Evaluations of compliance with California's first tobacco sales bans and tobacco marketing in restricted and cross-border stores.

INTRODUCTION: Beverly Hills and Manhattan Beach were the first California cities to end tobacco sales. Previous research assessed retailers' perceptions of the laws. This study is the first to evaluate compliance (Study 1), assess whether branded or unbranded tobacco cues remain, and examine cigarette price/discounts in cross-border stores (Study 2). METHODS: Each of four data collectors requested Marlboro or e-cigarettes (randomly assigned) in all restricted stores (n=33) until four attempts were exhausted or a violation occurred. Follow-up visits recorded whether former tobacco retailers advertised tobacco or contained unbranded cues. In a random sample of 126 cross-border stores (half within 1 mile of no-sales cities and half 2-4 miles away), data collectors recorded price of Marlboro and presence of cigarette discounts. Mixed models (stores within tracts), tested for differences between near and far stores, adjusting for store type and median household income. RESULTS: Compliance was 87.5%: three stores sold Marlboro ($8, $10, $10) and one sold Puff Bar ($16). Tobacco-branded items and unbranded tobacco cues remained in one store each. Mean Marlboro price was $10.61 (SD=1.92) at stores within 1 mile of no-sales cities, averaging y0.73 more than at stores farther away (p<0.05). However, odds of advertising cigarette discounts did not differ between stores nearby and farther from no-sales cities. CONCLUSION: Nearly all retailers complied with tobacco sales bans within 6 to 12 months of implementation. In addition, retail tobacco marketing was nearly eliminated in the two cities. There was no evidence of price gouging for Marlboro cigarettes in cross-border stores. IMPLICATIONS: Evidence from two early adopters of tobacco sales bans suggests that such local laws can be implemented effectively in California, although results from these high-income cities in a state with a strong tobacco control record limits generalizability. Enforcement involving routine purchase attempts rather than visual inspection for tobacco products is recommended. Although Beverly Hills and Manhattan Beach are each surrounded by communities where tobacco sales persist, there was no evidence of price gouging for cigarettes or greater presence of discounts in cross-border stores. Evaluations of the economic impacts and public health benefits of tobacco sales bans are much needed.

Kratom availability in California vape shops.

Kratom products are derived from trees native to Southeast Asia and have dose-dependent stimulant and opioid-like effects. Despite being on the Drug Enforcement Administration "Drugs and Chemicals of Concern List," kratom is legal for sale in most US states. However, there are scarce data on its availability. The goal of this study was to examine kratom availability in vape shops across the state of California and assess shop compliance with a local kratom sales ban (enacted in 2016) in San Diego City. As part of a larger study about retail tobacco marketing near colleges, availability of kratom was assessed in summer 2019 in a random sample of 614 vape shops that was stratified to compare stores near (≤ 3 miles) and distant (>3 miles) from colleges. Logistic regression examined kratom availability as a function of store type (stores that sold vape products only vs. stores selling other tobacco), nearness to college, and tract-level demographics. Kratom was available in 62.4% of observed stores and more often in vape-and-smoke (81.1%) than vape-only shops (11.5%, AOR = 40.4, 95% CI = 23.3-74.1). Kratom availability did not differ by nearness to colleges. In San Diego City, 46.2% of observed stores (95% CI = 28.8-64.5) sold kratom products. Findings indicate that kratom was available in the majority of vape shops and most commonly in vape-and-smoke shops. Widespread availability in tobacco specialty shops suggests the need for research on dual use with tobacco, kratom advertising and cross-product promotion, and the potential of state and local tobacco retail licensing to prohibit sales.

