menthol ban on smoking cessation outcomes among a representative cohort of Dutch smokers. METHODS: Adult (18+ years) smokers were recruited at wave 1 (pre-ban) of the International Tobacco Control Netherlands Surveys (February-March 2020) and followed post-ban at wave 2 (September-November 2020) and wave 3 (June-July 2021) (N=1326 participated in all three waves). Weighted bivariate, logistic regression and generalised estimating equation model analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Usual menthol use decreased from pre-ban (7.8%) to post-ban (4.0% at wave 2 and 4.4% at wave 3) (p<0.001). Pre-ban menthol smokers had greater odds of making a post-ban quit attempt than non-menthol smokers (66.9% vs 49.6%, adjusted OR (aOR)=1.89, 95% CI: 1.13 to 3.16). Compared with pre-ban non-menthol smokers, a higher proportion of menthol smokers quit by wave 2 (17.8% vs 10.2%, p=0.025) and by wave 3 (26.1% vs 14.1%, p=0.002), although this was not significant after adjusting for other factors. Female pre-ban menthol smokers had greater odds of quitting by wave 3 than female non-menthol smokers (aOR=2.23, 95% CI: 1.10 to 4.51). Most pre-ban menthol smokers (n=99) switched to non-menthol cigarettes (40.0%) or reported that they continued to smoke menthol cigarettes (33.0%) at wave 3. CONCLUSIONS: The EU menthol ban was effective in reducing menthol use and in increasing quit attempts and quitting among pre-ban menthol smokers. Impact could be maximised by closing gaps that allow post-ban menthol cigarette use.

Demand for Factory-Made Cigarettes and Roll-Your-Own Tobacco and Differences Between Age and Socioeconomic Groups: Findings From the International Tobacco Control Netherlands Survey.

INTRODUCTION: Macroeconomic studies have shown that young individuals who smoke, and have a low socioeconomic status respond more strongly to price increases. Most of this evidence stems from research on factory-made (FM) cigarettes. With the rising popularity of roll-your-own (RYO) tobacco, there is a need for studies on cigarette demand that distinguish between both. AIMS AND METHODS: This study examined whether individual demand differed for FM and RYO tobacco, and across age, and socioeconomic (income and education) groups. Purchase tasks for FM and RYO cigarettes were included in the 2020 International Tobacco Control (ITC) Netherlands Survey. Adults who smoke daily (n = 1620) stated how many cigarettes they would smoke in 24 hours across eight prices. Four demand indices were derived: intensity (consumption at zero costs), alpha (rate of change in elasticity), Pmax (turning point elasticity), and breakpoint (lowest price where consumption equals zero). The indices were tested for subgroup differences. RESULTS: Individuals who smoke RYO tobacco indicated higher intensity, and greater alpha than individuals who smoke FM cigarettes. Participants aged 25-39 had lower Pmax, and 18-24 year olds displayed higher breakpoints. Participants with low income displayed higher intensity, and lower Pmax than other income groups. No associations were found with education. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals who smoke RYO tobacco indicated higher price sensitivity than those smoking FM cigarettes, supporting the need to harmonize tobacco taxation. Taxation may be especially beneficial to reducing consumption among individuals with a low income or smoke RYO tobacco. Substantially higher prices are needed in the Netherlands to achieve the desired results. IMPLICATIONS: Individuals who smoke daily were willing to pay substantially higher prices than the current market prices, indicating the room and need for much higher taxation levels. Demand for RYO tobacco was more sensitive to price changes than demand for FM cigarettes. Taxation should be raised at equivalent rates for FM and RYO cigarettes. Taxation appears to be especially effective in reducing consumption among people who smoke RYO tobacco and low-income individuals. It remains important to combine increased taxation with other tobacco control measures.

The double-edged relationship between COVID-19 stress and smoking: Implications for smoking cessation.

INTRODUCTION: Although recent research shows that smokers respond differently to the COVID-19 pandemic, it offers little explanation of why some have increased their smoking, while others decreased it. In this study, we examined a possible explanation for these different responses: pandemic-related stress. METHODS: We conducted an online survey among a representative sample of Dutch current smokers from 11-18 May 2020 (n=957). During that period, COVID-19 was six weeks past the (initial) peak of cases and deaths in the Netherlands. Included in the survey were measures of how the COVID-19 pandemic had changed their smoking, if at all (no change, increased smoking, decreased smoking), and a measure of stress due to COVID-19. RESULTS: Overall, while 14.1% of smokers reported smoking less due to the COVID-19 pandemic, 18.9% of smokers reported smoking more. A multinomial logistic regression analysis revealed that there was a dose-response effect of stress: smokers who were somewhat stressed were more likely to have either increased (OR=2.37; 95% CI: 1.49-3.78) or reduced (OR=1.80; 95% CI: 1.07-3.05) their smoking. Severely stressed smokers were even more likely to have either increased (OR=3.75; 95% CI: 1.84-7.64) or reduced (OR=3.97; 95% CI: 1.70-9.28) their smoking. Thus, stress was associated with both increased and reduced smoking, independently from perceived difficulty of quitting and level of motivation to quit. CONCLUSIONS: Stress related to the COVID-19 pandemic appears to affect smokers in different ways, some smokers increase their smoking while others decrease it. While boredom and restrictions in movement might have stimulated smoking, the threat of contracting COVID-19 and becoming severely ill might have motivated others to improve their health by quitting smoking. These data highlight the importance of providing greater resources for cessation services and the importance of creating public campaigns to enhance cessation in this dramatic time.