Implementation of the polluter pay's principle in tobacco control in the UK: a stakeholder analysis.

BACKGROUND: The polluter's pay principle (PPP) aims to internalise external costs and assign liability to the polluter for the harmful cost of their products to society. Tobacco companies continue to manufacture and sell harmful cigarettes, earning billions in profits each year from these products. Meanwhile, governments and their people are left to 'clean up' and deal with the detrimental health consequences. This paper explores with expert stakeholders how the PPP could be implemented within the context of tobacco control in the United Kingdom (UK). METHODS: Twenty-four semi-structured interviews and two follow-up discussion groups were conducted with UK and international experts on tobacco control, public health, economics, or law from the academic, public, private and third sector. Participants considered the facilitators and barriers to implementing the PPP to tobacco control in the UK. Thematic analysis was employed, aided by NVivo 12, and data were compared to examine the views expressed by the different types of experts. RESULTS: Stakeholders favoured the implementation of the PPP in the context of tobacco control and indicated that it could be acceptable and feasible to implement and that it would likely have support from policymakers and the public alike. Stakeholders unanimously agreed that any legislation and administration should be free from tobacco industry influence; however, differences arose concerning who should oversee the implementation. CONCLUSION: The PPP from environmental law was predominantly seen as an approach that could be usefully applied to the tobacco industry. However, there is no one size fits all template, therefore its implementation would need to be adapted to fit the UK context.

Expert views on high fat, salt and sugar food marketing policies to tackle obesity and improve dietary behaviours in the UK: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: There has been a lack of progress in reducing obesity in the United Kingdom (UK) despite Government strategies released over the last 30 years. These strategies, including the most recent publication from July 2020, have focused on childhood obesity and high fat, sugar and/or salt (HFSS) marketing restrictions, particularly broadcast advertising. In this study, we aimed to examine a range of expert views on the potential impact and the relative importance of such policies. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 42 experts in policy (n = 19), industry (n = 10), and advocacy (n = 13) with an interest in obesity. The UK Government's 2020 obesity strategy was used as a prompt to guide discussion on policy options. Qualitative thematic analysis was employed to answer the three research questions and themes were inductively coded within each research question. Data were also cross compared using matrix coding and a form of framework analysis to examine the views expressed by the different types of stakeholders. RESULTS: Reactions to the July 2020 proposal were mixed among policy and advocacy stakeholders, while commercial stakeholders expressed disappointment. A main theme emerging in all groups was frustration with the policy process and wishing to see more clarity regarding restrictions and their implementation. There was an overall lack of trust that the government would carry out their proposed plan and agreement that a more comprehensive, multi-sector approach aimed at the underlying drivers of obesity would be most effective, with some stakeholders indicating that some of the proposed policies could make a difference if implemented robustly. On the theme of promoting healthier options, some stakeholders suggested lowering the prices of 'healthy' products and making them more accessible to combat regressivity. There was a potentially surprising level of agreement between policy/advocacy stakeholders and commercial stakeholders, although commercial stakeholders were more likely to advocate for collaboration between government and industry as well as voluntary industry measures. CONCLUSION: While HFSS marketing restrictions have a role to play and send a strong signal - provided they are implemented comprehensively - investment in these policies needs to be part of wider efforts to tackle the underlying drivers of obesity.

Youth's exposure to and engagement with e-cigarette marketing on social media: a UK focus group study.

OBJECTIVE: Electronic-cigarettes (e-cigarette) are promoted creatively through social media and considering the potential influence of social media marketing on young people, we explored young people's exposure to and engagement with social media marketing of e-cigarettes. DESIGN: Semistructured discussion groups. SUBJECTS: Twenty focus groups with 82 young people aged 11-16 living in the Central belt of Scotland. METHODS: Youths were asked about smoking and vaping behaviours, social media use, vaping advertisement exposure and were shown illustrative examples of social media content (eg, images and videos) about different messages, presentations and contextual features. Transcripts were imported into NVivo V.12, coded thematically and analysed. RESULTS: Youths highlighted a variety of tactics e-cigarette companies use, including influencer or celebrity endorsement, attractive youth flavours, bright colours and emotional appeal to advertise and promote their products directly to young people. Social media influencers who advertise e-cigarettes were described as portraying e-cigarettes as 'cool' and 'fashionable' to entice viewers to try the products. Youths considered that there is a need for more restrictions on social media content to protect youths while also still allowing smokers to purchase them as a cessation device. CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights that the e-cigarette industry is using previously employed tactics similar to the tobacco industry to advertise and promote its products on social media. These findings suggest the growing need for governments to work together to develop and implement policies to restrict the advertising and marketing of e-cigarettes on social media.

