Dataset Information

Behavioral economic substitutability of e-cigarettes, tobacco cigarettes, and nicotine gum.

ABSTRACT: The public health impact of e-cigarettes may depend on their substitutability for tobacco cigarettes. Dual users of e-cigarettes and tobacco cigarettes completed purchasing tasks in which they specified daily use levels under hypothetical conditions that varied the availability and price of e-cigarettes, tobacco cigarettes, and nicotine gum (for those with nicotine gum experience). When either e-cigarettes or tobacco cigarettes were the only available commodity, as price per puff increased, purchasing decreased, revealing similar reinforcement profiles. When available concurrently, as the price of tobacco puffs increased, purchasing of tobacco puffs decreased while purchasing of fixed-price e-cigarette puffs increased. Among those with nicotine gum experience, when the price of tobacco puffs was closest to the actual market value of tobacco puffs, e-cigarette availability decreased median tobacco puff purchases by 44% compared to when tobacco was available alone. In contrast, nicotine gum availability caused no decrease in tobacco puff purchases. E-cigarettes may serve as a behavioral economic substitute for tobacco cigarettes, and may be a superior substitute compared to nicotine gum in their ability to decrease tobacco use. Although important questions remain regarding the health impacts of e-cigarettes, these data are consistent with the possibility that e-cigarettes may serve as smoking cessation/reduction aids.

SUBMITTER: Johnson MW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6668913 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Behavioral economic substitutability of e-cigarettes, tobacco cigarettes, and nicotine gum.

Johnson Matthew W MW Johnson Patrick S PS Rass Olga O Pacek Lauren R LR

Journal of psychopharmacology (Oxford, England) 20170614 7

The public health impact of e-cigarettes may depend on their substitutability for tobacco cigarettes. Dual users of e-cigarettes and tobacco cigarettes completed purchasing tasks in which they specified daily use levels under hypothetical conditions that varied the availability and price of e-cigarettes, tobacco cigarettes, and nicotine gum (for those with nicotine gum experience). When either e-cigarettes or tobacco cigarettes were the only available commodity, as price per puff increased, purc ...[more]

PMID: 28612651

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionReduced-risk nicotine products are more likely to replace smoking if they match cigarettes in nicotine delivery and user satisfaction.Aims and methodsWe examined the nicotine delivery profile and user ratings of IQOS heated tobacco system and compared it with own brand cigarettes (OBC), Juul, and refillable e-cigarettes (EC).Participants (N = 22) who were daily vapers smoking <1 cigarette per day on average, attended after overnight abstinence from smoking and vaping, to test at separate sessions OBC, IQOS, and Juul. Eight participants also tested two refillable EC using e-liquid with 20 mg/mL nicotine. At each session, a baseline blood sample was taken before participants used the product ad libitum for 5 minutes. Further samples were taken at 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 30 minutes. Maximum nicotine concentration (Cmax), time to Cmax (Tmax), and nicotine delivered over 30 minutes (AUC0->30) were calculated. Participants rated their urge to smoke and product characteristics.ResultsIQOS delivered less nicotine than OBC (AUC0->30: z = -2.73, p = .006), and than Juul (AUC0->30: z = -3.08, p = .002; Cmax: z = -2.65, p = .008), and received less favorable ratings than Juul (effect on urges to smoke: z = -3.23, p = .001; speed of urge relief: z = -2.75, p = .006; recommendation to friends: z = -2.45, p = .014). Compared with refillable EC, IQOS delivered nicotine faster (Tmax: z = -2.37, p = .018), but received less favorable overall ratings (recommended to friends: z = -2.32, p = .021).ConclusionsIQOS' pharmacokinetic profile suggests that it may be less effective than Juul for smoking cessation, but at least as effective as refillable EC; although participants, who were experienced vapers rather than IQOS users, preferred refillable EC.ImplicationsBecause IQOS provided less efficient nicotine delivery than cigarettes and Juul in this sample, and also had a weaker effect on urges to smoke than Juul, it could be less helpful than Juul in assisting such dual users, and possibly smokers generally, to switch to an alternative product. IQOS, however, provided nicotine faster than refillable EC products, although participants preferred EC.

