Most studies have assessed use of “e-cigarettes” or “electronic cigarettes,” potentially excluding new electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS), such as e-hookahs and vape pens. Little is known about how adolescents and young adults perceive ENDS and if their perceptions vary by sub-type. We explored ENDS perceptions among these populations. Ten focus groups with 77 adolescents and young adults, ages 13–25, were conducted in spring 2014. Participants were users or susceptible nonusers of novel tobacco products. Focus group transcripts were coded for emergent themes. Participants reported positive ENDS attributes, including flavor variety; user control of nicotine content; and smoke trick facilitation. Negative attributes included different feel compared to combustible cigarettes, nicotine addiction potential, and no cue to stop use. Participants perceived less harm from ENDS compared to combustible cigarettes, perhaps due to marketing and lack of product regulation, but noted the uncertainty of ingredients in ENDS. Numerous terms were used to describe ENDS, including “e-cigarette,” “e-hookah,” “hookah pens,” “tanks,” and “vapes.” Although no clear classification system emerged, participants used product characteristics like nicotine content and chargeability to attempt classification. Perceptions differed by product used. E-hookah users were perceived as young and trendy while e-cigarette users were perceived as old and addicted to nicotine. Young adults and adolescents report distinct ENDS sub-types with varying characteristics and social perceptions of users. Although they had more positive than negative perceptions of ENDS, prevention efforts should consider highlighting negative attributes as they may discourage use and product trial among young nonusers. Our study underscores the need for a standardized measurement system for ENDS sub-types and additional research on how ENDS sub-types are perceived among adolescents and young adults. In addition, our findings highlight negative product attributes reported by participants that may be useful in prevention and regulatory efforts to offset favorable marketing messages.

E-cigarettes are relatively new products that simulate the smoking experience. This descriptive study assessed changes in e-cigarette availability and promotions among retailers in 11 college communities in North Carolina and Virginia during a 1-year period. During the spring of 2012 and 2013, observers completed assessments in 320 tobacco-selling retailers, including grocery and convenience stores, pharmacies, and tobacco shops. Assessors collected e-cigarette availability, advertising, price, and promotions. E-cigarette availability increased among retailers from 24.7% in 2012 to 59.9% in 2013. They were available in the form of disposables and reusable kits and were most frequently available in tobacco shops, convenience stores, and pharmacies. The average price for disposables was $9.70 (SD = 1.07) in 2012 and $9.61 (SD = 2.10) in 2013; the average price for kits was $39.58 (SD = 15.79) in 2012 and $32.59 (SD = 18.65) in 2013. The presence of interior advertising increased from 12.7% to 50.6% (p < .0001), and the presence of exterior advertising increased from 7.6% to 22.8% (p = .0002). Convenience stores with gas (16.4%–70.4%; p < .0001) and without gas (6.0%–48.4%; p < .0001) had significant increases in the presence of interior advertising. Convenience stores with gas also had a significant increase in the presence of exterior advertising (8.2%–33.3%; p < .0001). Only 3% of retailers offered price promotions. Availability of e-cigarettes, including rechargeable kits and disposables, more than doubled during the study. The presence of interior and exterior advertising also significantly increased. Results underscore the need for further surveillance to understand how these environmental characteristics impact individual exposure and use of e-cigarettes.

Background: Cannabidiol (CBD) products are increasingly available to consumers in the United States and are subject to regulation by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). CBD products cannot be marketed as unapproved new drugs with claims of therapeutic benefit. In addition, because CBD is the active ingredient in a FDA-approved CBD product, Epidiolex, CBD cannot be marketed as, or in, food products or dietary supplements. The FDA has issued Warning Letters to promote voluntary regulatory compliance. These letters provide insights as to the types of violations for CBD products detected in the U.S. market. Objective: The goal of this retrospective study was to content analyze Warning Letters issued by the FDA to identify illicit marketing of CBD products. Design: Warning Letters issued by the FDA between 2015 and 2019 were content analyzed using a deductive approach. We extracted year of issuance, issuing office, and claim types that are currently prohibited by the FDA, including (i) unapproved new drug, (ii) misbranded drug, (iii) false and/or misleading, (iv) FDA-approved/endorsed, (v) dietary supplement, and (vi) adulterated food product. In addition, we documented the disease or conditions the product claimed to affect, pharmacological effects, and location of violation. Results: Of the 39 Warning Letters issued, 97% were for violations made on company websites and 56% were for social media accounts. Almost all letters (97%) cited violations of marketing CBD as an unapproved new drug. These illicit therapeutic claims were made for >125 unique health problems, including cancer (87.2%), diabetes (71.8%), inflammation (66.7%), pain (66.7%), and arthritis (66.7%). The majority of letters (79.5%) also cited illicit marketing of CBD as a dietary supplement or food product. CBD was promoted as having 16 unique pharmacological effects, including anti-inflammatory (53.8%), anticancer (43.6%), and antipsychotic (30.8%). Conclusions: CBD products have been unlawfully advertised online as unauthorized drugs with health claims that promote therapeutic benefits and as dietary supplements. Efforts are needed to regulate and monitor illicit advertising so consumers are not misled about the risks and benefits of CBD use.

Little is known about differences between adolescents’ and adults’ exposure to e-cigarette advertising in various media channels, such as retail establishments, print, television, radio, and digital marketing. We examined the exposure to e-cigarette advertising in these channels amongst adolescents (13–17), young adults (18–25), and older adults (26+). Adolescents (N = 1124), young adults (N = 809), and adults (N = 4186) were recruited through two nationally representative phone surveys from 2014–2015. Lifetime e-cigarette advertising exposure was prevalent (84.5%). Overall, older adult males and older adult cigarette smokers reported the highest exposure to e-cigarette advertising (p < 0.001). Television was the largest source of exposure for all age groups. Adolescents and young adults had higher odds than older adults of exposure through television and digital marketing. However, adolescents had lower odds than young adults and older adults of exposure through retailers and print media. Although e-cigarette advertising appears to be reaching the intended audience of adult smokers, vulnerable populations are being exposed at high rates via television and digital marketing. Regulations aimed at curbing exposure through these media channels are needed, as are counter advertising and prevention campaigns.