Contextual influences on the role of evidence in e-cigarette recommendations: a multi-method analysis of international and national jurisdictions.

Background: E-cigarette policy has varied across jurisdictions, contrasting with the previous coordinated approach of international tobacco control communities. Aims and objectives: A multi-method case study approach was used to understand the role of evidence and external and internal contextual factors in the development of public health recommendations across four purposively selected jurisdictions (WHO, UK, Australia and USA). Methods: Informed by Dobrow et al.'s (2004) conceptual framework for context-based evidencebased decision-making, four data sources were drawn upon: 1) 15 public health bodies' e-cigarette recommendation documents, 2) seven development documents produced by the public health bodies, 3) sources of evidence cited in the public health bodies' recommendation documents and 4) 15 qualitative interviews with experts. Thematic analysis and citation analysis were conducted to aid triangulation of evidence. Findings: We found a complex interplay between internal and external factors which influence the role and use of evidence in the development of e-cigarette recommendations. For example, recommendation documents' remit (internal factor) was influenced by various external factors such as epidemiology and policy history, with decisions made over time having reshaped the external context. Considering the findings with respect to evidence utilisation, we propose a modified version of Dobrow et al.'s (2004) framework, highlighting the important interplay between internal and external contextual factors. Discussion and conclusion: This research suggest internal and external contextual factors mutually interact and influence how evidence is incorporated into recommendations. This dynamic interplay of contextual factors may help explain the why different policy approaches are pursued concerning public health topics, particularly e-cigarettes.

User-generated content and influencer marketing involving e-cigarettes on social media: a scoping review and content analysis of YouTube and Instagram.

BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests that experimentation with e-cigarettes among young people is increasing. Social media is widely used by young people with user-generated content and influencer marketing particularly influential in promoting products. This paper documents a snapshot of online user-generated content and influencer marketing related to e-cigarettes on YouTube and Instagram. METHODS: Scoping review of relevant e-cigarette-related content on two social media platforms popular with youths, YouTube and Instagram, between June and August 2021. Content analysis was undertaken to examine text, audio, and video content, recording age restrictions, health warnings, page characteristics, and post characteristics. Narrative post content was coded using a coding frame that was developed inductively in response to emergent categories. RESULTS: Vaping was portrayed positively on social media; of the posts analysed, 86.5% (n = 90 of 104) of Instagram posts and 66.0% (n = 64 of 97) of YouTube videos. Warnings about age restrictions and health (e.g., nicotine addiction/toxicity) did not feature in the majority of posts; 43.3% (n = 42) of YouTube videos (n = 42) contained an age warning compared to 20.2% of Instagram posts (n = 21). While 25.8% (n = 25) of YouTube videos and 21.2% of Instagram (n = 22) posts contained a health warning. CONCLUSION: Of concern is the fact that the vast majority of YouTube and Instagram content about e-cigarettes promoted their use, and typically the content does not contain age and/or health warnings. These findings may highlight a priority for governmental policy to restrict the ability of marketers to reach youths with social media content promoting e-cigarettes.

Youth's engagement and perceptions of disposable e-cigarettes: a UK focus group study.

OBJECTIVES: Evidence suggests that use of flavoured disposable electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) is increasing. Considering the growing popularity and rapid evolution of e-cigarettes, we explored youth's perceptions and engagement with disposable e-cigarettes. DESIGN: Twenty focus groups were conducted between March and May 2022, with 82 youths aged 11-16 living in the Central belt of Scotland. METHODS: Youths were asked about smoking and vaping behaviours and disposable e-cigarettes and were shown vaping-related images and videos from social media which were used to stimulate discussion about different messages, presentations and contextual features. Transcripts were imported into NVivo V.12, coded thematically, and analysed. RESULTS: Youths described disposable e-cigarettes as 'cool', 'fashionable' and enticing and viewed as a modern lifestyle 'accessory'. Tank models were perceived as being used by older adults. Youths stated that disposable e-cigarettes were designed in a way to target youths and the brightly coloured devices and range of flavourings encouraged youths to want to try the products, particularly sweet flavourings. Participants perceived e-cigarettes to be less harmful compared with combustible cigarettes but noted the uncertainty of ingredients in disposable e-cigarettes. CONCLUSIONS: Youths distinguish between e-cigarettes with varying characteristics and social perceptions of users. These findings provide evidence that disposable e-cigarettes are attractive to youths. Future research is needed to understand the factors that contribute to youth perceptions of disposable e-cigarettes. Policymakers should work together to design and implement policies and strategies to prevent youth uptake of vaping.

Experts' views on how to design a tobacco control fund in the UK.

