Dataset Information

How and Why California Young Adults Are Using Different Brands of Pod-Type Electronic Cigarettes in 2019: Implications for Researchers and Regulators.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

The aim of the study was to describe young adult use and perceptions of different brands of pod-based electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) and compare with earlier types of non-pod-based e-cigarettes (e.g., mods and tanks).

Methods

Data were collected from January to March 2019 and derive from the final wave of a cohort study recruited in 2013-2014 using a convenience sample from 10 large California high schools with racially/ethnically and socioeconomically diverse populations. A total of 445 participants completed an online survey (mean age = 20.1 years [SD = 1.66], 64.8% female [n = 278], 38.8% white [n = 161], 23.9% each for Asian and "more than one race" [n = 99], 13.5% other [n = 56], and 36.9% Hispanic [n = 160]). The main outcomes were description of and reasons to use pods, perceived nicotine content, and use patterns.

Results

Although <25% of participants reported smoking cigarettes and using non-pod-based e-cigarettes, >25% reported ever use of JUUL. Similarly, <33% of cigarette smokers and non-pod-based e-cigarette users reported use in the past 30 days, and >50% of JUUL ever users did. The most agreed upon reason (58%) for using pods was because they are "easy to hide." About half of pod users "do not know" if they mix brands of e-juice and pods, the nicotine concentration in their e-juice cartridges, nor time to finish a cartridge. Of the 50% of participants who shared their pod, 23 (15%) did "sometimes," 20 (13%) "always," and 16 (11% each) "about half the time" or "often." There was no consensus about how to refer to different brands of pods.

Conclusions

Our findings indicate young adults harbor confusion about pod-based e-cigarettes, including nicotine content, usage patterns, and labeling, and that pod use is largely because of the ease with which they can "stealth" vape. The findings suggest needed regulation and education about these products.

SUBMITTER: McKelvey K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7311231 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceElectronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) are the most commonly used tobacco product among adolescents and young adults, and the new pod-based e-cigarette devices may put adolescents and young adults at increased risk for polytobacco use and nicotine dependence.ObjectiveTo build an evidence base for perceptions of risk from and use of pod-based e-cigarettes among adolescents and young adults.Design, setting, and participantsIn a survey study, a cross-sectional analysis was performed of data collected from April 6 to June 20, 2018, from 445 California adolescents and young adults as part of an ongoing prospective cohort study designed to measure the use and perceptions of tobacco products.ExposuresUse of pod-based e-cigarettes, e-cigarettes, and cigarettes.Main outcomes and measuresEver use, past 7-day use, and past 30-day use and co-use of pod-based e-cigarettes, e-cigarettes, and cigarettes; use of flavors and nicotine in pod-based e-cigarettes and e-cigarettes; and associated perceptions of risks, benefits, and nicotine dependence.ResultsAmong 445 adolescents and young adults (280 females, 140 males, 6 transgender individuals, and 19 missing data; mean [SD] age, 19.3 [1.7] years) who completed wave 6 of the ongoing prospective cohort study, ever use information was provided by 437 respondents, of which 68 (15.6%) reported use of pod-based e-cigarettes, 133 (30.4%) reported use of e-cigarettes, and 106 (24.3%) reported use of cigarettes. The mean (SD) number of days that pod-based e-cigarettes were used in the past 7 days was 1.5 (2.4) and in the past 30 days was 6.7 (10.0). The mean (SD) number of days that other e-cigarettes were used in the past 7 days was 0.8 (1.8) and in the past 30 days was 3.2 (7.4). The mean (SD) number of days that cigarettes were used in the past 7 days was 0.7 (1.8) and in the past 30 days was 3.0 (7.6). Among ever users of pod-based e-cigarettes, 18 (26.5%) reported their first e-liquid was flavored menthol or mint and 19 (27.9%) reported fruit (vs 13 [9.8%] and 50 [37.6%] for other e-cigarettes). The mean perceived chance of experiencing social risks and short-term and long-term health risks from the use of either pod-based e-cigarettes or other e-cigarettes was 40% and did not differ statistically by e-cigarette type. Among 34 adolescents and young adults reporting any loss of autonomy from nicotine, there was no difference in mean (SD) Hooked On Nicotine Checklist scores between those using pod-based e-cigarettes (2.59 [3.14]) and other e-cigarettes (2.32 [2.55]).Conclusions and relevanceUse by adolescents and young adults of newer types of e-cigarettes such as pod-based systems is increasing rapidly, and adolescents and young adults report corresponding misperceptions and lack of knowledge about these products. Rapid innovation by e-cigarette manufacturers suggests that public health and prevention efforts appear to be needed to include messages targeting components common to all current and emerging e-cigarette products to increase knowledge and decrease misperceptions, with the goal to try to ultimately reduce e-cigarette use among adolescents and young adults.