Project description:IntroductionE-cigarettes are increasingly being marketed as containing tobacco-free nicotine (TFN). There is no data examining use of TFN e-cigarettes by young adults and how use may differ from non-TFN e-cigarettes. The current study aims to characterize young adult TFN e-cigarette use and examine differences between those who report using TFN and non-TFN e-cigarettes.MethodU.S. young adults (18-25) with lifetime e-cigarette use (n = 927) were recruited via online panels in Fall 2021 and answered questions about TFN and non-TFN e-cigarettes. Participants were categorized by lifetime TFN e-cigarette use status (yes vs. no; 34% yes). Bivariate comparisons examined differences in e-cigarette characteristics (device type, flavors, nicotine concentration) between the TFN and non-TFN groups. Binary logistic regression models examined associations between lifetime frequency of vaping (<100 vs. ≥100 times), and other tobacco product, cannabis, and/or alcohol use and lifetime TFN e-cigarette use (yes vs. no). Adjusted models include age, race/ethnicity, vaping onset age, and sex.ResultsIn multivariable adjusted models, lifetime TFN e-cigarette use was associated with younger age, greater lifetime vaping, and nicotine pouch use. Young adults who used TFN e-cigarettes were more likely to report fruit, mint, menthol, and beverage flavors and know their e-liquid nicotine concentration compared with those who used non-TFN e-cigarettes.ConclusionAmong young adults who have used e-cigarettes, more frequent e-cigarette use and use of nicotine pouches, which can also contain TFN, were associated with TFN e-cigarette use. Understanding behaviors and characteristics of those using TFN e-cigarettes is critical to regulation of TFN containing products.ImplicationsThis study characterizes young adults who report experience with tobacco free nicotine (TFN) e-cigarettes and compares them to those who have not used TFN e-cigarettes. Young adults with more frequent e-cigarette use and use of nicotine pouches are more likely to report TFN e-cigarette use.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:The aerosol composition of electronic cigarettes (ECs) suggests that exposure to toxicants during use is greatly reduced compared to exposure from combustible cigarettes (CCs). METHODS:This randomized, parallel-group, clinical study enrolled smokers to switch to Vuse Solo (VS) Digital Vapor Cigarettes (Original or Menthol) or Nicorette 4 mg nicotine gum (NG) in a controlled setting. Subjects who smoked CCs ad libitum for 2 days during a baseline period were then randomized to ad libitum use of either VS or NG for 5 days. Biomarkers of 23 toxicants were measured in 24-hour urine samples and blood collected at baseline and following product switch. RESULTS:A total of 153 subjects completed the study. Total nicotine equivalents decreased in all groups, but higher levels were observed in the VS groups compared to the NG groups, with decreases of 38% and 60%-67%, respectively. All other biomarkers were significantly decreased in subjects switched to VS, and the magnitude of biomarker decreases was similar to subjects switched to NG. Decreases ranged from 30% to greater than 85% for constituents such as benzene and acrylonitrile. CONCLUSIONS:These results indicate that exposure to toxicants when using VS is significantly reduced compared to CC smoking, and these reductions are similar to those observed with use of NG. Although statistically significantly decreased, nicotine exposure is maintained closer to CC smoking with VS use compared to NG use. This research suggests that use of VS exposes consumers to fewer and lower levels of smoke toxicants than CCs while still providing nicotine to the consumer. IMPLICATIONS:This is the first study to report changes in nicotine delivery and biomarkers of tobacco exposure following a short-term product switch from CCs to either an EC or NG in a controlled environment. The study shows that nicotine exposure decreased in both groups but was maintained closer to CC smoking with the EC groups. Biomarkers of tobacco combustion decreased to similar levels in both EC and gum groups.

Project description:Introduction:The majority of cigarettes sold in the United States and abroad feature filter ventilation holes designed to dilute mainstream smoke. Although initially intended to produce a safer cigarette, data instead suggest that filter ventilation increases total harm from smoking. In the present study, we examined the effects of blocking ventilation holes on behavioral economic demand for cigarettes (i.e., consumption as a function of price). Methods:In a within-subjects design, regular smokers (N = 15) of ventilated cigarettes sampled vent-blocked cigarettes for 3 days. Subsequently, they completed three sessions in which they used an experimental income to purchase vent-blocked and/or control cigarettes across a range of prices. Participants also completed the Drug Effects/Liking Scale. Results:In sessions in which only one cigarette type was available, demand measures were undifferentiated between cigarette types. However, in sessions in which both cigarettes were available at equivalent prices, significantly greater preference for ventilated control cigarettes emerged in demand measures. Regardless of session type, participants also rated vent-blocked cigarettes more poorly in the Drug Effects/Liking Scale (more bad effects, fewer good effects, and less liking, desire, and less likely to use again). Conclusions:Removing filter ventilation reduced cigarette abuse liability, as measured by behavioral economic demand and the Drug Effects/Liking Scale. However, reduced demand was only apparent when both cigarette types were concurrently available. This selective effect suggests that regulatory action banning filter ventilation would only reduce cigarette consumption when effective substitutes for vent-blocked cigarettes are available. Implications:This preliminary study indicates that regulatory action designed to ban or restrict cigarette filter ventilation may decrease cigarette abuse liability as measured by both behavioral economic demand and self-report measures. However, effects of removing filter ventilation on demand measures appear to depend on concurrent availability of alternative, preferred cigarette types.

Dataset Information

Behavioral economic substitutability of e-cigarettes, tobacco cigarettes, and nicotine gum.

Publications

Behavioral economic substitutability of e-cigarettes, tobacco cigarettes, and nicotine gum.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets