An Analysis of the FTC's Attempt to Stop the Altria-Juul Labs Deal

How to Identify e-Cigarette Brands Available in the United States During 2020-2022: Development and Usability Study

BACKGROUND

Prior studies have demonstrated that the e-cigarette market contains a large number of brands. Identifying these existing e-cigarette brands is a key element of market surveillance, which will further assist in policy making and compliance checks.

OBJECTIVE

To facilitate the surveillance of the diverse product landscape in the e-cigarette market, we constructed a semantic database of e-cigarette brands that have appeared in the US market as of 2020-2022.

METHODS

In order to build the brand database, we searched and compiled e-cigarette brands from a comprehensive list of retail channels and sources, including (1) e-liquid and disposable brands sold in web-based stores, (2) e-cigarette brands sold in brick-and-mortar stores and collected by the Nielsen Retail Scanner Data, (3) e-cigarette brands compiled by Wikipedia, (4) self-reported e-cigarette brands from the 2020 International Tobacco Control Four-Country Smoking and Vaping (ITC 4CV) US survey, and (5) e-cigarette brands on Twitter. We also estimated the top 5 e-cigarette brands by sales volume in brick-and-mortar stores, by the frequency and variety of offerings in web-based shops, and by the frequency of self-reported brands from the 2020 ITC 4CV US survey.

RESULTS

As of 2020-2022, a total of 912 e-cigarette brands have been sold by various retail channels. During 2020-2022, the top 5 brands are JUUL, vuse, njoy, blu, and logic in brick-and-mortar stores; blu, king, monster, twist, and air factory for e-liquids in web-based stores; hyde, pod mesh, suorin, vaporlax, and xtra for disposables sold in web-based stores; and smok, aspire, vaporesso, innokin, and eleaf based on self-reported survey data.

CONCLUSIONS

As the US Food and Drug Administration enforces the premarket tobacco market authorization, many e-cigarette brands may become illegal in the US market. In this context, how e-cigarette brands evolve and consolidate in different retail channels will be critical for understanding the regulatory impacts on product availability. Our semantic database of e-cigarette brands can serve as a useful tool to monitor product and marketplace development, conduct compliance checks, assess manufacturers' marketing behaviors, and identify regulatory impacts.

Do Tobacco Companies Have an Incentive to Promote "Harm Reduction" Products?: The Role of Competition

INTRODUCTION

Some cigarette companies have started to talk about replacing cigarettes with less harmful alternatives, which might include nicotine vaping products (NVPs), heated tobacco products (HTPs), and oral nicotine delivery products. We consider market competition as a primary driver of whether cigarette companies follow through on their stated intentions.

AIMS AND METHODS

We focus on the behavior of cigarette companies in the United States. We compare competition in the pre- and post-2012 time periods, analyze the impact of the growth in NVPs on smoking prevalence and cigarette company profits, and examine the potential future role of competition.

RESULTS

Since 2006, consumers have broadened their use of non-combustible nicotine delivery products (NCNDPs) to include, inter alia, NVPs, HTPs, and oral nicotine pouches. U.S. cigarette companies have acquired major stakes in each of these product categories which corresponds to a period of rapidly declining adult smoking prevalence, especially among younger adults (ages 18-24 years). The shifting dynamics of the nicotine product marketplace are also reflected in cigarette company stock prices. While cigarette companies are likely to promote HTPs and nicotine delivery products over NVPs, their incentives will be directly related to competition from independent firms, which in turn will depend on government regulation.

CONCLUSIONS

Although cigarette companies will back alternatives to combusted tobacco when threatened by competition, the prospects for their lasting conversion to NCNDPs will depend on the extent of such competition, which will be influenced by government regulation of tobacco products.

IMPLICATIONS

Regulations that limit competition from independent firms while also protecting cigarette company profits risk slowing or even reversing recent declines in smoking, especially among youth and young adults. Regulations that reduce the appeal and addictiveness of combusted tobacco products, such as higher cigarette taxes or a reduced nicotine standard, will encourage smokers to quit and/or switch to less harmful non-combusted forms of tobacco. The regulation of non-combustible nicotine delivery products and cigarettes should be proportionate to their relative risks, so that smokers have incentives to switch from combustibles to safer alternatives, and cigarette companies have incentives to promote safer products.

A Decision-Theoretic Public Health Framework for Heated Tobacco and Nicotine Vaping Products

Markets for nicotine vaping products (NVPs) and heated tobacco products (HTPs) have grown as these products became positioned as harm-reduction alternatives to combusted tobacco products. Herein, we present a public health decision-theoretic framework incorporating different patterns of HTP, NVP, and cigarette use to examine their impacts on population health. Our framework demonstrates that, for individuals who would have otherwise smoked, HTP use may provide public health benefits by enabling cessation or by discouraging smoking initiation and relapse. However, the benefits are reduced if more harmful HTP use replaces less harmful NVP use. HTP use may also negatively impact public health by encouraging smoking by otherwise non-smokers or by encouraging initiation or relapse into smoking. These patterns are directly influenced by industry behavior as well as public policy towards HTPs, NVPs, and cigarettes. While substantial research has been devoted to NVPs, much less is known about HTPs. Better information is needed to more precisely define the health risks of HTPs compared to cigarettes and NVPs, the relative appeal of HTPs to consumers, and the likelihood of later transitioning to smoking or quitting all products. While our analysis provides a framework for gaining that information, it also illustrates the complexities in distinguishing key factors.