Project description:Our purpose was to test the hypothesis that ultrasonic cigarettes (u-cigarettes), which operate at relatively low temperatures, produce aerosols that are less harmful than heated-coil pod-style electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes). The major chemicals in SURGE u-cigarette fluids and aerosols were quantified, their cytotoxicity and cellular effects were assessed, and a Margin of Exposure risk assessment was performed on chemicals in SURGE fluids. Four SURGE u-cigarette flavor variants ("Blueberry Ice," "Watermelon Ice," "Green Mint," and "Polar Mint") were evaluated. Flavor chemicals were quantified in fluids and aerosols using gas chromatography/mass spectrometry. Cytotoxicity and cell dynamics were assessed using the MTT assay, live-cell imaging, and fluorescence microscopy. WS-23 (a coolant) and total flavor chemical concentrations in SURGE were similar to e-cigarettes, while SURGE nicotine concentrations (13-19 mg/mL) were lower than many fourth generation e-cigarettes. Transfer efficiencies of dominant chemicals to aerosols in SURGE ranged from 44-100%. SURGE fluids and aerosols had four dominant flavor chemicals (>1 mg/mL). Toxic aldehydes were usually higher in SURGE aerosols than in SURGE fluids. SURGE fluids and aerosols had aldehyde concentrations significantly higher than pod-style e-cigarettes. Chemical constituents, solvent ratios, and aldehydes varied among SURGE flavor variants. SURGE fluids and aerosols inhibited cell growth and mitochondrial reductases, produced attenuated and round cells, and depolymerized actin filaments, effects that depended on pod flavor, chemical constituents, and concentration. The MOEs for nicotine, WS-23, and propylene glycol were <100 based on consumption of 1-2 SURGE u-cigarettes/day. Replacing the heating coil with a sonicator did not eliminate chemicals, including aldehydes, in aerosols or diminish toxicity in comparisons between SURGE and other e-cigarette pod products. The high concentrations of nicotine, WS-23, flavor chemicals, and aldehydes and the cytotoxicity of SURGE aerosols do not support the hypothesis that aerosols from u-cigarettes are less harmful than those from e-cigarettes.

Project description:Tobacco cigarette (TC) smoking has never been lower in the United States, but electronic cigarette (EC) vaping has reached epidemic proportions among our youth. Endothelial dysfunction, as measured by flow-mediated vasodilation (FMD) is a predictor of future atherosclerosis and adverse cardiovascular events and is impaired in young TC smokers, but whether FMD is also reduced in young EC vapers is uncertain. The aim of this study in otherwise healthy young people was to compare the effects of acute and chronic tobacco cigarette (TC) smoking and electronic cigarette (EC) vaping on FMD. FMD was compared in 47 nonsmokers (NS), 49 chronic EC vapers, and 40 chronic TC smokers at baseline and then after EC vapers (n = 31) and nonsmokers (n = 47) acutely used an EC with nicotine (ECN), EC without nicotine (EC0), and nicotine inhaler (NI) at ~4-wk intervals and after TC smokers (n = 33) acutely smoked a TC, compared with sham control. Mean age (NS, 26.3 ± 5.2 vs. EC, 27.4 ± 5.45 vs. TC, 27.1 ± 5.51 yr, P = 0.53) was similar among the groups, but there were more female nonsmokers. Baseline FMD was not different among the groups (NS, 7.7 ± 4.5 vs. EC:6.6 ± 3.6 vs. TC, 7.9 ± 3.7%∆, P = 0.35), even when compared by group and sex. Acute TC smoking versus control impaired FMD (FMD pre-/postsmoking, -2.52 ± 0.92 vs. 0.65 ± 0.93%∆, P = 0.02). Although the increase in plasma nicotine was similar after EC vapers used the ECN versus TC smokers smoked the TC (5.75 ± 0.74 vs. 5.88 ± 0.69 ng/mL, P = 0.47), acute EC vaping did not impair FMD. In otherwise healthy young people who regularly smoke TCs or ECs, impaired FMD compared with that in nonsmokers was not present at baseline. However, FMD was significantly impaired after smoking one TC, but not after vaping an equivalent "dose" (estimated by change in plasma nicotine) of an EC, consistent with the notion that non-nicotine constituents in TC smoke mediate the impairment. Although it is reassuring that acute EC vaping did not acutely impair FMD, it would be dangerous and premature to conclude that ECs do not lead to atherosclerosis.NEW & NOTEWORTHY In our study of otherwise healthy young people, baseline flow-mediated dilation (FMD), a predictor of atherosclerosis and increased cardiovascular risk, was not different among tobacco cigarette (TC) smokers or electronic cigarette (EC) vapers who had refrained from smoking, compared with nonsmokers. However, acutely smoking one TC impaired FMD in smokers, whereas vaping a similar EC "dose" (as estimated by change in plasma nicotine levels) did not. Finally, although it is reassuring that acute EC vaping did not acutely impair FMD, it would be premature and dangerous to conclude that ECs do not lead to atherosclerosis or increase cardiovascular risk.