Public Perceptions of the Food and Drug Administration's Regulatory Authority Over Synthetic Nicotine on Twitter: Observational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Omnibus Budget Bill, known as H. R. 2471, passed through Congress on March 10, 2022, and was eventually signed by President Biden on March 15, 2022. This bill amended the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act granting the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulatory authority over synthetic nicotine. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to examine the public perceptions of the Omnibus Bill that regulates synthetic nicotine products as tobacco products on Twitter (rebranded as X). METHODS: Through the X streaming application programming interface, we collected and identified 964 tweets related to the Omnibus Bill on synthetic nicotine between March 8, 2022, and April 13, 2022. The longitudinal trend was used to examine the discussions related to the bill over time. An inductive method was used for the content analysis of related tweets. By hand-coding 200 randomly selected tweets by 2 human coders respectively with high interrater reliability, the codebook was developed for relevance, major topics, and attitude to the bill, which was used to single-code the rest of the tweets. RESULTS: Between March 8, 2022, and April 13, 2022, we identified 964 tweets related to the Omnibus Bill regulating synthetic nicotine. Our longitudinal trend analysis showed a spike in the number of tweets related to the bill during the immediate period following the bill's introduction, with roughly half of the tweets identified being posted between March 8 and 11, 2022. A majority of the tweets (497/964, 51.56%) had a negative sentiment toward the bill, while a much smaller percentage of tweets (164/964, 17.01%) had a positive sentiment toward the bill. Around 31.43% (303/964) of all tweets were categorized as objective news or questions about the bill. The most popular topic for opposing the bill was users believing that this bill would lead users back to smoking (145/497, 29.18%), followed by negative implications for small vape businesses (122/497, 24.55%) and government or FDA mistrust (94/497, 18.91%). The most popular topic for supporting the bill was that this bill would take a dangerous tobacco product targeted at teens off the market (94/164, 57.32%). CONCLUSIONS: We observed a more negative sentiment toward the bill on X, largely due to users believing it would lead users back to smoking and negatively impact small vape businesses. This study provides insight into public perceptions and discussions of this bill on X and adds valuable information for future regulations on alternative nicotine products.
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 | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".