'Maybe they should regulate them quite strictly until they know the true dangers': A focus group study exploring UK adolescents’ views on e-cigarette regulation

Background and aims: Regulation of electronic cigarettes has moved to the top of the addiction policy agenda, as demonstrated by the recent focus across the UK on introducing age of sale restrictions. Yet, the views of those affected by such regulation remain largely unexplored. This paper presents the first detailed qualitative exploration of adolescents’ perceptions of existing, and opinions about potential, e-cigarette regulation. Methods: 16 focus groups, including a total of 83 teenagers between the ages of 14 and 17, were conducted in deprived, mixed and affluent urban areas in Scotland and England between November 2014 and February 2015. Transcripts were imported into Nivivo 10, thematically coded and analysed. Results: Participants critically considered existing evidence and competing interests in regulatory debates and demonstrated sophisticated understandings of the advantages and disadvantages of regulation. They overwhelmingly supported strong e-cigarette regulation and endorsed restrictions on sales to minors, marketing and e-cigarette use in public places. Concern about potential health harms of e-cigarette use and marketing increasing the acceptability of vaping and smoking led these adolescents to support regulation. Conclusions: In focus group discussions, a sample of UK adolescents exposed to particular communications about e-cigarettes supported strict regulation of e-cigarettes, including banning sales to minors and use in indoor public areas

A qualitative exploration of consumers’ perceived impacts, behavioural reactions, and future reflections of the EU Tobacco Products Directive (2017) as applied to electronic cigarettes

Background: Electronic cigarette regulations included in the Tobacco Products Directive (TPD), Article 20, implemented in Europe by May 2017, aimed to improve safety for e-cigarette consumers, and prevent uptake among non-smokers, particularly young people. Before implementation, there were significant concerns from consumers, industry, and some in the scientific community about the potential negative impact of the TPD on people using e-cigarettes to stay stopped from smoking. To date, there is limited evidence on how the TPD has affected consumers. This study aimed to add insight into how consumers perceived and experienced the regulations. Methods: Qualitative data, collected between March 2018 and March 2019, relating to participant views of the TPD were extracted from 160 interviews/extended surveys of e-cigarette consumers as part of a wider study into e-cigarette use trajectories (ECtra study). Data were thematically analysed. Results: Awareness of the TPD amongst consumers was not universal. Participants’ smoking behaviour did not appear to be influenced by the legislation. Participants were reassured by manufacturing regulations and requirements for ingredients labels. Participants responded negatively to changes perceived to cause inconvenience and extra plastic waste. The product restrictions prompted some participants to purchase non-compliant products illegally, potentially putting their safety at risk. Conclusions: E-cigarette regulation should focus on ensuring product safety. Raising awareness of the TPD amongst consumers and smokers could be beneficial

One Step Forward, Two Steps Backward: An Elastic Products Liability Framework for E-Cigarette Regulation

Societal innovation is frequently triggered by need. Year after year, novel technologies are created by entrepreneurs who seek to find a more effective, efficient, or less dangerous way of accomplishing a specific goal. Oftentimes, these new technologies enter the marketplace bringing with them a host of uncertainties concerning both their performance and effect on consumer activity. Despite these inevitable uncertainties, new technologies play a vital role in advancing society when appropriately controlled. Indeed, while the appropriate levels of control may vary across industries and technologies, one principal remains constant amongst the mall: the obligation to balance risk with reward. The need for such a delicate balancing act is no more evident than in the case of e-cigarettes and vaporizer products. Over the last two decades, innovators and entrepreneurs alike have sought to develop healthier solutions aimed at reducing the overwhelming number of fatalities and life-threatening illnesses associated with one of America’s most prevalent killers, the consumption of traditional tobacco cigarettes. While the undeniable benefits of these innovations have been formally acknowledged by both the FDA and Congress, the current federal regulatory framework that controls their availability to consumers operates as a hindrance to innovation and industry growth rather than an effective means of protecting the public’s health. This Note sets out to analyze the turbulent rise and fall of government and consumer sentiment surrounding these products and evaluates the effectiveness of the current FDA regulatory framework, which functions to constrain the diffusion of what may be one of the next substantial public health benefits. Specifically, this Note explores the potential for a more effective and elastic regulatory framework which incorporates the dual use of federal and state regulatory measures to strike an optimal middle ground position between minimizing uncertain public health risks while simultaneously not discouraging innovation and industry growth. In the final analysis, officials tasked with developing sufficient regulatory measures should seek to take calculated risks in the interests of promoting innovation. After all, it should come as no surprise that the most promising technological tobacco alternative emerged from an unregulated environment