We examined flavored non-cigarette tobacco availability in brick-and-mortar vape shops in San Francisco (SF) and Alameda Counties, California (USA), comparing cities organized by flavored tobacco sales restriction policy. A total of 22 brick-and-mortar vape shops were identified and audited in October-November 2019; shops were located in SF City-County and nine cities in Alameda County. Fisher Exact Tests were used to assess differences in the availability of products between vape shops in cities with versus without comprehensive or partial flavored tobacco sales restrictions enacted before November 21, 2019 (n = 15 shops in six cities with policies vs n = 7 shops in four cities without policies). In the six cities with any flavored sales restrictions, fewer vape shops sold menthol/mint flavored JUUL pods (27% vs 71%, p = 0.074), candy/fruit (53% vs 100%, p = 0.051) and menthol/mint (53% vs 100%, p = 0.051) nicotine e-cigarette liquids compared to cities without flavored tobacco sales restrictions, but results were borderline significant. Tobacco-flavored JUUL pods (47% vs 71%, p = 0.381), tobacco-flavored nicotine e-cigarette liquids (67% vs 100%, p = 0.135), and flavored e-cigarette liquids without nicotine (candy/fruit: 87% vs 71%, p = 0.565 and menthol/mint: 87% vs 57%, p = 0.274) were not included in the policies, and availability was not significantly different between cities with or without policies. Enactment of local policies was associated with lower flavored e-cigarette tobacco product availability but not tobacco-flavored or non-nicotine product availability; federal policies restricting sales of flavored tobacco products may reduce access to flavored e-cigarette products in vape shops.

Purpose

Perceived harm is associated with substance use. Changes in product and policy landscapes may impact perceived harms of tobacco and cannabis. This study aimed to examine changes in young adults' perceived harms of tobacco and cannabis and their associations with use behavior during a period including both before and after legalization of cannabis.

Methods

We conducted a panel survey of California Bay Area young adults (mean age = 23.5 years old, 64.4% female) in 2014 and 2019-2020. Participants (N = 306) reported past 30-day use and perceived harms of tobacco and cannabis at both waves. Perceived harms to health of cannabis and tobacco (cigarettes, e-cigarettes, hookah, smokeless tobacco, and secondhand tobacco smoke) were measured from 1-"Not at all harmful" to 7-"Extremely harmful." Mixed-effects logistic regressions examined associations between perceived harms and use of tobacco and cannabis, controlling for demographics.

Results

Participants perceived lower harm for cannabis than for tobacco products. Perceived harms of e-cigarettes, hookah, and smokeless tobacco significantly increased over time; while perceived harms of cigarettes, secondhand tobacco smoke, and cannabis did not change. Increased perceived harm of e-cigarettes was associated with lower odds of any tobacco use (OR = 0.72, 95%CI = 0.56, 0.92), and increased perceived harm of cannabis was associated with lower odds of any cannabis use (OR = 0.51, 95%CI = 0.42, 0.62).

Conclusions

Findings suggest that perceived harms of e-cigarettes and cannabis play important roles in driving young adult use behaviors. Risk communication efforts that increase perceptions of health harms related to e-cigarettes and cannabis may decrease use of tobacco and cannabis among young people.

California Proposition 56 increased the state tobacco tax by $2 per cigarette pack effective April 1, 2017. Between 2015-2020 San Francisco (SF) and some cities in Alameda County enacted local flavored tobacco sales restrictions. SF also increased its Cigarette Litter Abatement Fee, from $0.20/pack in 2015 to $1.00 in 2020. Compare the change in tobacco prices before (2015) and after (2019/20) the implementation of a $2 increase in tobacco excise tax and local flavored tobacco policies in SF and Alameda Counties. Descriptive study of the pre-to-post policy analysis design. We drew a proportional random sample of retailers (N=463) in SF and Alameda Counties, by city. Using multivariable, single- and multiple-level linear regressions, we compared inflation-adjusted average tobacco prices in 2015 vs. 2019/20 by county and by flavor policy, accounting for socio-demographics. Change in inflation-adjusted average tobacco prices in 2015 vs. 2019/20 by county and flavor policy, accounting for socio-demographics. Between 2015-2019/20, the increase in cigarette prices was higher than the $2 tax increase, and higher in SF than Alameda County (+$4.6 vs +$2.5). SF retailers stopped selling Newport menthol cigarettes and Blu brand menthol e-cigarettes in 2019/20. Adjusted average cigarette prices increased significantly more in SF and Alameda County cities with comprehensive or partial flavor policies versus cities without flavor policies (by $3.23 and $2.11). Local flavor policies affected menthol product availability and may have had positive spillover effects and indirectly increased pack prices.