"If There's No Nicotine, Why Waste My Money?": Reactions to a Proposed Reduced Nicotine Policy Among Priority and General Adult Populations.
7 affiliations
- 1Department of Health Policy & Management, Faculty of Public Health, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria.
- 2Department of Health Policy and Behavioral Sciences, School of Public Health, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
- 3Department of Health Promotion, Education & Behavior, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA.
- 4School of Public Health, University of Ahmad Dahlan, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.
- 5Nell Hodgson Woodruff School of Nursing, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
- 6Putney Consulting, New Hampshire, NH, USA.
- 7TRSConsulting56, Lilburn, GA, USA.
Abstract
Background
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration proposed reducing nicotine in cigarettes and other combusted tobacco products to minimally addictive levels, a policy with the potential to save millions of lives. Limited research has examined how priority populations, including individuals with low socioeconomic status (SES) or serious psychological distress (SPD), may respond.Methods
We conducted 12 in-person focus groups in Atlanta, GA, with adults aged 21+ who smoke (n=70), stratified into SPD (n=18), low SES (n=27), and neither subgroup (n=25). Participants were informed that the nicotine content of cigarettes would be reduced by 95% and viewed messages on Very Low Nicotine Cigarettes (VLNCs), presented as posters, storyboards, and cigarette pack inserts. Participants discussed their anticipated reactions to the policy.Results
Participants generally expressed support for the nicotine reduction policy, with many saying they personally would quit smoking if it were implemented. Across all subgroups, a common perception was that continuing to smoke would be a waste of money. However, when considering the broader impact, skepticism about the policy's ability to reduce smoking was common. Many participants anticipated compensatory behaviors, such as smoking more cigarettes, seeking higher nicotine products through illicit markets, or switching to alternatives, like cigars or nicotine pouches. Overall, reactions reflected a mix of support, doubt, and uncertainty. While some participants expressed interest in trying VLNCs, others preferred a gradual reduction in nicotine content over time. These reactions were similar across all participant subgroups.Conclusion
Findings show general support for the nicotine reduction policy and its potential to motivate quitting, including among those with low SES and with SPD. However, skepticism and possible behavioral adaptations may reduce the policy's impact. Supportive measures, including a well-designed communication strategy, may help address these concerns and strengthen the policy's effectiveness.
Related
- Nicotine: evolution, dependence, and the path to total quit: redefining cessation in a changing nicotine landscape
- The collective effect of non-nicotine constituents on the reinforcing and neuropharmacological effects of comprehensive cigarette smoke and electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) aerosol extracts in rats.
- Oral nicotine pouches: rising popularity of a new class of tobacco products among youth
- Use of Alcohol and Nicotine in the Context of cannabis Legalization: Considerations from a German Perspective.
- In Silico Exploration of Foods and Compounds That Modulate Nicotine Metabolism
BibTeX
@article{adeniji2026theres,
title = {{"If There's No Nicotine, Why Waste My Money?": Reactions to a Proposed Reduced Nicotine Policy Among Priority and General Adult Populations.}},
author = {Folashayo P Adeniji and Jordan D Foster and Winnie Ni and Vanessa Mallory and Adebusola Ogunnaike and Di Pei and Nurul Kodriati and Samantha Petillo and Katherine C Henderson and Aubrey Juris and Prudence Nkansah and Christin D'Ovidio and Nicholas A Giordano and Claire A Spears and David L Ashley and Terry F Pechacek and James F Thrasher and Lucy Popova},
journal = {Tobacco use insights},
year = {2026},
month = sep,
doi = {10.1177/1179173x261484361},
url = {https://europepmc.org/article/MED/43011200},
note = {CC BY-NC},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - "If There's No Nicotine, Why Waste My Money?": Reactions to a Proposed Reduced Nicotine Policy Among Priority and General Adult Populations.
AU - Folashayo P Adeniji
AU - Jordan D Foster
AU - Winnie Ni
AU - Vanessa Mallory
AU - Adebusola Ogunnaike
AU - Di Pei
AU - Nurul Kodriati
AU - Samantha Petillo
AU - Katherine C Henderson
AU - Aubrey Juris
AU - Prudence Nkansah
AU - Christin D'Ovidio
AU - Nicholas A Giordano
AU - Claire A Spears
AU - David L Ashley
AU - Terry F Pechacek
AU - James F Thrasher
AU - Lucy Popova
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/09/23
JO - Tobacco use insights
DO - 10.1177/1179173x261484361
UR - https://europepmc.org/article/MED/43011200
AB - Background The U.S. Food and Drug Administration proposed reducing nicotine in cigarettes and other combusted tobacco products to minimally addictive levels, a policy with the potential to save millions of lives. Limited research has examined how priority populations, including individuals with low socioeconomic status (SES) or serious psychological distress (SPD), may respond.Methods We conducted 12 in-person focus groups in Atlanta, GA, with adults aged 21+ who smoke (n=70), stratified into SPD (n=18), low SES (n=27), and neither subgroup (n=25). Participants were informed that the nicotine content of cigarettes would be reduced by 95% and viewed messages on Very Low Nicotine Cigarettes (VLNCs), presented as posters, storyboards, and cigarette pack inserts. Participants discussed their anticipated reactions to the policy.Results Participants generally expressed support for the nicotine reduction policy, with many saying they personally would quit smoking if it were implemented. Across all subgroups, a common perception was that continuing to smoke would be a waste of money. However, when considering the broader impact, skepticism about the policy's ability to reduce smoking was common. Many participants anticipated compensatory behaviors, such as smoking more cigarettes, seeking higher nicotine products through illicit markets, or switching to alternatives, like cigars or nicotine pouches. Overall, reactions reflected a mix of support, doubt, and uncertainty. While some participants expressed interest in trying VLNCs, others preferred a gradual reduction in nicotine content over time. These reactions were similar across all participant subgroups.Conclusion Findings show general support for the nicotine reduction policy and its potential to motivate quitting, including among those with low SES and with SPD. However, skepticism and possible behavioral adaptations may reduce the policy's impact. Supportive measures, including a well-designed communication strategy, may help address these concerns and strengthen the policy's effectiveness.
SN - 1179-173X
ER -