Randomized trial demonstrates candy-themed packaging enhances appeal and perceived sweetness of free-base nicotine e-cigarettes in adults, suggesting marketing bans could reduce sustained use.
SIGNIFICANCE: E-cigarettes with candy-themed marketing are implicated in decisions to first try e-cigarettes but have unknown effects on the experience of vaping. We compared adults' perceived appeal and sensory attributes after self-administering flavoured e-cigarettes in experimentally manipulated packaging with candy-themed versus standard marketing. We also assessed effect modification by salt vs free-base nicotine formulation. METHODS: Adults who currently used e-cigarettes and/or cigarettes (N=72; age M(SD)=31.4 (12.8) years) completed single-puff self-administrations from eight individually-packaged pods containing fruit or dessert-flavoured e-liquid via staff-guided video sessions. For each e-liquid flavour, we custom-manufactured packaging with standard (eg, 'mango'; mango fruit image) and candy (eg, 'mango gummy bear'; gummy bear image) marketing versions, which we varied within-subject (four pods candy; four pods standard). After participants opened the package and vaped the pod inside, they rated its sensory attributes and appeal (0-100 scale). Participants were randomised between subjects to salt or free-base ~2.3% nicotine in all pods. RESULTS: =5.7) ratings in free-base but not salt nicotine formulations. Marketing theme did not affect smoothness, harshness and bitterness ratings regardless of nicotine formulation. CONCLUSION: Candy-themed marketing may heighten the appeal and sweet sensory experience of vaping flavoured free-base nicotine e-cigarettes. While marketing restrictions are predominantly intended to prevent e-cigarette initiation, candy-themed marketing restrictions could also prevent persistent use by lowering the appeal of flavoured free-base nicotine e-cigarettes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jafarzadeh et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: