IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0275053.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Use of supporting evidence by health and industry organisations in the consultation on e-cigarette regulations in New Zealand

Author

Listed:
  • Lucy Hardie
  • Judith McCool
  • Becky Freeman

Abstract

Objectives: Scientific evidence to support the development of appropriate policy for electronic cigarette use is limited by rapidly changing technology and a lack of long-term data. Perceptions of risk and benefits determine diverse framings of the e-cigarette debate and complicate policy decisions. E-cigarette use by smokers who are attempting to quit may result in improved health outcomes, while their use among young people and non-smokers may lead to adverse health consequences. The purpose of this study was to identify the types of evidence used during public consultations on proposed revisions to New Zealand’s e-cigarette legislation in 2020. Methods: Using submissions to parliament made by the tobacco/e-cigarette industry and the health sector, we assessed the cited evidence for quality and independence measured by publication type and tobacco industry connections. We identified themes from a sub-sample of frequently cited evidence to understand how stakeholders and organisations used evidence. Results: The sample consisted of 57 submissions from the e-cigarette and tobacco industry (n = 21) and health organisations (n = 36). A total of 442 pieces of evidence were cited at least once. Health organisations were more likely to cite peer-reviewed evidence (OR = 2.99). The industry was more likely to cite evidence outside of peer review and sources with tobacco industry connections (OR = 4.08). In the sample of frequently cited evidence, youth prevalence and flavours were the most common themes. In some cases the same evidence was used by both groups to support opposing policy positions. Conclusions: The industry continues to rely more heavily on evidence published outside of the peer-review process, which is, therefore, subjected to less scientific scrutiny. By using a smoking-cessation or harm-reduction narrative, the industry could be seen as a legitimate stakeholder in policy development.

Suggested Citation

  • Lucy Hardie & Judith McCool & Becky Freeman, 2022. "Use of supporting evidence by health and industry organisations in the consultation on e-cigarette regulations in New Zealand," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(9), pages 1-11, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0275053
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0275053
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0275053
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0275053&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0275053?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel A Erku & Kylie Morphett & Kathryn J Steadman & Coral E Gartner, 2019. "Policy Debates Regarding Nicotine Vaping Products in Australia: A Qualitative Analysis of Submissions to a Government Inquiry from Health and Medical Organisations," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(22), pages 1-18, November.
    2. Konstantinos E. Farsalinos & Giorgio Romagna & Dimitris Tsiapras & Stamatis Kyrzopoulos & Alketa Spyrou & Vassilis Voudris, 2013. "Impact of Flavour Variability on Electronic Cigarette Use Experience: An Internet Survey," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-11, December.
    3. repec:plo:pone00:0194145 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Marissa J Smith & Andrew J Baxter & Kathryn Skivington & Mark McCann & Shona Hilton & Srinivasa Vittal Katikireddi, 2021. "Examining the sources of evidence in e-cigarette policy recommendations: A citation network analysis of international public health recommendations," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(8), pages 1-17, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Allison Lee & Angela A. Chang & Joanne Chen Lyu & Pamela M. Ling & Stephanie L. Hsia, 2022. "Characterizing Participant Perceptions about Smoking-Cessation Pharmacotherapy and E-Cigarettes from Facebook Smoking-Cessation Support Groups," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(12), pages 1-12, June.
    2. Cosima Hoetger & Rose S. Bono & Nicole E. Nicksic & Andrew J. Barnes & Caroline O. Cobb, 2019. "Influence of Electronic Cigarette Characteristics on Susceptibility, Perceptions, and Abuse Liability Indices among Combustible Tobacco Cigarette Smokers and Non-Smokers," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(10), pages 1-15, May.
    3. Konstantinos E. Farsalinos & I. Gene Gillman & Matt S. Melvin & Amelia R. Paolantonio & Wendy J. Gardow & Kathy E. Humphries & Sherri E. Brown & Konstantinos Poulas & Vassilis Voudris, 2015. "Nicotine Levels and Presence of Selected Tobacco-Derived Toxins in Tobacco Flavoured Electronic Cigarette Refill Liquids," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-14, March.
    4. Ratika Sharma & Britta Wigginton & Carla Meurk & Pauline Ford & Coral E. Gartner, 2016. "Motivations and Limitations Associated with Vaping among People with Mental Illness: A Qualitative Analysis of Reddit Discussions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-15, December.
    5. Lei Wang & Yongcheng Zhan & Qiudan Li & Daniel D. Zeng & Scott J. Leischow & Janet Okamoto, 2015. "An Examination of Electronic Cigarette Content on Social Media: Analysis of E-Cigarette Flavor Content on Reddit," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-20, November.
    6. Stephanie Bell & Judith Dean & Charles Gilks & Mark A. Boyd & Lisa Fitzgerald & Allyson Mutch & Peter Baker & Graham Neilsen & Coral E. Gartner, 2017. "Tobacco Harm Reduction with Vaporised Nicotine (THRiVe): The Study Protocol of an Uncontrolled Feasibility Study of Novel Nicotine Replacement Products among People Living with HIV Who Smoke," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-12, July.
    7. Riccardo Polosa & Pasquale Caponnetto & Fabio Cibella & Jacques Le-Houezec, 2015. "Quit and Smoking Reduction Rates in Vape Shop Consumers: A Prospective 12-Month Survey," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-11, March.
    8. Liu, Leilei & Ba, Zhichao & Pei, Lei, 2024. "How does policy information shape its adoption? A citation analysis of large-scale energy policies in China," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 18(4).
    9. Jessica K. Pepper & Kurt M. Ribisl & Sherry L. Emery & Noel T. Brewer, 2014. "Reasons for Starting and Stopping Electronic Cigarette Use," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-17, October.
    10. Konstantinos E. Farsalinos & Giorgio Romagna & Dimitris Tsiapras & Stamatis Kyrzopoulos & Vassilis Voudris, 2014. "Characteristics, Perceived Side Effects and Benefits of Electronic Cigarette Use: A Worldwide Survey of More than 19,000 Consumers," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-18, April.
    11. Manoj Misra & Robert D. Leverette & Bethany T. Cooper & Melanee B. Bennett & Steven E. Brown, 2014. "Comparative In Vitro Toxicity Profile of Electronic and Tobacco Cigarettes, Smokeless Tobacco and Nicotine Replacement Therapy Products: E-Liquids, Extracts and Collected Aerosols," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-23, October.
    12. Anastasia Moysidou & Konstantinos E. Farsalinos & Vassilis Voudris & Kyriakoula Merakou & Kallirrhoe Kourea & Anastasia Barbouni, 2016. "Knowledge and Perceptions about Nicotine, Nicotine Replacement Therapies and Electronic Cigarettes among Healthcare Professionals in Greece," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-25, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0275053. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.