Rates of Age Verification for Cigarette and E-cigarette Purchases as a Function of State T21 Laws Before and After Implementation of the Federal T21 Law in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: In the US, having a 21 minimum legal sales age for tobacco (T21) at the state level may have impacted age verification of cigarette and e-cigarette purchases among U.S. young adults (ages 18-26), before and/or after federal T21 implementation. AIMS AND METHODS: This study examined this by analyzing data from cigarette and/or e-cigarette users (n = 618 and n = 864) in six metropolitan areas in six states. Participants reported frequency of being age verified ("almost always" vs. less frequently) for cigarette and/or e-cigarette purchases across 3 timepoints (ie, wave 1 [w1]: September-December 2018, w2: September-December 2019, and w3: September-December 2020). Multilevel modeling examined time-varying state T21 status and time (reflecting federal T21 implementation) in relation to age verification of cigarette and e-cigarette purchases, respectively. RESULTS: The proportions almost always age verified for cigarette purchases in states with T21 versus without were: W1: 38.5% versus 37.7%, w2: 33.0% versus 39.1%, and w3: 45.4% versus 30.6%. For e-cigarettes, the proportions were: W1: 30.6% versus 40.3%, w2: 42.3% versus 50.5%, and w3: 56.0% versus 58.3%. In multilevel modeling, state T21 status was associated with greater likelihood of age verification for e-cigarettes (aOR = 1.67, CI = 1.13 to 2.45), but not for cigarettes. Age verification increased over time for e-cigarettes-both accounting for and not accounting for state T21 status. There were no changes for cigarettes. CONCLUSIONS: State T21 status and time correlated with age verification for e-cigarettes, but not cigarettes. These self-reported age verification data contribute to evidence from compliance checks, indicating that retailers require additional prompts and enforcement to enhance compliance with T21 laws. IMPLICATIONS: Current findings suggest that variations in regulations and gaps in enforcement may hinder the potential impact of increasing the minimum legal sales age, which ultimately may undermine the promise of such policies, specifically with regard to preventing tobacco use among the underage. Therefore, it is crucial to monitor retailer compliance with T21 laws and evaluate their efficacy to increase ID checks, minimize illegal sales, and curb underage use of tobacco. Relatedly, particular attention to enforcement efforts that may promote compliance is warranted.

Rapid-response surveillance of the first US test market for VLN cigarettes.

INTRODUCTION: VLN King menthol and non-menthol are the first combustible cigarettes to receive US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authorisation as modified risk tobacco products. Focusing on the first retail test market, this study characterised VLN advertising, product placement, discounts and price. METHODS: All Chicago-area Circle K stores (n=133) were telephoned to assess whether they sold VLN. Single-pack price of non-menthol was obtained in 57 of 100 stores that sold VLN. In fall 2022, trained data collectors visited those 57 stores to assess VLN product placement, advertising, discounts and prices. Paired t-tests compared observed VLN price with telephone price and to price of other cigarette brands. RESULTS: Nearly all stores (91.1%) displayed exterior advertisements for VLN, and 41.1% displayed interior advertising, with 8.9% of stores advertising VLN in the power wall but never in the header row. VLN cigarettes were displayed in the power wall exclusively and among high-nicotine cigarettes. Some VLN marketing claims were not FDA-authorised. VLN advertised a sweepstakes offer and rewards programme. Most stores (85.7%) offered VLN discounts. VLN was priced like a premium brand (mean=$10.90, SD=$1.53), and prices obtained by telephone did not differ from observed prices several months later. CONCLUSIONS: Retail marketing strategies for VLN mimic those for high-nicotine cigarettes. Deviations from FDA-authorised marketing claims were evident. Surveillance in future test markets is recommended to assess compliance with marketing claims and examine relative price and discount offers. Of interest is how premium-priced, low-nicotine cigarettes stand to compete in a market dominated by cheaper high-nicotine cigarettes.

Underage sales signage in vape shops: Comparison of stores near and far from California colleges.

Objective: Two-thirds of U.S. colleges are near vape shops, where higher rates of underage sales exist. This study examined vape shop compliance with state-mandated age-of-sale signs, the presence of age-of-entry signs and the tobacco industry's "We Card" sign. Participants: Random sample of 614 California vape shops, stratified by distance to community colleges or 4-year universities/colleges; visited June-August, 2019. Methods: Logistic regressions examined whether signage varied by distance to colleges and whether stores sold other tobacco products (OTP). Results: Compliance with the state-mandated age-of-sale sign was 69.4%; vape-only stores were less compliant than vape + OTP (AOR = 0.39, 95% CI = 0.22,0.70). Age-of-entry signs were more common in vape-only (AOR = 1.87, 95% CI = 1.07,3.28) than vape + OTP stores. However, this difference was greater for vape-only stores near community colleges and attenuated for vape-only stores near 4-year universities/colleges. Conclusion: Improved enforcement and retailer education regarding age-of-sale signage are needed, particularly near colleges where greater potential for underage sales presumably exists.

