Perceived Comparative Harm of Cigarettes and Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems

Nyman, Amy L.; Huang, Jidong; Weaver, Scott R.; Eriksen, Michael P.

doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.15680

Cited by 27 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…1. Perceptions of the relative health risks among adult smokers and vapers, the focus of our study, have been relatively stable since the time of our study and the current time period (Huang et al, 2019;Nyman, Huang, Weaver, & Eriksen, 2019). The health risks of tobacco cigarettes have been well-established for decades (US Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, 1964).…”

Section: Maclean and Buckellmentioning

confidence: 83%

Information and sin goods: Experimental evidence on cigarettes

Maclean

Buckell

2020

Health Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We test the importance of information source on consumer choice in the context of sin goods, specifically electronic and tobacco cigarettes, among adult smokers. We proxy choice with intentions to vape and quit smoking in the next 30 days. We experimentally vary the information source: government, private companies, physicians, and no source. Our findings suggest that information source matters in the context of cigarettes choice for adult smokers. Private companies appear to be an important information source for cigarettes among adult smokers.

show abstract

Section: Maclean and Buckellmentioning

confidence: 83%

Information and sin goods: Experimental evidence on cigarettes

Maclean

Buckell

2020

Health Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Open access e-cigarettes as much more harmful than cigarettes. 4 The increasing trends of misperceptions about the relative harms of e-cigarettes compared with regular cigarettes are important for public health because perceived harms of e-cigarettes are associated with smokers' willingness to use e-cigarettes 6 as a harm reduction strategy. Misperceptions, defined as false or inaccurate beliefs of the individual, 7 of e-cigarette harms may be related to exposure to misinformation-information that is incorrect or misleading.…”

Section: Strengths and Limitations Of This Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2 Despite this growing consensus, several recent studies show misperceptions about the relative harms of e-cigarettes among current smokers are increasing in both the USA and the UK. [3][4][5] Between 2014 and 2019, the percentage of current adult smokers in the UK who thought e-cigarettes were less harmful than cigarettes decreased from 45% to 34% and an even lower proportion of people believe so among smokers who were not using e-cigarettes. 5 Many smokers also do not think that complete replacement of cigarettes with e-cigarettes would lead to major health benefits.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of brief exposure to misinformation about e-cigarette harms on twitter: a randomised controlled experiment

Wright

Williams

Elizarova³

et al. 2021

BMJ Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesTo assess the effect of exposure to misinformation about e-cigarette harms found on Twitter on adult current smokers’ intention to quit smoking cigarettes, intention to purchase e-cigarettes and perceived relative harm of e-cigarettes compared with regular cigarettes.SettingAn online randomised controlled experiment conducted in November 2019 among USA and UK current smokers.Participants2400 adult current smokers aged ≥18 years who were not current e-cigarette users recruited from an online panel. Participants’ were randomised in a 1:1:1:1 ratio using a least-fill randomiser function.InterventionsViewing 4 tweets in random order within one of four conditions: (1) e-cigarettes are just as or more harmful than smoking, (2) e-cigarettes are completely harmless, (3) e-cigarette harms are uncertain, and (4) a control condition of tweets about physical activity.Primary outcomes measuresSelf-reported post-test intention to quit smoking cigarettes, intention to purchase e-cigarettes, and perceived relative harm of e-cigarettes compared with smoking.ResultsAmong US and UK participants, after controlling for baseline measures of the outcome, exposure to tweets that e-cigarettes are as or more harmful than smoking versus control was associated with lower post-test intention to purchase e-cigarettes (β=−0.339, 95% CI −0.487 to –0.191, p<0.001) and increased post-test perceived relative harm of e-cigarettes (β=0.341, 95% CI 0.273 to 0.410, p<0.001). Among US smokers, exposure to tweets that e-cigarettes are completely harmless was associated with higher post-test intention to purchase e-cigarettes (β=0.229, 95% CI 0.002 to 0.456, p=0.048) and lower post-test perceived relative harm of e-cigarettes (β=−0.154, 95% CI −0.258 to –0.050, p=0.004).ConclusionsUS and UK adult current smokers may be deterred from considering using e-cigarettes after brief exposure to tweets that e-cigarettes were just as or more harmful than smoking. Conversely, US adult current smokers may be encouraged to use e-cigarettes after exposure to tweets that e-cigarettes are completely harmless. These findings suggest that misinformation about e-cigarette harms may influence some adult smokers’ decisions to consider using e-cigarettes.Trial registration numberISRCTN16082420.

show abstract

“…The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) acknowledges that in comparison to combustible cigarettes, which kill up to half of life-long smokers, e-cigarettes lie on the lower end of a continuum of risk [ 13 – 15 ]. Yet, many smokers in the U.S. believe e-cigarettes are at least as harmful to health as combustible cigarettes [ 16 ]. This may dissuade them from switching to e-cigarettes and, thus, have a detrimental impact on population health.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How did beliefs and perceptions about e-cigarettes change after national news coverage of the EVALI outbreak?

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Exposure to media content can shape public opinions about tobacco. In early September 2019, the outbreak of e-cigarette, or vaping, product use–associated lung injury (EVALI) became headline news in the United States. Methods In August and September 2019, we conducted two cross-sectional online surveys with current and former smokers assessing attitudes and beliefs about e-cigarettes. Study one (n = 865) was collected before the EVALI outbreak was widely covered and study two (n = 344) was collected after the outbreak had become nation-wide news. We examined differences in perceptions and beliefs between time points. Results E-cigarette harm perceptions increased between study one (mean = 2.67) and study two (mean = 2.90, p < .05). Ever-users of e-cigarettes largely account for this change. Endorsement of the belief that e-cigarettes were risky and more likely to cause lung damage compared to cigarettes increased between studies (p < .05). Seventy eight percent of participants at study two were aware of the vaping illness story. Being aware of the story was associated with more endorsement of the belief that e-cigarettes were risky to use, but not that using e-cigarettes would make the participant more likely to get damaged lungs. Discussion When the stories about the health and safety of tobacco products dominate the public information environment, it presents an opportunity to change beliefs that are frequently targeted by paid health campaigns. Changes in participant’s perceptions of e-cigarettes were associated with coverage of this large news story, underscoring the importance of working to ensure that coverage is a scientifically accurate as possible.

show abstract

Perceived Comparative Harm of Cigarettes and Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems

Abstract: This survey study examines the changing attitudes regarding the perceived harm of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) among smokers, nonsmokers, and ENDS users from 2017 to 2018.

Cited by 27 publications

References 4 publications

Information and sin goods: Experimental evidence on cigarettes

Information and sin goods: Experimental evidence on cigarettes

Effects of brief exposure to misinformation about e-cigarette harms on twitter: a randomised controlled experiment

How did beliefs and perceptions about e-cigarettes change after national news coverage of the EVALI outbreak?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About