OBJECTIVE: To explore expert views on the potential value, and approaches to establishing and administering a tobacco control fund in the UK. DESIGN: Semistructured interviews and follow-up discussion groups. SUBJECTS: Twenty-four UK and international experts on tobacco control regulation, public health, economics or law from the academic, public, private and third sector. METHODS: Participants considered the relative merit of (1) general excise tax on retail tobacco sales; (2) ring-fenced hypothecation of excise taxes on retail tobacco sales; and (3) a direct levy on tobacco manufacturers. Preliminary synthesis of interview findings was deliberated on in two follow-up discussion groups to identify key considerations for policy design. RESULT: Most experts agreed that a ring-fenced tobacco control fund would be a valuable method of raising predictable and reliable funds from tobacco producers either using either companies' sales volume or market share as a way to establish the proportion they should pay. Experts predominantly recommended that a fund in the UK should be administered by a government body with devolved nation input and with an independent advisory group. They typically indicated that funding should be allocated yearly with a distribution at local, regional and national levels to support smoking prevention and cessation rather than treatment activities with priority given to measures that tackle smoking-related inequalities. CONCLUSION: There was overwhelming agreement by experts on the need to establish a tobacco control fund to help meet the proposed government tobacco-free targets to reduce adult smoking prevalence to 5% by 2030 (England) and 2034 (Scotland).

Development processes for e-cigarette public health recommendations lacked transparency in managing conflicts of interest.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate how guideline development groups collect and manage conflicts of interest (COI) when producing electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) recommendations. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Public health bodies that had produced e-cigarette recommendations were identified from four purposively selected jurisdictions (World Health Organization, United Kingdom, Australia, and United States). We analysed their COI policies and conducted 15 interviews with guideline methodologists, policymakers, and academics in guideline development groups. RESULTS: Only five of 10 public health bodies had a publicly available COI policy. Participants discussed the importance of those involved in the development process declaring COI. However, there were differences in who had to report COI, the time period asked about, and what and how declarations are made. COI policies and participants discussed a range of approaches for managing COI, from limiting involvement to disqualification from the recommendation development process. Participants considered the current processes for collecting and managing COI insufficient due to their open interpretation and possibility for partial declarations of interest. CONCLUSION: The management of COI varies across public health bodies, with little standardization and lack of transparency. To improve the collection and management of COI, and ultimately increase the trustworthiness of recommendations, guideline development groups should draw upon a comprehensive and accessible COI policy.

Examining the sources of evidence in e-cigarette policy recommendations: A citation network analysis of international public health recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Public health policies and recommendations aim to be informed by the best available evidence. Evidence underpinning e-cigarettes policy recommendations has been necessarily limited due to the novelty of the technology and the lack of long-term epidemiological studies and trials. Some public health bodies have actively encouraged e-cigarette use whilst others have raised concerns over introducing new health risks and renormalising tobacco smoking. Using citation network analysis we investigated the author conflicts of interest and study funding statements within sources of evidence used by public health bodies when making recommendations about e-cigarette policy. METHODS: We conducted citation network analysis of public health recommendation documents across four purposively selected diverse jurisdictions: WHO, UK, Australia, and USA. We extracted all citations from 15 public health recommendation documents, with more detailed data collected for influential citations (used in 3+ recommendation documents). We analysed the relationships between the sources of evidence used across jurisdictions using block modelling to determine if similar groups of documents were used across different jurisdictions. We assessed the frequency and nature of conflicts of interest. RESULTS: 1700 unique citations were included across the 15 public health recommendation documents, with zero to 923 citations per document (median = 63, IQR = 7.5-132). The evidence base underpinning public health recommendations did not systematically differ across jurisdictions. Of the 1700 citations included, the majority were journal articles (n = 1179). Across 1081 journal articles published between 1998-2018, 200 declared a conflict of interest, 288 contained no mention of conflicts of interest, and 593 declared none. Conflicts of interest were reported with tobacco (3%; n = 37 journal articles of 1081), e-cigarette (7%; n = 72), and pharmaceutical companies (12%; n = 127), with such conflicts present even in the most recent years. There were 53 influential citations, the most common study type was basic science research without human subjects (e.g. examination of aerosols and e-liquids) (n = 18) followed by systematic review (n = 10); with randomised control trial being least common (n = 4). Network analysis identified clusters of highly-cited articles with a higher prevalence of conflicts of interest. CONCLUSION: Public health bodies across different jurisdictions drew upon similar sources of evidence, despite articulating different policy approaches to e-cigarettes. The evidence drawn upon, including the most influential evidence, contained substantial conflicts of interest (including relationships with e-cigarette and tobacco industries). Processes to explicitly manage conflicts of interest arising from the underlying evidence base may be required when developing public health recommendations.