State T21, Restrictions on Flavored E-Cigarette Products, and Non-Medical Cannabis Sales Legalization in Relation to Young Adult Reports of Vape Shop Age Verification and Product Offerings: A Multilevel Analysis.

Vape shop practices related to age verification and product offerings (e.g., other tobacco, cannabis), which may affect young-adult tobacco/substance use, are likely impacted by state-level policies (i.e., Tobacco 21 [T21], flavored e-cigarette restrictions, non-medical cannabis legalization). Using data from young adults (18-34 years) in 6 US states representing variability in whether/when they implemented the aforementioned policies, this study focused on past 6-month e-cigarette users who visited vape shops (Wave 1 [W1]: September-December 2018, n = 1127; W2: September-December 2019, n = 702; W3: September-December 2020, n = 549). Multilevel modeling examined T21 in relation to participants' reports of age verification at last vape shop visit (among those < 27), and flavor restrictions and cannabis legalization in relation to noticing other tobacco or cannabis products at last visit. At W1-W3, 69.7%, 78.7%, and 75.8% of participants < 27 reported age verification, and participants increasingly noticed other tobacco (W2: 36.9%; W3: 48.6%) and cannabis products (W1: 25.8%; W2: 41.3%; W3: 58.3%). State T21 was unrelated to age verification (aOR = 1.19, 95%CI = 0.80-1.79); flavored e-cigarette restrictions correlated with noticing other tobacco products (aOR = 1.96, 95%CI = 1.10-3.51); flavored e-cigarette restrictions (aOR = 2.26, 95%CI = 1.57-3.24) and cannabis legalization (aOR = 2.84, 95%CI = 1.78-4.51) correlated with noticing cannabis products. Regulatory efforts must be informed by ongoing surveillance of such policies and their impact.

The Impact of Recent Tobacco Regulations and COVID-19 Restrictions and Implications for Future E-Cigarette Retail: Perspectives from Vape and Vape-and-Smoke Shop Merchants.

BACKGROUND: Tobacco regulations and COVID-19 state orders have substantially impacted vape retail. This study assessed vape retailers' perspectives regarding regulations and future retail activities. METHODS: In March-June 2021, 60 owners or managers of vape or vape-and-smoke shops (n = 34 vs. n = 26) in six US metropolitan areas completed an online survey assessing: (1) current and future promotional strategies and product offerings; and (2) experiences with federal minimum legal sales age (T21) policies, the federal flavored e-cigarette ban, and COVID-19-related orders. Quantitative data were analyzed descriptively; qualitative responses to open-ended questions were thematically analyzed. RESULTS: Most participants had websites (65.0%), used social media for promotion (71.7%), offered curbside pickup (51.7%), and sold CBD (e.g., 73.3% vape products, 80.0% other); many also sold other tobacco products. Knowledge varied regarding state/local policies in effect before federal policies. Participants perceived tobacco regulations and COVID-19 orders as somewhat easy to understand/implement and perceived noncompliance consequences as somewhat severe. Qualitative themes indicated concerns regarding regulations' negative impacts (e.g., sales/customer loss, customers switching to combustibles), insufficient evidence base, challenges explaining regulations to customers, and concerns about future regulatory actions. CONCLUSIONS: Surveillance of tobacco retail, consumer behavior, and regulatory compliance is warranted as policies regarding nicotine and cannabis continue evolving.

Spatial Clustering of Hookah Lounges, Vape Shops, and All Tobacco Retailers Near Colleges.

