It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Background
The 2020 European Union (EU) menthol cigarette ban increased quitting among pre-ban menthol smokers in the Netherlands, but some reported continuing to smoke menthol cigarettes. This study examined three possible explanations for post-ban menthol use—(i) illicit purchasing, (ii) use of flavour accessories and (iii) use of non-menthol replacement brands marketed for menthol smokers.
Methods
Data were from the ITC Netherlands Cohort Surveys among adult smokers before the menthol ban (Wave 1: February–March 2020, N = 2067) and after the ban (Wave 2: September–November 2020, N = 1752; Wave 3: June–July 2021, N = 1721). Bivariate, logistic regression and generalized estimating equation model analyses were conducted on weighted data.
Results
Illicit purchasing remained low from pre-ban (2.4%, 95% CI: 1.8–3.2, Wave 1) to post-ban (1.7%, 1.2–2.5%, Wave 3), with no difference between menthol and non-menthol smokers from Wave 1 to Wave 3. About 4.4% of post-ban menthol smokers last purchased their usual brand outside of the EU and 3.6% from the internet; 42.5% of post-ban menthol smokers and 4.4% of smokers overall reported using flavour accessories, with greater odds among those aged 25–39 years vs. 55+ (aOR = 3.16, P = 0.002). Approximately 70% of post-ban smokers who reported using a menthol brand were actually using a non-menthol replacement brand.
Conclusions
There was no increase in illicit purchasing or of smuggling outside the EU among menthol and non-menthol smokers in the Netherlands 1 year after the EU menthol cigarette ban. Use of flavour accessories and non-menthol replacement brands best explain post-ban menthol use, suggesting the need to ban accessories and ensure industry compliance.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details




1 Department of Primary Care and Public Health, School of Public Health, Imperial College London , London, UK
2 Department of Psychology, University of Waterloo , Waterloo, ON, Canada
3 Health Behavior, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center , Buffalo, NY, USA
4 Department of Health Promotion (CAPHRI), Maastricht University , Maastricht, The Netherlands