Impact of Massachusetts law prohibiting flavored tobacco products sales on cross-border cigarette sales

Ali, Fatma Romeh M.; King, Brian A.; Seaman, Elizabeth L; Vallone, Donna; Schillo, Barbara

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0274022

Cited by 12 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Studies should also investigate unintended consequences of policy passage. While studies to date demonstrate that the Massachusetts policy was effective in reducing access to flavors without increasing sales in neighboring states 30 , 36 , this will be an important aspect of flavored tobacco policies to continue to monitor. Study findings reinforce the continued need to better understand access and patterns of use, and to address loopholes in the current regulatory environment at the federal level in order to maximize the impact of flavored tobacco sales restrictions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Early evidence of flavored tobacco product restrictions in Massachusetts and New York State

Schillo,

Seaman,

Cuccia

et al. 2023

Tob. Induc. Dis.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

INTRODUCTION With many US states and localities enacting policies that restrict flavored e-cigarette sales, evaluation of these restrictions is critical to inform future efforts. This study analyzed both survey and retail scanner data to assess early-stage impacts of flavored tobacco sales restrictions in Massachusetts and New York State on e-cigarettes sales and product use among young people. METHODS This study uses state-level e-cigarette retail sales data and survey data from youth and young adults (aged 13–24 years). Cross-sectional surveys were conducted at two time points in Massachusetts (both post policy implementation) and New York (pre and post policy implementation); retail sales data in both states were analyzed from 2019 through 2020 and compared to sales in control states. RESULTS E-cigarette unit sales decreased significantly following the implementation of statewide restrictions on flavored e-cigarettes in both Massachusetts and New York State (p<0.001). Survey data showed a decrease in mint flavored e-cigarette use in Massachusetts and an increase in tobacco flavored e-cigarette use in New York State over time (p=0.001). In both states, a greater proportion of respondents reported using disposable e-cigarettes at Time 2 compared to Time 1 (p=0.001). Among those who reported using fruit-flavored e-cigarettes in New York State, a significantly greater proportion reported disposable device use at Time 2 compared to Time 1 (p=0.004). CONCLUSIONS Findings from these case studies from two US states suggest that statewide policies reduce the availability of e-cigarettes and have the potential to reduce use of many youth-appealing flavors. The increase in use of disposable e-cigarettes likely reflects existing loopholes in federal policy, which may be attenuating the potential impact of strong state-level policies.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Early evidence of flavored tobacco product restrictions in Massachusetts and New York State

Schillo,

Seaman,

Cuccia

et al. 2023

Tob. Induc. Dis.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An assumption of the DID model is that average weighted mean nicotine strength and total e‐cigarette unit sales in intervention states were parallel to the comparison states before policy implementation. A parallel trend assumption test was performed by augmenting each DID model with two interaction terms [24, 33]. The first was an interaction between a linear time trend, an indicator for intervention states and an indicator for the period before policy implementation.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Difference-in-difference (DID) regression models were used to compare the adjusted change over time in weighted mean nicotine strength and total e-cigarette unit sales for the intervention groups before and after state policy implementation, compared to 34 An assumption of the DID model is that average weighted mean nicotine strength and total e-cigarette unit sales in intervention states were parallel to the comparison states before policy implementation. A parallel trend assumption test was performed by augmenting each DID model with two interaction terms [24,33]. The first was an interaction between a linear time trend, an indicator for intervention states and an indicator for the period before policy implementation.…”

Section: Primary Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of statewide restrictions on e‐cigarette nicotine strength—United States, 2017–2022

et al. 2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims: To evaluate statewide policies restricting e-cigarette nicotine strength.Design: A difference-in-difference regression analysis was used to compare e-cigarette sales in states that restrict nicotine strength with states with no restrictions. Because flavor restrictions might affect sales and nicotine strength, states with flavor restrictions were also assessed. Setting and cases: United States e-cigarette retail sales data during January 2017 to March 2022 were licensed from Information Resources Incorporated. States with restrictions included Massachusetts (restricted maximum nicotine strength to 3.5% and nontobacco flavored e-cigarette sales in December 2019); Utah (restricted nicotine strength to 3.6% in September 2021); and Rhode Island, New York and Washington (restricted nontobacco flavor sales in October 2019, May 2020 and October 2019 to January 2020, respectively). These were compared with data from 34 states with no e-cigarette nicotine strength or flavor restrictions. Measurements: Weighted mean nicotine strength and total unit sales. Total unit sales per 1000 state population were summed into 4-week periods by state. Models controlled for emergency responses, state demographics, tobacco control policies, time and state fixed effects.Findings: Restricting both nicotine strength and flavors in Massachusetts was associated with a 2.04 percentage point (pp) reduction in mean nicotine strength and 86.76-unit reduction in monthly unit sales per 1000 persons compared with states with no restrictions (all P < 0.01). Restricting nicotine strength only in Utah was associated with a 1.77 pp (P < 0.01) reduction in mean nicotine strength; however, there was no impact on unit sales. Restricting nontobacco flavor sales only in Rhode Island, New York and Washington slightly reduced mean nicotine strength (0.21, 0.62 and 0.19 pp, respectively) and sales (36.66, 34.51 and 16.37 units, respectively) (all P < 0.01).Conclusions: United States statewide policies restricting e-cigarette nicotine strength appear to be associated with reductions in average nicotine strength in sales within that state; however, there appears to be no impact on unit sales. When these policies are

show abstract

“…The set of selected states include: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Utah and Washington. Several manuscripts have been published or are underway that include analyses of these retail sales data which extend beyond the descriptive estimates presented in the Sales Data Briefs (18,19,20,21,22).…”

Section: Retail Sales Data Disseminationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of a multi-method approach to rapidly assess the impact of public health policies at the state and local level: a case study of flavored e-cigarette policies

et al. 2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background E-cigarettes are the most-commonly used tobacco product by youth since 2014. To prevent youth access and use of e-cigarettes, many U.S. states and localities have enacted policies over a relatively short period of time. The adoption of these policies has necessitated timely data collection to evaluate impacts. Methods To assess the impact of flavored e-cigarette policies in select states and local jurisdictions across the United States, a multi-method, complementary approach was implemented from July 2019 to present, which includes analyses of cross-sectional online surveys of young people ages 13–24 years with retail sales data. Results From February 2020 through February 2023, cross-sectional surveys have been conducted in three cities, one county, and eight states where policy changes have been enacted or are likely to be enacted. Data collection occurred every six months to provide near real-time data and examine trends over time. Additionally, weekly retail sales data were aggregated to showcase monthly sales trends at the national level and for the selected states. Discussion This rapid and efficient method of coupling online survey data with retail sales data provides a timely and effective approach for monitoring a quickly changing tobacco product landscape, particularly for states and localities where rapidly-available data is often not available. This approach can also be used to monitor other health behaviors and relevant policy impacts.

show abstract

Impact of Massachusetts law prohibiting flavored tobacco products sales on cross-border cigarette sales

Cited by 12 publications

References 7 publications

Early evidence of flavored tobacco product restrictions in Massachusetts and New York State

Early evidence of flavored tobacco product restrictions in Massachusetts and New York State

Evaluation of statewide restrictions on e‐cigarette nicotine strength—United States, 2017–2022

Use of a multi-method approach to rapidly assess the impact of public health policies at the state and local level: a case study of flavored e-cigarette policies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About