INTRODUCTION: US college students smoke hookah and vape nicotine at higher rates than other young adults. Density and/or proximity of hookah lounges and vape shops near colleges has been described, but this study is the first to test whether tobacco retailers spatially cluster near college campuses. AIMS AND METHODS: We created and linked spatial shapefiles for community colleges and 4-year colleges in California with lists of hookah lounges, vape shops, and licensed tobacco retailers. We simulated 100 datasets, placing hookah lounges, vape shops, and tobacco retailers randomly in census tracts in proportion to population density. A modified version of Ripley's K-function was computed using the radius (r) from each retailer within retail category. RESULTS: In 2018-2019, 50.5% of hookah lounges (n = 479), 42.5% of vape shops (n = 2467), and 42.0% of all tobacco retailers (n = 31 100) were located within 3 miles of a community college. Spatial clustering was significant (p < .05) from at least 0.4 miles for hookah lounges, 0.1 mile for vape shops, and 0.3 miles for all tobacco retailers. For 4-year colleges, approximately 46.8% of hookah lounges, 31.3% of vape shops, and 31.6% of all tobacco retailers were located within 3 miles. Clustering was significant from 0.2 miles for hookah lounges and 1.3 miles for all tobacco retailers but was not significant for vape shops. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence that some types of tobacco retailers cluster near community colleges and 4-year colleges implies greater accessibility and exposure to advertising for students. It is also concerning because a higher probability of underage tobacco sales presumably exists near colleges. IMPLICATIONS: Prior studies infer that hookah lounges and vape shops cluster near colleges from the density and closer proximity to campuses. This study modified a traditional test of spatial clustering and considered community colleges separately from 4-year universities. Spatial clustering of hookah lounges and all licensed tobacco retailers was evident near both types of campuses, but vape shops clustered only near community colleges. Place-based strategies to limit tobacco retail density could expand state and local laws that prohibit tobacco sales near schools to include retailers near college campuses. In addition, college environments should be a target for reducing hookah smoking and nicotine vaping.

The changing retail landscape for tobacco: dollar stores and the availability of cheap cigarettes among tobacco-related priority populations.

INTRODUCTION: Dollar stores are rapidly altering the retail landscape for tobacco. Two of the three largest chains sell tobacco products in more than 24 000 stores across the USA. We sought to examine whether dollar stores are more likely to be located in disadvantaged neighbourhoods and whether dollar stores charge less for cigarettes than other tobacco retailers. METHODS: Data were collected from a statewide random sample of licensed tobacco retailers in California (n=7678) in 2019. Logistic regression modelled odds of a census tract containing at least one dollar store as a function of tract demographics. Linear mixed models compared price of the cheapest cigarette pack by store type, controlling for tract demographics. RESULTS: Census tracts with lower median household income, rural status and higher proportions of school-age youth were more likely to contain at least one dollar store. The cheapest cigarette pack cost less in dollar stores compared with all store types examined except tobacco shops. Estimated price differences ranged from $0.32 (95% CI: 0.14 to 0.51) more in liquor stores and $0.39 (95% CI: 0.22 to 0.57) more in convenience stores, to $0.82 (95% CI: 0.64 to 1.01) more in small markets and $1.86 (95% CI: 1.61 to 2.11) more in stores classified as 'other'. CONCLUSIONS: Dollar stores may exacerbate smoking-related inequities by contributing to the availability of cheaper cigarettes in neighbourhoods that are lower income, rural and have greater proportions of youth. Pro-equity retail policies, such as minimum price laws and density reduction policies, could mitigate the health consequences of dollar stores' rapid expansion.

Young people's e-cigarette risk perceptions, policy attitudes, and past-month nicotine vaping in 30 U.S. cities.

