Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

Search Results (3)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = Marketing and regulation of nicotine-containing products

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
14 pages, 2190 KB  
Review
Classification, Perception, and Toxicity of Emerging Flavored Oral Nicotine Pouches
by Sadiya Bi Shaikh, Chad Newton, Wai Cheung Tung, Yehao Sun, Dongmei Li, Deborah Ossip and Irfan Rahman
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20(5), 4526; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20054526 - 3 Mar 2023
Cited by 23 | Viewed by 9336
Abstract
Introduction: Oral Nicotine Pouches (ONPs) are the new form of nicotine pouches that have become a type of emerging smokeless tobacco product sold by various tobacco companies. These smokeless tobacco products are marketed for usage all over as snus containing tobacco-derived nicotine (natural) [...] Read more.
Introduction: Oral Nicotine Pouches (ONPs) are the new form of nicotine pouches that have become a type of emerging smokeless tobacco product sold by various tobacco companies. These smokeless tobacco products are marketed for usage all over as snus containing tobacco-derived nicotine (natural) or as tobacco-free nicotine (synthetic) as substitutes for other tobacco products. Based on perception and socio-behavioral aspects, ONPs have become popular tobacco products among adolescents/young adults, and over 50% of young adult users of ONP use flavored ONPs, such as menthol/mint, tobacco, dessert/candy, and fruity, which are the most popular flavors. Various new ONP flavors are currently popular locally as well as in the online market. Tobacco, menthol, and fruit-flavored ONPs could motivate cigarette smokers to change to ONPs. Methods: We expanded our knowledge on natural/synthetic ONP flavor wheels to available data on ONPs, describing, in detail, their flavors and brands (US and Europe) in both natural and synthetic ONP categories. We classified over 152 snus and 228 synthetic ONPs into the following flavor categories: “Tobacco”, “Menthol/Mint”, “Fruity”, “Candy/Deserts”, “Drink”, “Aroma”, “Spices”, and “Mixed Flavors”. Results: Based on total numbers, we found the most popular ONP flavors, sold as tobacco and menthol, to be among natural ONPs; among synthetic ONPs, fruity and menthol are the most prominent flavors, with varying concentrations of nicotine and other flavoring chemicals, including coolant WS-23. We also showed possible molecular targets and toxicities, due to exposure to ONPs, activating several signaling cascades such as AKT and NF-kappaB, which might possibly lead to apoptosis and epithelial mesenchymal transition (EMT). Conclusions: Considering the marketing of ONP products with various flavor profiles and with most of these products containing tobacco/menthol/fruit flavor, it is likely to have regulation and a marketing disclaimer on some of these products. Further, it would be logical to determine how the market reacts in terms of compliance and non-compliance with flavor restrictions by the regulatory agencies. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

13 pages, 595 KB  
Article
A Comparison of E-Cigarette Use Patterns and Smoking Cessation Behavior among Vapers by Primary Place of Purchase
by Greta Hsu, Anthony C. Gamst, Yue-Lin Zhuang, Tanya Wolfson and Shu-Hong Zhu
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16(5), 724; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16050724 - 28 Feb 2019
Cited by 12 | Viewed by 5305
Abstract
Background: E-cigarettes are purchased through multiple channels, including general retail, online, and specialty smoke and vape shops. We examine how e-cigarette users’ primary purchase place relates to e-cigarette use and smoking cessation behaviors. Methods: Probability-based samples of the U.S. population who were current [...] Read more.
Background: E-cigarettes are purchased through multiple channels, including general retail, online, and specialty smoke and vape shops. We examine how e-cigarette users’ primary purchase place relates to e-cigarette use and smoking cessation behaviors. Methods: Probability-based samples of the U.S. population who were current e-cigarette users were surveyed in 2014 (N = 879) and 2016 (N = 743), with responses combined for most analyses. E-cigarette use and smoking cessation behaviors were compared across users’ primary purchase place. Results: Higher percentages of vape shop (59.1%) and internet (42.9%) customers were current daily users of e-cigarettes compared to retail (19.7%) and smoke shop (23.2%) customers (p-values < 0.001). Higher percentages of vape shop (40.2%) and internet (35.1%) customers were also former smokers, compared to 17.7% of retail and 19.3% of smoke shop customers (p’s < 0.001). Among those smoking 12 months prior to survey, smoking cessation rates were higher for vape shop (22.2%) and internet customers (22.5%) than for retail customers (10.7%, p = 0.010 and p = 0.022, respectively), even though retail customers were more likely to use FDA-approved smoking cessation aids. The percentage of customers purchasing from vape shops increased from 20.4% in 2014 to 37.6% in 2016, surpassing general retail (27.7%) as the most likely channel in 2016. Conclusions: E-cigarette customers differed in significant ways by channels of purchase, most notably in their smoking cessation behaviors. Previous population studies have relied mostly on retail channel data, which accounted for less than 30% of all products sold by 2016. Future studies of e-cigarette use should consider a broader set of channels. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Electronic Cigarettes: Good and Bad Impacts)
Show Figures

Figure 1

13 pages, 298 KB  
Article
A Descriptive Longitudinal Study of Changes in Vape Shop Characteristics and Store Policies in Anticipation of the 2016 FDA Regulations of Tobacco Products, Including E-Cigarettes
by Sheila Yu, Patricia Escobedo, Robert Garcia, Tess Boley Cruz, Jennifer B. Unger, Lourdes Baezconde-Garbanati, Leah Meza and Steve Sussman
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15(2), 313; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15020313 - 11 Feb 2018
Cited by 17 | Viewed by 6862
Abstract
After proposing the “Deeming Rule” in 2014, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) began regulating the manufacturing, marketing, and sales of electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) products as tobacco products in 2016. The current study conducted vape shop store observations and surveyed Los Angeles–area [...] Read more.
After proposing the “Deeming Rule” in 2014, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) began regulating the manufacturing, marketing, and sales of electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) products as tobacco products in 2016. The current study conducted vape shop store observations and surveyed Los Angeles–area shop employees (assessing their beliefs, awareness, and perceptions of e-cigarettes and related FDA regulations) at two time points one year apart to better understand what vape shop retailers would do given FDA’s soon-to-be-enacted Deeming Rule. The study also compared retailer beliefs/awareness/actions and store characteristics immediately after the Deeming Rule proposal versus a year after the Rule had been proposed, right before its enactment. Two data collection waves occurred before the Deeming Rule enactment, with Year 1 surveying 77 shops (2014) and Year 2 surveying 61 shops (2015–2016). Between the data collection points, 16 shops had closed. Among the shops that were open at both time points, the majority (95% in Year 1; 74% in Year 2) were aware of some FDA regulations or other policies applying to vape shops. However, overall awareness of FDA regulations and state/local policies governing e-cigarettes significantly decreased from Year 1 to Year 2. At both time points, all shops offered customers free puffs of nicotine-containing e-liquids (prohibited by the then upcoming Deeming Rule). Perceptions of e-cigarette safety also significantly decreased between the years. Exploring vape shop retailer perceptions and store policies (i.e., free puffs/samples displays, perceptions of e-cigarette safety, etc.) over time will help the FDA assess the needs of the vape shop community and develop more effective retailer education campaigns and materials targeted to increase compliance with the newly enacted regulations. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Electronic Cigarette Use and Public Health)
Back to TopTop