Noticing education campaigns or public health messages about vaping among youth in the US, Canada, and England from 2018 to 2022

Purpose: Public health campaigns have the potential to correct vaping misperceptions. However, campaigns highlighting vaping harms to youth may increase misperceptions that vaping is equally/more harmful than smoking. Vaping campaigns have been implemented in the US and Canada since 2018, and in England since 2017, but with differing focus: youth vaping prevention (US/Canada) and smoking cessation (England). We therefore examined country differences and trends in noticing vaping campaigns among youth and, using 2022 data only, perceived valence of campaigns and associations with harm perceptions. Methods: Seven repeated cross-sectional surveys of 16–19-year-olds in US, Canada, England (2018-2022, N=92,339). Results: Over half of youth reported noticing vaping campaigns, and noticing increased from Aug’18-Feb’20 (US:55.2-74.6%,AOR=1.21,95%CI=1.18-1.24; Canada:52.6-64.5%,AOR=1.13,1.11-1.16; England:48.0-53.0%,AOR=1.05,1.02-1.08) before decreasing (Canada) or plateauing (England/US) to Aug’22. Increases were most pronounced in the US, then Canada. Noticing was most common on websites/social media, school, and television/radio. In 2022 only, most campaigns were perceived to negatively portray vaping and this was associated with accurately perceiving vaping as less harmful than smoking among youth who exclusively vaped (AOR=1.46,1.09-1.97). Conclusion: Consistent with implementation of youth vaping prevention campaigns in the US and Canada, most youth reported noticing vaping campaigns/messages, and most were perceived to negatively portray vaping

SRNT 2024 - Disposable Vapes Symposium

Slides from our symposium on disposable vapes as part of SRNT 202

Cross-country content analysis of e-cigarette packaging: a codebook and study protocol

Introduction. Marketing elements on packaging can influence the appeal of electronic cigarette (EC) products. ECs can contain nicotine and their long-term health effects are unknown; it is important to monitor elements such as packaging which may influence the appeal and uptake of EC products by youth. This study therefore aims to describe marketing elements used on the packaging of commonly used EC products in England, Canada, and the US, countries with different EC marketing regulations. Methods and analysis. We will conduct two content analyses of EC products and their packaging. The first will focus on liquid-containing products (disposable devices, e-liquid refills) in Canada, England, and the US; the second on EC devices (tank, cartridge, and disposable) in England. We will use a codebook to systematically record elements present on EC products and their packaging, including: warnings, product information (e.g., flavour and nicotine), characteristics and design of the packaging and the product (e.g., shape, size), claims (e.g., health-related, cost-related), digital and interactive elements, colours, other graphic elements, and coder impressions. EC products will be sampled based on the most popular brands identified from surveys conducted by the International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Project (ITC) and Action on Smoking and Health (ASH). Approximately 144 products will be sampled for the cross-country analysis and 45 for the single-country analysis. We will report frequencies of each element, discuss frequently identified codes, and describe any notable differences between countries and product types. Ethics and dissemination. No ethical concerns. Results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal

Marketing claims on the websites of leading e-cigarette brands in England

Introduction: Exposure to electronic cigarette (EC) marketing is associated with EC use, particularly among youth. In England, the Tobacco and Related Products Regulations and Committee of Advertising Practice (CAP) regulate EC marketing to reduce appeal to youth; however, there are little published data on EC marketing claims used online. This study therefore provides an overview of marketing claims present on the websites of EC brands popular in England. Methods: From January to February 2022, a content analysis of 10 of England's most popular EC brand websites was conducted, including violation of CAP codes. Results: Of the 10 websites, all presented ECs as an alternative to smoking, 8 as a smoking cessation aid and 6 as less harmful than smoking. Four websites presented ECs as risk-free. All mentioned product quality, modernity, convenience, sensory experiences and vendor promotions. Nine featured claims about flavours, colours, customisability and nicotine salts. Seven featured claims concerning social benefits, personal identity, sustainability, secondhand smoke and nicotine strength. Six featured claims about fire safety. Some claimed ECs are cheaper than tobacco (n=5), cited health professionals (n=4) or featured collaborations with brands/icons (n=4). All were assessed by the research team to violate one or more CAP code(s) by featuring medicinal claims (n=8), contents which may appeal to non-smokers (n=7), associations with youth culture (n=6), depictions of youth using ECs (n=6) or media targeting youth (n=5). Conclusion: Among 10 top EC brand websites in England, marketing elements that might appeal to youth were commonly identified and CAP code compliance was low.</p

Perceptions of risks across vaping products: an online survey of adult smokers and vapers

This study aims to examine the features of vaping products that people who smoke and vape perceive contribute to the health harms of vaping

Examining the effect of standardized packaging and limited flavour and brand descriptors of e-liquids among youth in Great Britain.

Significance: E-cigarette vaping among youth has increased in Great Britain (GB). Many vaping products feature bright colours, novel brand names and flavour descriptions, which may appeal to youth. This study examined the impact of fully branded and white standardized e-liquid packaging (including limiting brand and flavour descriptors) on peer interest in trying e-liquids among youth in GB. Methods: A between-subjects experiment was included in the Action on Smoking and Health Smokefree GB Youth 2021 online survey (age 11-18; n=1628). Participants were randomised to view a set of three images of e-liquids from one of three packaging conditions: (1) fully branded (control), (2) white standardized, or (3) white standardized with coded brand names and limited flavour descriptors. Participants were asked which e-liquid they thought people their age would be most interested in trying, participants could also respond “no interest” or “don’t know”. Multinomial regression models were used to examine differences in selecting ‘interest in trying (ref)’, ‘no interest’ or ‘don’t know’ across the different packaging conditions. Results: Compared with fully branded packaging (22.7%), youth had higher odds of reporting no interest among people their age in trying the e-liquids in white standardized packs with brand codes and limited flavour descriptors (30.3%, AOR=2.07[95%CI=1.53-2.79], p&lt;.001), but not white standardized packs with usual descriptors (23.1%, 1.21[0.89-1.65], p=.214). Youth had higher odds of reporting no interest in trying the e-liquids in white standardized packs with brand codes and limited flavour descriptors (30.3%) compared to white standardized packs with usual descriptors (23.1%, AOR=0.59, 95% CI= 0.44-0.79, p&lt;.001). Conclusion: Standardized e-liquid packaging, which also limits flavour and brand descriptors, may reduce the appeal of e-liquids to youth