BACKGROUND: This study examined young people's e-cigarette risk perceptions, policy attitudes, and past-month nicotine vaping in 30 US cities in relation to city e-cigarette retail policy. METHODS: Participants ages 13-20 were recruited online September-November 2020 (N = 900, approximately 30 per city). Cities (median population = 688,531) were in 23 states. Ever e-cigarette users were oversampled. A multilevel generalized estimating equations (GEE) model compared past-month nicotine vaping as a function of local e-cigarette retail policy. Among ever-users, multilevel bivariate GEE models examined associations of participant characteristics with past-month vaping (yes/no) and, among past-month nicotine vapers, purchase of vaping products at a retail location (yes/no). RESULTS: The sample (age M = 17.7 [SD = 1.8]) was 60.2% female and 29.3% Black. Minimal city-level variation was observed in e-cigarette risk perceptions or policy attitudes (ICCs < 0.001). Nearly half the sample (44.6%) reported ever e-cigarette use; 11.8% reported past-month nicotine vaping. Past-month nicotine vaping was associated with older age, being non-Hispanic white, living with someone who vapes, having friends who vape, greater exposure to retail e-cigarette ads, lower e-cigarette risk perceptions, and lower perceived efficacy of flavored tobacco policy. Among ever-users, past-month nicotine vaping was not significantly associated with city e-cigarette flavor policy (p = .784). Most participants reporting past-month nicotine vaping purchased products in-store (58.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Among young people surveyed in US cities, e-cigarette risk perceptions and policy attitudes showed minimal between-city variation. Past-month vaping among ever-users did not differ significantly by local flavor policies. A majority of past-month users, regardless of city policies, reported underage access to flavored products in retail locations.

Are California's Local Flavored Tobacco Sales Restrictions Effective in Reducing the Retail Availability of Flavored Tobacco Products? A Multicomponent Evaluation.

INTRODUCTION: Flavored tobacco appeals to new users. This paper describes evaluation results of California's early ordinances restricting flavored tobacco sales. METHODS: A multicomponent evaluation of proximal policy outcomes involved the following: (a) tracking the reach of local ordinances; (b) a retail observation survey; and (c) a statewide opinion poll of tobacco retailers. Change in the population covered by local ordinances was computed. Retail observations compared availability of flavored tobacco at retailers in jurisdictions with and without an ordinance. Mixed models compared ordinance and matched no-ordinance jurisdictions and adjusted for store type. An opinion poll assessed retailers' awareness and ease of compliance with local ordinances, comparing respondents in ordinance jurisdictions with the rest of California. RESULTS: The proportion of Californians living in a jurisdiction with an ordinance increased from 0.6% in April 2015 to 5.82% by January 1, 2019. Flavored tobacco availability was significantly lower in ordinance jurisdictions than in matched jurisdictions: menthol cigarettes (40.6% vs. 95.0%), cigarillos/cigar wraps with explicit flavor descriptors (56.4% vs. 85.0%), and vaping products with explicit flavor descriptors (6.1% vs. 56.9%). Over half of retailers felt compliance was easy; however, retailers in ordinance jurisdictions expressed lower support for flavor sales restrictions. CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of California's population covered by a flavor ordinance increased nine-fold between April 2015 and January 2019. Fewer retailers in ordinance jurisdictions had flavored tobacco products available compared to matched jurisdictions without an ordinance, but many still advertised flavored products they could not sell. Comprehensive ordinances and retailer outreach may facilitate sales-restriction support and compliance.

Perceived Susceptibility to and Seriousness of COVID-19: Associations of Risk Perceptions with Changes in Smoking Behavior.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, studies have documented increased and decreased cigarette smoking among adults. Individual differences in the perceived susceptibility and seriousness of the virus, for people who smoke in general and for oneself personally, may relate to changes in smoking. Using the Health Belief Model (HBM) as a theoretical framework, we examined associations with self-reported increasing and decreasing smoking a lot during the COVID-19 stay-at-home period. Adults in 30 large U.S. cities who smoked cigarettes daily completed an online survey between 14 July and 30 November 2020. The analytic sample (N = 2768) was 54.0% male and 68.3% white with 23.7% reporting increasing and 11.3% decreasing smoking (6% reported both). Younger age, a diagnosis of COVID-19, and greater pandemic-related stress were associated with greater odds of both increased and decreased smoking. Increased smoking also was associated with heavier nicotine dependence, greater desire to quit, and greater perceived susceptibility and lower perceived seriousness of COVID-19 for people who smoke, while pandemic-related job-loss, lower nicotine dependence, and greater self-efficacy were associated with decreased smoking. Among respondents who had not contracted COVID-19 (n = 2418), correlates were similar with the addition of greater perceived personal susceptibility to COVID-19 associated with both increased and decreased smoking, while greater perceived personal seriousness of COVID-19 was associated with increased smoking. Findings for risk perceptions were largely in directions that contradict the HBM. Circumstances surrounding behavior change during the pandemic are complex and may be especially complex for nicotine addiction.