Evolution of tobacco products: recent history and future directions

Declines in cigarette smoking prevalence in many countries and the consolidation of the tobacco industry have prompted the introduction of other forms of nicotine delivery. These include electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS), heated tobacco products (HTPs) and oral nicotine products (ONPs). Evolving over time, some of these products now deliver nicotine at levels comparable to cigarettes and may serve as effective substitutes for smokers. However, certain products, especially ENDS like JUUL, have also appealed to youth and non-smokers, prompting concerns about expanding nicotine use (and potentially nicotine addiction). The tobacco industry could shift away from primarily promoting cigarettes to promoting ENDS, HTPs and/or ONPs, though at this time it continues to heavily promote cigarettes in low and middle-income countries. Differing regulatory regimes may place upward and downward pressures on both cigarettes and these newer products in terms of population use, and may ultimately drive the extent to which cigarettes are or are not displaced by ENDS, HTPs and/or ONPs in the coming decade.

From Tobacco Cigarettes to Electronic Cigarettes: The Two Sides of a Nicotine Coin

Tobacco smoking-related diseases, including cardiovascular disease, pulmonary disease, stroke, and cancer in multiple organ sites, are the leading causes of preventable death, worldwide. Youth electronic cigarette use (vaping) is an evolving public health problem in the United States and around the world. Many of the same toxicants and carcinogens present in tobacco smoke are also found in electronic cigarette vapor, although mostly at substantially lower levels. The reduced concentrations of these chemicals in electronic cigarette vapor may imply lower health risk; however, they cannot equate to no risk. To date, the long-term health consequences of vaping are largely unknown. This “Perspective” provides a concise chronology of events leading up to an unprecedented global challenge, namely the convergence of global tobacco epidemic and youth vaping epidemic. Current state of knowledge, outstanding questions in the field, present challenges, and future directions in research are highlighted. The existing data show a continued and dynamic evolution of the converged epidemics. The goal should be to prevent youth vaping while improving smoking cessation strategies. In smokers who are unable or unwilling to quit smoking, the objective should be to provide “provably” safe or less-harmful alternatives, which should “completely” or “substantially” substitute tobacco cigarettes.

The consequential impact of JUUL on youth vaping and the landscape of tobacco products: The state of play in the COVID-19 era

JUUL is a groundbreaking electronic cigarette (e-cig) and the preeminent vaping product on the market. We present an overview of the rapid and spectacular rise of JUUL and its remarkable fall within the timespan of 2015 - 2020. We highlight JUUL's entering the market in June 2015, becoming the industry leader in mid 2017, and experiencing a litany of setbacks by late 2019 through to early 2020. We address the role played by JUUL in the ongoing epidemic of youth vaping. We also feature competing views on the public health impact of JUUL use (in particular), and e-cig vaping (in general). We further highlight the latest trends in youth vaping and sales records for JUUL and tobacco cigarettes. In view of the ongoing pandemic of COVID-19, we briefly summarize the existing evidence on the relationship between vaping and smoking and the prevalence, disease course, and clinical outcomes of COVID-19.

Public health implications of vaping in the USA: the smoking and vaping simulation model

Background

Nicotine vaping products (NVPs) are increasingly popular worldwide. They may provide public health benefits if used as a substitute for smoking, but may create public health harms if used as a gateway to smoking or to discourage smoking cessation. This paper presents the Smoking and Vaping Model (SAVM), a user-friendly model which estimates the public health implications of NVPs in the USA.

Methods

SAVM adopts a cohort approach. We derive public health implications by comparing smoking- and NVP-attributable deaths and life-years lost under a No-NVP and an NVP Scenario. The No-NVP Scenario projects current, former, and never smoking rates via smoking initiation and cessation rates, with their respective mortality rates. The NVP Scenario allows for smoking- and NVP-specific mortality rates, switching from cigarette to NVP use, separate NVP and smoking initiation rates, and separate NVP and smoking cessation rates. After validating the model against recent US survey data, we present the base model with extensive sensitivity analyses.

Results

The SAVM projects that under current patterns of US NVP use and substitution, NVP use will translate into 1.8 million premature smoking- and vaping-attributable deaths avoided and 38.9 million life-years gained between 2013 and 2060. When the NVP relative risk is set to 5%, the results are sensitive to the level of switching and smoking cessation rates and to a lesser extent smoking initiation rates. When the NVP relative risk is raised to 40%, the public health gains in terms of averted deaths and LYL are reduced by 42% in the base case, and the results become much more sensitive to variations in the base case parameters.

Discussion

Policymakers, researchers, and other public health stakeholders can apply the SAVM to estimate the potential public health impact of NVPs in their country or region using their own data sources. In developing new simulation models involving NVPs, it will be important to conduct extensive sensitivity analysis and continually update and validate with new data.

Conclusion

The SAVM indicates the potential benefits of NVP use. However, given the uncertainty surrounding model parameters, extensive sensitivity analysis becomes particularly important.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12963-021-00250-7.