To determine test market awareness and promotional effects of Camel dissolvable tobacco.
Design.
Cross-sectional survey.
Setting.
Indiana test market.
Subjects.
Stratified sample of Indiana adults (N = 472).
Measures.
Data were poststratified and weighted to account for the sampling and demographics.
Analysis.
Descriptive statistics and multivariate analysis.
Results.
The study results indicate that 31.2% of participants were aware of Camel Dissolvables, 4.5% had tried them, and 8.3% were likely to try them. Tobacco use was a significant predictor of all outcomes; dual (cigarettes and smokeless tobacco) users were more likely to be familiar with, try, and be interested in trying Camel Dissolvables than single tobacco users and nonusers (p < .05). Male gender was a significant predictor only for likelihood of trial (p < .05). Education was a significant predictor only of actual trial (p < .05). Familiarity was predicted by in-store, magazine, and mail promotions. Trial was predicted by having seen magazine ads. Web site exposure predicted likelihood of trial. Of those who reported trying Camel Dissolvables (N = 37), 49% no longer used them, 43% used them some days, and 8% used them daily. Continued use was reported by 87% of dual users and 26% of single tobacco users (p < .01).
Conclusion.
Smokers and male dual tobacco users appear most affected by Camel Dissolvables promotions.
RomitoLMSaxtonMKCoanLLChristenAG. Retail promotions and perceptions of R.J. Reynolds' novel dissolvable tobacco in a US test market. Harm Reduct J.2011;8(1):1–10.
9.
StepanovIJensenJHatsukamiDHechtSS. New and traditional smokeless tobacco: A comparison of toxicant and carcinogen levels. Nicotine Tob Res.2008;10:1773–1782.
10.
StepanovIBienerLKnezevichA. Monitoring tobacco-specific n-nitrosamines and nicotine in novel Marlboro and Camel smokeless tobacco products: Findings from round 1 of the new product watch. Nicotine Tob Res.2011;14:274–281.
11.
LiuSTNemethJMKleinEG. Adolescent and adult perceptions of traditional and novel smokeless tobacco products and packaging in rural Ohio. Tob Control. In press.
12.
ChoiKFabianLMotteyN. Young adults' favorable perceptions of snus, dissolvable tobacco products, and electronic cigarettes: Findings from a focus group study. Am J Public Health. 2012;102:2088–2093.
SchwartzJLBrunnemannKDAdamiA. Brand specific responses to smokeless tobacco in a rat lip canal model. J Oral Path Med.2010;39:453–459.
16.
Mendoza-BaumgartMITulunayOEHechtSS. Pilot study on lower nitrosamine smokeless tobacco products compared with medicinal nicotine. Nicotine Tob Res.2007;9:1309–1332.
17.
LevyDTMumfordEACummingsKM. The relative risks of a low-nitrosamine smokeless tobacco product compared with smoking cigarettes: Estimates of a panel of experts. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev.2004;13:2035–2042.
18.
GartnerCHallW. Harm reduction policies for tobacco users. Int J Drug Policy. 2010;21:129–130.
19.
RoduBGodshallWT. Tobacco harm reduction: An alternative cessation strategy for inveterate smokers. Harm Reduct J.2006;3:37.
20.
HatsukamiDKLemmondsCTomarSL. Smokeless tobacco use: Harm reduction or induction approach?Prev Med.2004;38:309–317.
21.
TomarSL. Epidemiologic perspectives on smokeless tobacco marketing and population harm. Am J Prev Med.2007;33(S6):387–397.
22.
WetterDWMcClureJBde MoorC. Concomitant use of cigarettes and smokeless tobacco: Prevalence, correlates, and predictors of tobacco cessation. Prev Med.2002;34:638–648.
23.
TeoKKOunpuuSHawkenS; INTERHEART Study Investigators. Tobacco use and risk of myocardial infarction in 52 countries in the INTERHEART study: A case-control study. Lancet. 2006;19:647–658.
24.
MejiaABLingPMGlantzSA. Quantifying the effects of promoting smokeless tobacco as a harm reduction strategy in the USA. Tob Control. 2012;19:297–305.
25.
MejiaABLingPM. Tobacco industry consumer research on smokeless tobacco users and product development. Am J Public Health. 2010;100:78–87.
26.
FreibergMJ. Federal approaches to the regulation of noncigarette tobacco products. Am J Prev Med.2012;43(5suppl. 3):S249–S254.
27.
ReganAKDubeSRArrazolaR. Smokeless and flavored tobacco products in the US: 2009 styles survey results. Am J Prev Med.2012;42:29–36.
28.
McMillenRMadukaJWinickoffJ. Use of emerging tobacco products in the United States. J Environ Public Health. 2012:1–8.
29.
SouthwellBGKimAETessmanGK. The marketing of dissolvable tobacco: Social science and public policy research needs. Am J Health Promot. 2012;26:331–332.
30.
BienerLBogenK. Receptivity to Taboka and Camel Snus in a US test market. Nicotine Tob Res.2009;11:1154–1159.
