This study found that "pro" e-cigarette information is dominated on YouTube and warning voice about the health risks associated with e-cigarette is weak.
More research will be necessary to investigate who is sharing (or not sharing) e-cigarette information and the extent to which interpersonal discussion affects tobacco-related health disparities.
12 The distributions of the perceived valence measures are summarised in table 2. The majority of respondents who reported exposure to each of the three channels of e-cigarette information perceived the valence of the information as positive.
i Respondents' frequency of exposure to e-cigarette information in media other than advertising in the preceding 30 days was measured including (1) news on television, newspapers or magazines; (2) television shows other than news (eg, drama, late night comedy, celebrity talk shows, reality television); and (3) social media.
31 The study shows the success of the smoking control strategies implemented in the 1990s, 32 based on legislative measures targeted at restricting the sale, raising the price and placing limitations on the advertising of cigarettes, information programmes about smoking-related risks and antismoking campaigns.
The cigarette smoking information was extracted from the questionnaires from both study periods.
Cigarettes in the latter two categories were defined as contraband based on an exhaustive internet search of worldwide cigarette brands, information provided by the RCMP (M. Harvey, personal communication, April 27 , 2009, and the knowledge that legally-manufactured cigarette brands have visible branding on the filters.
Future qualitative work could be helpful to explore this dimension of e-cigarette-related information.
Nor was any association seen with long term (> 15 years) use of mentholated cigarettes in the alternative analyses shown in Table 11 that included different subsets of smokers (current smokers, smokers of filter cigarettes, smokers with full information on cigarette type) or involved different assumptions concerning missing data on brand history.
A 'smoker' was defined as an individual who smoked pipes, cigars, manufactured cigarettes or hand-rolled cigarettes, if this information was available.
The jury found that cigarette makers withheld information about smoking risks and put unreasonably dangerous products on the market.