Turning over a new leaf: Vape shop closings, openings and transitions in six U.S. Metropolitan statistical areas.

This study characterizes vape shop closings, openings, and changes in product mix in six U.S. metropolitan statistical areas with different tobacco and marijuana policies. With concern for higher rates of marijuana use among those who vape nicotine, the presence of marijuana-related terms in store names was also assessed. A census of stores that were classified online as vape shops/stores or vaporizer stores were telephoned in April-May 2018 (n = 739) and July-September 2019 (n = 919) to verify whether vape products and other tobacco products (OTP) were sold. We computed the percent of stores that closed, opened, and started/stopped selling OTP. Multilevel models tested whether these events varied by store type and by neighborhood demographics. Within 16 months, 11.5% of 739 stores had closed and 29.8% of 919 stores at follow-up had opened. Closings were more likely among vape-only than vape + OTP stores (AOR = 2.51, 95% CI = 1.47,4.29); vape-only stores were less likely to open (AOR = 0.46, 95% CI = 0.34,0.62). Regardless of store type, the odds of a store opening increased as the proportion of non-Hispanic/Latino White residents in the census tract increased (AOR = 1.47, 95% CI = 1.18,1.85). Overall, 2.0% of stores (vape-only and vape + OTP) had marijuana-related names at baseline and 3.5% at follow-up. The observed change (1.6% to 5.8%) was greatest in Oklahoma City, where the state legalized medical marijuana between baseline and follow-up. More stores were opening than closing in six U.S. metropolitan statistical areas before statewide sales restrictions on flavored tobacco and COVID-19. Uniform licensing is recommended to define vape shops and track their location and sales practices.

Association between density and proximity of tobacco retail outlets with smoking: A systematic review of youth studies.

BACKGROUND: Reducing the retail availability of tobacco has been proposed as a component of tobacco endgame, yet it is not known whether retail availability has a direct impact on smoking behaviours. A narrative review and a meta-analysis have been undertaken to examine the density and proximity of tobacco retail outlets, but were limited in scope, exposure and outcome variables. The aim of this current study was to undertake a systematic review of the international literature on the density and proximity of tobacco retail outlets to homes, schools and communities and their association with smoking behaviours among youth. METHODS: We reviewed and critically appraised the evidence documenting the association between density or proximity of tobacco retail outlets and smoking behaviours among school-age youth (18 and under), between 1 January 1990 and 21 October 2019. We reviewed original quantitative research that examined the associations of tobacco retail outlet density and proximity with individual smoking status or population-level smoking prevalence; initiation of smoking; frequency of tobacco use; sales to minors; purchasing by minors; susceptibility to smoking among non-smokers; perceived prevalence of smoking, and quitting behaviours. FINDINGS: Thirty-five peer-reviewed papers met the inclusion criteria. This review provided evidence of a relationship between density of tobacco retail outlets and smoking behaviours, particularly for the density near youths' home. A study using activity spaces also found a significant positive association between exposure to tobacco retail outlets and daily tobacco use. The review did not provide evidence of an association between the proximity of tobacco retail outlets to homes or schools and smoking behaviours among youth. CONCLUSIONS: The existing evidence supports a positive association between tobacco retail outlet density and smoking behaviours among youth, particularly for the density near youths' home. This review provides evidence for the development and implementation of policies to reduce the density of tobacco retail outlets to reduce smoking prevalence among youth.

Popularity of natural American Spirit cigarettes is greater in U.S. cities with lower smoking prevalence.

