Erin L Sutfin1, Allison J Lazard2,3, Eric K Soule4, Caroline M Kimes1, Jessica King5, Desmond Jenson6, Jennifer Cornacchione Ross1. 1. Department of Social Sciences and Health Policy, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA. 2. Hussman School of Journalism and Media, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. 3. Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. 4. Department of Health Education and Promotion, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC, USA. 5. Department of Health and Kinesiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. 6. Mitchell Hamline School of Law, Public Health Law Center, Saint Paul, MN, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Waterpipe tobacco (WT) smoking is associated with misperceptions of harm, especially among users. WT packaging contains imagery, flavor descriptors, and text claims that may contribute to misperceptions. The study goal was to characterize visual and text elements of WT packaging. AIMS AND METHODS: Using data from the U.S. Population Assessment on Tobacco and Health Study Wave 2 (October 2014-October 2015), we identified the 10 most popular WT brands. For each brand, we identified available flavors, including flavor collections with unique packaging elements. We randomly selected 10 flavors per brand for purchase (March-April 2018). We conducted descriptive content analysis to code all textual and visual design elements of each package. RESULTS: Over half (54%) of WT packages had modified risk tobacco product (MRTP) claims prohibited by federal law, including substance-free MRTP claims (43%) and the descriptor "natural" (11%). No MRTP reduced exposure or reduced risk claims were found. Over a quarter (26%) of packaging including one or more of terms that may imply reduced harm including "fresh," "premium," "quality," and "pure." All packages included a text-only warning, yet none appeared on the primary display panel. Almost all packaging (99%) included imagery, with 72% including flavor imagery. The majority of packages (72%) included a smoking cue. The most popular marketing appeals were "well-made" (57%), "enjoyable" (55%), and "patriotic" (47%). CONCLUSIONS: Prohibited MRTP claims, other descriptors, and flavor imagery are common on WT packaging, despite federal law. Future research is needed to evaluate if this marketing contributes to misperceptions of reduced harm. IMPLICATIONS: Tobacco packaging is used to convey health-related messages, both explicitly and implicitly; however, information about WT packaging is virtually nonexistent. We conducted a content analysis of WT packaging from the 10 most popular US brands. Over half (54%) of packages had prohibited MRTP claims and over a quarter (26%) included one or more descriptors that may be perceived as implying reduced harm. Use of imagery, including smoking cues, was common. The widespread use of prohibited MRTP claims, other descriptors, and imagery on WT packaging may contribute to misperceptions of reduced harm.
INTRODUCTION: Waterpipe tobacco (WT) smoking is associated with misperceptions of harm, especially among users. WT packaging contains imagery, flavor descriptors, and text claims that may contribute to misperceptions. The study goal was to characterize visual and text elements of WT packaging. AIMS AND METHODS: Using data from the U.S. Population Assessment on Tobacco and Health Study Wave 2 (October 2014-October 2015), we identified the 10 most popular WT brands. For each brand, we identified available flavors, including flavor collections with unique packaging elements. We randomly selected 10 flavors per brand for purchase (March-April 2018). We conducted descriptive content analysis to code all textual and visual design elements of each package. RESULTS: Over half (54%) of WT packages had modified risk tobacco product (MRTP) claims prohibited by federal law, including substance-free MRTP claims (43%) and the descriptor "natural" (11%). No MRTP reduced exposure or reduced risk claims were found. Over a quarter (26%) of packaging including one or more of terms that may imply reduced harm including "fresh," "premium," "quality," and "pure." All packages included a text-only warning, yet none appeared on the primary display panel. Almost all packaging (99%) included imagery, with 72% including flavor imagery. The majority of packages (72%) included a smoking cue. The most popular marketing appeals were "well-made" (57%), "enjoyable" (55%), and "patriotic" (47%). CONCLUSIONS: Prohibited MRTP claims, other descriptors, and flavor imagery are common on WT packaging, despite federal law. Future research is needed to evaluate if this marketing contributes to misperceptions of reduced harm. IMPLICATIONS: Tobacco packaging is used to convey health-related messages, both explicitly and implicitly; however, information about WT packaging is virtually nonexistent. We conducted a content analysis of WT packaging from the 10 most popular US brands. Over half (54%) of packages had prohibited MRTP claims and over a quarter (26%) included one or more descriptors that may be perceived as implying reduced harm. Use of imagery, including smoking cues, was common. The widespread use of prohibited MRTP claims, other descriptors, and imagery on WT packaging may contribute to misperceptions of reduced harm.
Authors: Hanno C Erythropel; Deyri S Garcia Torres; Jackson G Woodrow; Tamara M de Winter; Mark M Falinski; Paul T Anastas; Stephanie S O'Malley; Suchitra Krishnan-Sarin; Julie B Zimmerman Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2021-02-16 Impact factor: 4.244