Responses to Real-World and Hypothetical Menthol Flavor Bans Among US Young Adults Who Smoke Menthol Cigarettes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Menthol cigarette bans have been implemented in some US states and localities, and a federal ban is being proposed by the FDA. This study asks how young adults who use menthol cigarettes respond to changes in menthol cigarette availability. AIMS AND METHODS: An online survey of young adults ages 18-34 who reported smoking menthol cigarettes on ≥7 of 30 days around Thanksgiving 2019 (n = 734), oversampling Massachusetts-the first state with a menthol ban. Participants reported their tobacco use behavior following real-world menthol cigarette bans or predicted their behavior under a hypothetical federal ban. RESULTS: Most respondents who exclusively smoked versus dual used with e-cigarettes continued smoking/using combustible tobacco following real-world bans (95.3% vs. 86.9%), accessing menthol cigarettes from other jurisdictions. Fewer who smoked exclusively responded by using e-cigarettes compared to those who dual used (3.9% vs. 43.7%). Quitting all tobacco use (ie, no smoking, vaping, or any tobacco use) was uncommon for both groups (3.6% vs. 9.0%). Under a hypothetical ban, majorities of those who exclusively smoke and who dual use predicted they would continue smoking (72.2% vs. 71.8%); fewer who smoke exclusively would use e-cigarettes compared to those who dual use (14.7% vs. 41.4%). Those who smoke exclusively were more likely to report quitting all tobacco compared to those who dual use (29.6% vs. 12.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Under real-world and hypothetical menthol cigarette bans, most respondents continued smoking. However, more young adults continued smoking following real-world bans, reflecting the limitations of local/state restrictions when menthol cigarettes are available in other jurisdictions. IMPLICATIONS: This survey asked young adults who use menthol cigarettes how they responded to real-world changes in the availability of menthol cigarettes; 89% reported continuing to smoke. Those who smoked exclusively were far less likely to respond by switching to e-cigarettes compared to people who dual used both products. Under a hypothetical federal menthol cigarette ban, 72% of young adults predicted that they would continue smoking. Quitting all tobacco was less common in the real-world scenario compared to the hypothetical ban. Access to menthol cigarettes in other jurisdictions and flavored cigars likely dampen the public health benefit of menthol cigarette bans.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".