scholarly journals Sources and Number of Coupons for Cigarettes and Snus Received by a Cohort of Young Adults

2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 153-160 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelvin Choi ◽  
Naomi Taylor ◽  
Jean Forster
Keyword(s):  
Young Adults ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
College Education ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Tobacco Product ◽  
Tobacco Products ◽  
Product Packaging ◽  
Former Smokers ◽  
Racial Ethnic ◽  
Hispanic White

Purpose: To examine the sources of tobacco coupons and their influence on susceptibility to snus use. Design: Cohort study. Setting: Minnesota Adolescent Community Cohort Study. Subjects: A population-based sample of US Midwest young adults in 2011 to 2012 and 2012 to 2013 (aged 22-28; n = 2384). Measures: Exposure to coupons for various tobacco products through various sources in the past 6 months, susceptibility to snus use. Analysis: Multiple logistic regressions. Results: During the 6 months prior to 2012 to 2013 survey, 11% of the sample received coupons for cigarettes, 5% received coupons for snus, 3% received coupons for other smokeless tobacco products, and <1% received coupons for little cigars. Direct mail was the most commonly cited source of cigarette and snus coupons. Tobacco product packaging provided the highest number of tobacco coupons for current and former smokers. Participants without a 4-year college education (compared to those who had a 4-year college education) were more likely to have received coupons for cigarettes and snus and received more coupons for both products ( P < .05). Racial/ethnic minority young adults (vs non-Hispanic white) received more cigarette and snus coupons ( P < .05). Receiving snus coupons was positively associated with susceptibility to snus use ( P < .05). Conclusion: Tobacco companies are successful in reaching young adults using coupons for various tobacco products. Snus coupons may influence snus use, similar to how cigarette coupons influence smoking.

scholarly journals E-cigarette and cigarette purchasing among young adults before and after implementation of California’s tobacco 21 policy

2020 ◽  
pp. tobaccocontrol-2019-055417 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Schiff ◽  
Fei Liu ◽  
Tess Boley Cruz ◽  
Jennifer B Unger ◽  
Sam Cwalina ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Population Based ◽  
Tobacco Product ◽  
Cigarette Use ◽  
Limited Data ◽  
Tobacco Products ◽  
Gas Stations ◽  
The Past ◽  
Before And After ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Vape Shops

BackgroundTobacco 21 (T21) laws, which raise the minimum legal age of sale of tobacco products to 21, have been proposed and implemented in states and cities across the USA. However, limited data are available on the effect of T21 laws on youth tobacco purchasing behaviours and access to tobacco products.MethodsParticipants in a population-based prospective cohort in southern California completed questionnaires before (n=1609, age=18–19 y) and after (n=1502, age=19–20 y) T21 was implemented in California (June 2016). We examined the prevalence of past 30-day cigarette and e-cigarette use, and among past 30-day users, purchase location of tobacco products before (pre-) versus after (post-) T21. We also examined whether, post-T21, participants were refused purchase of tobacco products due to their age, and the perceived relative ease of purchasing cigarettes and e-cigarettes (vs pre-T21).ResultsNegligible changes in cigarette and e-cigarette use were observed pre-T21 versus post-T21. At both time points, the majority of past 30-day users purchased cigarettes from gas stations and e-cigarettes from vape shops. Post-T21, the proportion of participants who reported purchasing cigarettes at gas stations decreased. Post-T21, most past 30-day cigarette or e-cigarette users were not refused purchase of cigarettes (65.4%) or e-cigarettes (82.0%) in the past 30 days, despite being under 21; half of the participants felt it was harder to purchase cigarettes (54.3%) and e-cigarettes (43.6%) post-T21.ConclusionPost-T21, few participants were refused purchase of any tobacco product, despite the illegality of such sales. Better enforcement of T21 is needed to improve the efficacy of T21 legislation.

scholarly journals Cigarette, E-Cigarette and Waterpipe Use among Young Adults: Differential Cognitions about These Three Forms of Smoking

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (11) ◽  
pp. 3787 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark J.M. Sullman ◽  
Maria-Eugenia Gras ◽  
Antonios Kagialis ◽  
Ioulia Papageorgi ◽  
Sílvia Font-Mayolas
Keyword(s):  
Young Adults ◽  
Health Risks ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Peer Pressure ◽  
Tobacco Product ◽  
Tobacco Products ◽  
Best Friend ◽  
Alternative Tobacco Products ◽  
Waterpipe Use ◽  
Clear Information

Background: Polytobacco use is common among young adults. The purpose of the present study was to investigate a number of cognitions related to the use of three tobacco products (cigarettes, e-cigarettes and waterpipes) among young adults. Methods: Participants (n = 799, 59.4% women) aged 18–25 years old (M = 21.8, SD = 1.7) completed an online tobacco cognitions questionnaire. Results: For all three tobacco products, there was significantly more agreement with the cognition “I would smoke if my best friend offered” among tobacco users (used one or more tobacco products) than among non-users. For e-cigarettes and waterpipes, there was significantly more agreement with the cognition “It would be easy to quit these products” than was reported by non-users. Polytobacco users (three tobacco products) endorsed the cognitions scale (the six cognition items were combined to form a single cognitions scale for each tobacco product) significantly more than non-users for cigarettes and e-cigarettes. Furthermore, waterpipe users, polytobacco users, dual users and single users all endorsed the combined cognitions scales more strongly than non-users. Conclusions: Efforts to prevent polytobacco use should ensure that young adults have the necessary self-efficacy to resist peer pressure and provide them with clear information about the health risks associated with using alternative tobacco products.

scholarly journals Global review of tobacco product flavour policies

2020 ◽  
pp. tobaccocontrol-2019-055454 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olufemi Erinoso ◽  
Katherine Clegg Smith ◽  
Michael Iacobelli ◽  
Sejal Saraf ◽  
Kevin Welding ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Grey Literature ◽  
Tobacco Product ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Specific Reference ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Tobacco Products ◽  
Product Packaging ◽  
Policy Documents ◽  
Policy Domain ◽  
The Usa

ObjectiveWe determined which countries prohibit flavoured tobacco products and the details of those restrictions in order to identify possible gaps and opportunities for these and other countries to address.MethodsWe reviewed the grey literature, scanned news articles and consulted with key informants and identified 11 countries and the European Union (EU) that ban or restrict tobacco product flavours. We reviewed policy documents for their stated policy rationale, terms and definitions of flavours, tobacco products covered and restrictions on the use of flavour imagery and terms on tobacco product packaging.ResultsCountries with a tobacco product flavour policy include the USA, Canada, Brazil, Ethiopia, Uganda, Senegal, Niger, Mauritania, EU (28 Member States), Moldova, Turkey and Singapore. Most of the countries’ policies provide a rationale of dissuading youth from taking up tobacco use. Ten of the 12 policies use the terms ‘flavours’ (n=6) or ‘characterising flavours’ (n=4). Six policies cover all products made entirely or partly of tobacco leaf. Countries consistently prohibit flavours associated with fruits, vanilla and spices. The USA and Niger make an exception for menthol, while Mauritania and Uganda do not specify the scope of flavours or ingredients covered by their policies. Eight policies make no specific reference to restricting flavour descriptors on tobacco product packaging.ConclusionCountries looking to implement policies restricting flavours in tobacco products can build on existing comprehensive policies. Future research could examine the implementation and impacts of these policies, to inform other countries interested in acting in this policy domain.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document