0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      To Tweet or Not to Tweet: Tweets About Tobacco Regulation can Help Disseminate Anti-regulatory Messages

      , , , ,
      Nicotine and Tobacco Research
      Oxford University Press (OUP)

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          Twitter enables public organizations to engage the public in health policy discourse. However, documented hostility towards tobacco control proposals on Twitter suggests that a closer examination of the nature of interaction with such content is warranted.

          Aims and Methods

          We scraped tweets from government bodies with tobacco control interests between July and November of 2021 (N = 3889), 2 months before and after the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Premarket Tobacco Authorization Act’s (PMTA) September deadline. PMTA is a review process for authorizing the sale of new and existing e-cigarette or vaping products. Tweets related to PMTA were identified (n = 52) using a keyword filter. A content analysis of quote tweets and replies examined the amplification of pro and anti-policy sentiment via likes and retweets.

          Results

          Replies were overwhelmingly anti-policy (96.7%). Moreover, the amplification of these replies, including 83.3% of likes and 65.6% of retweets, amplified anti-policy replies. Quote tweets, which allow users to add their own commentary to an existing tweet, were 77.9% (n = 120) anti-policy, receiving 87.7% of likes (n = 1708) and 86.2% of retweets (n = 726) compared to pro-policy quote tweets (n = 240 likes and n = 116 retweets). Regression analyses showed a significantly greater amplification of anti-policy content.

          Conclusions

          Communicating about tobacco policy on Twitter carries risks. Anti-policy advocates can weaponize quote tweets for easy construction of messages designed in accordance with evidence-based guidelines for conferring resistance to persuasion. Future research should examine whether public health organizations can adapt this strategy to counter anti-regulatory advocates on Twitter.

          Implications

          The primary implications of this research are that communication about tobacco policy on Twitter should be part of a broader public engagement strategy with quantifiable metrics of success. The information environment on Twitter is demonstrably hostile to pro-tobacco regulatory policy positions. As a result, efforts to engage on the platform by regulatory institutions like the FDA can inadvertently provide materials that are easily leveraged as effective counter-messaging. Moreover, this counter-messaging can disseminate more broadly than the original message.

          Related collections

          Most cited references34

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          See Something, Say Something: Correction of Global Health Misinformation on Social Media

          Social media are often criticized for being a conduit for misinformation on global health issues, but may also serve as a corrective to false information. To investigate this possibility, an experiment was conducted exposing users to a simulated Facebook News Feed featuring misinformation and different correction mechanisms (one in which news stories featuring correct information were produced by an algorithm and another where the corrective news stories were posted by other Facebook users) about the Zika virus, a current global health threat. Results show that algorithmic and social corrections are equally effective in limiting misperceptions, and correction occurs for both high and low conspiracy belief individuals. Recommendations for social media campaigns to correct global health misinformation, including encouraging users to refute false or misleading health information, and providing them appropriate sources to accompany their refutation, are discussed.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Vapors Produced by Electronic Cigarettes and E-Juices with Flavorings Induce Toxicity, Oxidative Stress, and Inflammatory Response in Lung Epithelial Cells and in Mouse Lung

            Oxidative stress and inflammatory response are the key events in the pathogenesis of chronic airway diseases. The consumption of electronic cigarettes (e-cigs) with a variety of e-liquids/e-juices is alarmingly increasing without the unrealized potential harmful health effects. We hypothesized that electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS)/e-cigs pose health concerns due to oxidative toxicity and inflammatory response in lung cells exposed to their aerosols. The aerosols produced by vaporizing ENDS e-liquids exhibit oxidant reactivity suggesting oxidants or reactive oxygen species (OX/ROS) may be inhaled directly into the lung during a “vaping” session. These OX/ROS are generated through activation of the heating element which is affected by heating element status (new versus used), and occurs during the process of e-liquid vaporization. Unvaporized e-liquids were oxidative in a manner dependent on flavor additives, while flavors containing sweet or fruit flavors were stronger oxidizers than tobacco flavors. In light of OX/ROS generated in ENDS e-liquids and aerosols, the effects of ENDS aerosols on tissues and cells of the lung were measured. Exposure of human airway epithelial cells (H292) in an air-liquid interface to ENDS aerosols from a popular device resulted in increased secretion of inflammatory cytokines, such as IL-6 and IL-8. Furthermore, human lung fibroblasts exhibited stress and morphological change in response to treatment with ENDS/e-liquids. These cells also secrete increased IL-8 in response to a cinnamon flavored e-liquid and are susceptible to loss of cell viability by ENDS e-liquids. Finally, exposure of wild type C57BL/6J mice to aerosols produced from a popular e-cig increase pro-inflammatory cytokines and diminished lung glutathione levels which are critical in maintaining cellular redox balance. Thus, exposure to e-cig aerosols/juices incurs measurable oxidative and inflammatory responses in lung cells and tissues that could lead to unrealized health consequences.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              A Meta-Analysis of Research on Inoculation Theory

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                Nicotine and Tobacco Research
                Oxford University Press (OUP)
                1469-994X
                September 01 2023
                August 19 2023
                May 20 2023
                September 01 2023
                August 19 2023
                May 20 2023
                : 25
                : 9
                : 1603-1609
                Article
                10.1093/ntr/ntad078
                37209413
                b6d4767c-392b-4aed-9204-d7458a1dcccc
                © 2023

                https://academic.oup.com/pages/standard-publication-reuse-rights

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content51

                Cited by1

                Most referenced authors246