BACKGROUND: Often perceived as a safer smoke, Natural American Spirit (NAS) may find particular appeal in communities with strong non-smoking norms. We hypothesized NAS would be more popular in cities with lower smoking prevalence, with the pattern unique to NAS. We tested household income, cigarette taxes, and young adult population as alternative correlates and examined brand specificity, relative to Marlboro and Pall Mall. METHODS: Using proprietary, city-specific sales estimates obtained from Nielsen for 30 U.S. cities over one year (9/7/18-9/9/19), we computed cigarette sales volume as standard pack units per 10,000 adult smokers for NAS and Marlboro and Pall Mall. Linear regression models examined associations between city-level sales volume and adult smoking prevalence, median household income, the sum of state/local cigarette excise taxes, and young adult population. RESULTS: NAS sales volume averaged 44,785 packs per 10,000 adult smokers (SD = 47,676). Across 30 cities, adult smoking prevalence averaged 18.0% (SD = 4.5%), median household income averaged $53,677 (SD = $14,825), cigarette excise tax averaged $2.55 (SD = $1.63), and young adult population averaged 10.6% (SD = 2.2%). NAS sales volume was greater in cities with lower adult smoking prevalence (ß = -0.39, 95% CI[-0.74, -0.03], p = 0.034), a pattern that was not observed for Marlboro or Pall Mall (ps > 0.356). Marlboro (ß = -0.40, 95% CI[-0.76, -0.05], p = 0.027) and Pall Mall (ß = -0.48, 95% CI[-0.82, -0.14], p = 0.008) sales volumes were higher in cities where cigarette excise taxes were lower, a pattern not observed for NAS (p = 0.224). CONCLUSION: NAS appears to be more popular in cities with lower smoking prevalence and may deter efforts to further decrease prevalence.

Vape shop identification, density and place characteristics in six metropolitan areas across the US.

Vaping is increasingly prevalent and controversial. Vape shops and convenience stores are common but distinct sources of vaping products, and where they locate may reflect likely target markets. This study examined the density and neighborhood demographics of vape shops and convenience stores in six metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs): Atlanta, Boston, Minneapolis, Oklahoma City, San Diego, Seattle. We identified 459 vape shops using Yelp and Google application programming interfaces and 10,777 convenience stores using ReferenceUSA and Dun & Bradstreet. Retailers were geocoded to census tracts (n = 4,442), and logistic regressions were conducted using as predictors percent non-White, percent youth (5-17 years or 5-20 years), and median household income from the American Community Survey, 2013-2017. Per 10,000 young adults, vape shop density ranged from 0.6 (Boston, San Diego) to 1.7 (Oklahoma City), and convenience store density ranged from 12.6 (San Diego) to 26.3 (Oklahoma City). Logistic regressions indicated that vape shops more likely resided in tracts with lower percentages of youth in Boston, but higher percentages of youth in Atlanta, as well as with lower incomes in Boston and Seattle. Convenience stores more likely resided in tracts with lower percentages of non-Whites in Atlanta and Boston; lower incomes in Atlanta, Boston, San Diego, and Seattle; and higher percentages of youth in Atlanta, Boston, and Minneapolis. These common retail sources of vaping products differentially locate in relation to neighborhood sociodemographics across MSAs. Findings suggest that, in some MSAs, vape shops and convenience stores may target youth and lower income populations.

Retail Tobacco Marketing in Rural Versus Nonrural Counties: Product Availability, Discounts, and Prices.

Objectives. To assess tobacco product availability, advertised discounts, and prices in rural and nonrural stores, comparing results for two definitions of rural. Method. This geospatial study linked data from marketing surveillance in a representative sample of licensed tobacco retailers in California (n = 1,276) and categorized rural/nonrural stores at the county and tract levels. Data were collected from January to March, 2017, and mixed-models analyses tested for differences by location (rural vs. nonrural). Results. Compared to nonrural stores, rural-county stores were 2.1 (95% confidence interval [CI; 1.2, 3.6]) times more likely to sell chewing tobacco and 2.5 (95% CI [1.4, 4.2]) times more likely to sell roll-your-own. Rural-county stores sold larger packs of cigarillos for less than $1 (coefficient = 0.22, 95% CI [0.05, 0.39]) and charged less for the cheapest cigarette pack regardless of brand (estimated mean difference = $-0.21, 95% CI [-0.39, -0.03]). Contrary to expectation, a popular brand of chewing tobacco cost more in rural-county stores. A tract-level definition of rural reclassified only 1 in 10 stores, and did not substantially alter the results. Overall, 32.9% of stores advertised discounts on chewing tobacco, but this was more common in rural than nonrural census tracts (adjusted odds ratio = 1.81, 95% CI [1.14, 2.88]). Discussion. Evidence that $1 buys more cigarillos in rural-county stores than elsewhere adds to health equity concerns that the prevalence of cheap, flavored tobacco is not limited to neighborhoods characterized by socioeconomic disadvantage, higher proportions of African Americans, and higher proportions of school-age youth. Policies that focus on the retail environment for tobacco are needed to make tobacco less attractive and more costly everywhere, including rural areas.

