Waterpipe Tobacco Warnings: An Experimental Study Among a Nationally Representative Sample of US Young Adults

Abstract

Abstract Background Waterpipe tobacco (WT) smoking by young adults remains high and misperceptions are common. Product warnings can increase knowledge of harms and reduce use. The goal of this study was to test warning statements, including the FDA-required nicotine warning (prior to implementation), on young adults’ thinking about harms of and discouragement from WT smoking. Methods We conducted a between-subjects experiment in a nationally representative telephone survey of 1152 young adults aged 18–29. Participants were randomly assigned to hear one of five warning statements and reported how much, on a 4-point scale, the warning made them think about the harms and discouraged them from WT smoking. Results The sample was 36.8% female, 57.8% white, 20.2% Black, 24.1% Hispanic, with a mean age of 23.2 (SE = 0.25). Under half (43.5%) had ever smoked WT. There were significant differences among the statements on both thinking about harms (p < .0001) and discouragement (p < .0001). The FDA-required “nicotine” warning led to the lowest thinking about harms (M = 2.85, SE = 0.08) and was the least discouraging (M = 2.86, SE = 0.08), while the “100 cigarettes” warning resulted in the greatest thinking about harms (M = 3.62, SE = 0.05) and was the most discouraging (M = 3.56, SE = 0.06). Conclusions The nicotine warning resulted in the lowest levels of thinking about harms and discouragement from WT smoking, suggesting limited impact. However, a warning focused on comparing smoke inhalation from WT smoking to cigarettes seems promising. Warnings should cover a broad range of WT health effects, and possibly comparisons to cigarettes. Findings also have implications for the content of international waterpipe warnings. Implications This study indicates that the nicotine warning is the least effective at making young adults think about the harms of and discouraging WT smoking. The FDA and other countries should consider requiring warnings to cover a broader range of health harms, misperceptions, and possibly comparisons to cigarettes.