Assurances of Voluntary Compliance: A Regulatory Mechanism to Reduce Youth Access to E-Cigarettes and Limit Retail Tobacco Marketing.

Objectives. To evaluate assurances of voluntary compliance (AVCs) between state attorneys general and retail chains by assessing e-cigarette sales to underage decoys and tobacco marketing violations in corporate-owned stores (that sign AVCs) and franchise stores (that do not sign AVCs).Methods. Decoys 18 to 19 years of age attempted to purchase e-cigarettes without presenting ID in California convenience stores (n = 540). Auditors characterized the presence and content of age-of-sale signage and advertising for tobacco products. Data were collected and analyzed in 2018.Results. Corporate-owned stores were less likely than were franchise stores to violate ID requests (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.29; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.12, 0.71) and to sell e-cigarettes illegally (AOR = 0.37; 95% CI = 0.15, 0.88). Regardless of AVC category, advertising violations were common in stores (vaping products, 26.3%; other tobacco products, 74.3%).Conclusions. The differences in violation rates found in corporate and franchise stores imply that AVCs could reduce youth access to e-cigarettes. However, merchant education and routine enforcement are needed to better leverage restrictions on retail tobacco marketing in AVCs.Public Health Implications. Strengthening compliance with existing AVCs and establishing new agreements with retailers shown to be in violation through federal or state inspections could reduce youth access to e-cigarettes and exposure to tobacco marketing.

The Price of Natural American Spirit Relative to Other Cigarette Brands.

INTRODUCTION: American Spirit cigarettes feature American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) imagery in the branding and are marketed as environmentally friendly, without additives, and four varieties contain organic tobacco. This study is the first to examine retail price of American Spirit relative to other cigarette brands and to assess how its price varies by neighborhood demography. METHODS: In a random sample of licensed tobacco retailers (n = 1277), trained data collectors recorded availability and price of American Spirit, Pall Mall, Newport, Marlboro, and the cheapest cigarettes regardless of brand. Data were collected in January-March 2017 in California, the state with the largest AI/AN population. Paired t tests assessed prices (before sales tax) of American Spirit relative to others. Ordinary least squares regressions modeled prices as a function of neighborhood demography, adjusting for store type. RESULTS: American Spirit was sold in 77% of stores at an average price of $7.03 (SD = 0.66), which was $0.75-$1.78 (12.0%-34.4%) higher than Pall Mall, Newport, and Marlboro in the same stores. American Spirit costs significantly less in neighborhoods with a higher proportion of school-age residents; however, this pattern was not unique to that brand. Contrary to expectation, American Spirit did not cost less in neighborhoods with a higher proportion of AI/ANs. CONCLUSION: This study is the first to document lower prices for American Spirit in neighborhoods with a higher proportion of school-age youth. Future research should consider whether the ultra-premium price of American Spirit contributes to misperceptions that the brand is organic and less harmful than other cigarettes. IMPLICATIONS: In a large random sample of licensed tobacco retailers in California, American Spirit costs significantly more than other brands, 12.0%-34.4% more than Pall Mall, Newport, and Marlboro in the same stores. After controlling for store type, American Spirit price was significantly lower in neighborhoods with a higher proportion of school-age residents. Research about how an ultra-premium price contributes to misperceptions that all American Spirit varieties are organic and the brand is less harmful and less addictive than other cigarette brands would be informative for ongoing litigation and product regulation.