COVID-19, smoking, vaping and quitting: A representative population survey in England

Introduction

COVID-19 is a respiratory disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus.¹ Tobacco smoking was considered an a priori risk factor for SARS-CoV-2 infection and poor COVID-19 disease outcomes: current and former smoking is known to increase the risk of respiratory viral and bacterial infection and adverse disease outcomes compared with never smoking.^2,3 Behavioural factors involved in both smoking and vaping, such as regular hand-to-mouth movements, may increase viral infection and transmission if performed without accompanying protective behaviours like hand washing.⁴ However, early descriptive epidemiology from the ongoing pandemic produced surprising results. Limited, mixed-quality evidence suggests lower than expected smoking rates among those testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection and those hospitalised with COVID-19.^5,6 This has led to the hypothesis that nicotine may protect against a hyper-inflammatory response to SARS-CoV-2 infection,^7,8 thus preventing adverse outcomes such as hospitalisation with COVID-19 disease. Alternatively, the lower than expected smoking rates may reflect smokers being less likely to become infected due to an unexpected interaction between nicotine and ACE2 receptors, or may just be an artefact of various measurement and sampling issues.⁵ Our aim is to use a large, representative population survey with reliable assessment of smoking status to estimate rates of self-reported SARS-CoV-2 infection in relation to smoking status.

The early literature has focussed on smoking, SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 disease. However, comparisons of rates of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection between smokers, ex-smokers and non-smokers are a poor test of the nicotine hypothesis. Other components in tobacco smoke could lead to greater symptom severity, which could obscure the hypothesised protective effect of nicotine. Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) have lower toxicity than cigarettes.^9,10 Therefore, an assessment of the use of these products provides a better test of a potential protective effect of nicotine. Despite this, few studies so far in the pandemic have measured the use of e-cigarettes or NRT.¹¹ In addition, most studies have not been able to rely on representative sampling and have failed to distinguish between current smokers, recent ex-smokers, long-term ex-smokers and never smokers.⁵ Our secondary aim is therefore to estimate rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection by use of alternative nicotine products in a representative population survey.

Hand washing is an important behaviour in reducing the transmission of infectious diseases through the population, especially for those that are primarily spread through respiratory droplets.¹² Because of the repeated hand-to-mouth movements involved in smoking and vaping, current smokers and e-cigarette users may be less likely to regularly wash their hands before touching their face. Additionally, personality factors, such as lower risk aversion,¹³ could lead to reduced hand washing among tobacco and nicotine users. These behavioural factors could explain differences in rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection by smoking status, e-cigarette use or NRT use. Therefore, in this study, we measured associations between self-reported engagement in hand washing behaviours and use of these products.

In the absence of clear evidence as to whether smoking is a risk factor for SARS-CoV-2 infection or hospitalisation, public health messaging has focused on general benefits of quitting tobacco smoking.^14,15 Some organisations, such as the American Lung Association,¹⁶ have also urged people to stop using e-cigarettes (“vaping”), claiming that doing so may reduce their risk of developing severe COVID-19 symptoms — despite little evidence to support this. The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic may therefore have prompted smokers and e-cigarette users to attempt to stop in greater numbers. Social distancing measures, introduced in England in March 2020, have limited people to leave their home only for food, healthcare, exercise and essential work.¹⁷ These measures may have increased the amount people smoke inside their home, which would be especially damaging because school closures mean children are housebound and at risk of exposure to second-hand smoke.

The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated heath inequalities in England, with the highest mortality rates found among people working in manual, routine and service occupations¹⁸ and in black and ethnic minority groups.¹⁹ In addition, those living in deprived areas are the most likely to be diagnosed with COVID-19 and have worse outcomes when hospitalised.²⁰ Because smoking and vaping prevalence is highest among people from disadvantaged groups,²¹ the impact these behaviours have on SARS-CoV-2 infection may be more pronounced in these groups. In this study, we will use a representative population sample of adults in England to estimate:

1. associations between suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection and smoking status, e-cigarette use and NRT use;

2. associations between hand washing and smoking status, e-cigarette use and NRT use;

3. the proportion of smokers and e-cigarette users who have attempted to quit product use because they are motivated by the pandemic;

4. the proportion of smokers, with or without children in their household, who are smoking more, less, or the same amount inside their home; and

5. whether the above associations vary by socioeconomic status (SES).

Methods

Results

Of the 3,285 participants interviewed, 3,179 (96.8%) provided complete data on all questions required for the current analyses. Sample characteristics are shown in Table 1. Of the analytic sample, 1,804 (56.7%) were never smokers, 834 (26.2%) were long-term ex-smokers, 72 (2.3%) were recent ex-smokers, and 469 (14.8%) were current smokers. In addition, 192 (6.0%) were current e-cigarette users and 88 (2.8%) were current NRT users.

Discussion

In this representative sample of adults in England, current smokers and long-term ex-smokers had significantly greater odds of suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection compared with never smokers after controlling for a number of potential confounding variables. There was sufficient evidence to rule out a large association of suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection with NRT use, and a medium association with e-cigarette use. Compared with never smokers, recent ex-smokers had significantly lower odds of washing their hands before touching their face. Participants reported high engagement in other hand washing behaviours, regardless of smoking status, e-cigarette use or NRT use. 12.2% of past-year smokers who made a recent quit attempt were motivated to do so by COVID-19 and a similar proportion (11.2%) of current e-cigarette users attempted to quit vaping due to COVID-19. Most current smokers reported smoking the same number of cigarettes inside their home, while equal proportions reported smoking more or fewer. No significant differences by SES were observed across analyses.

Prior studies unexpectedly found that smoking rates among those hospitalised for COVID-19 were lower than would be expected from population estimates.⁵ There are at least three possible explanations for the observation: smokers are less likely to become infected, smokers who are infected are less likely to develop disease severe enough to require hospitalisation, or it is an artefact of various measurement or sampling issues. In this study, we found that, compared with never smokers, current smokers and long-term ex-smokers had greater odds of suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection. Recent ex-smokers also had greater odds of suspected infection, but not significantly so. These findings suggest that one of the two explanations other than infection are likely to account for the lower than expected smoking rates among those hospitalised for COVID-19. However, see below for an alternative interpretation.

In terms of infection, the most parsimonious interpretation of the current findings is that current smokers and long-term ex-smokers are at increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, independent of a variety of sociodemographic factors. This increased risk could be the result of behaviour or biology. A relevant behaviour is that smoking requires repeated hand-to-mouth actions although we found no equivalent association with e-cigarette use, which involves similar behaviours. In terms of biology, smoking has been associated with upregulation of ACE2, the receptor for the virus in the lung, which would provide a mechanism for increased risk. However, other studies argue the relationship between smoking and ACE2 is more complicated and may vary between epithelial or alveolar cells.^28,29 The alternative explanation is that smokers are more likely to report suspected infection but that this does not reflect an increased infection risk. Instead, these differences could result from smokers and long-term ex-smokers having greater susceptibility to other infections with similar symptoms to COVID-19.3 Consistent with this explanation is that current compared with never smoking is associated with reduced risk of testing positive among people tested in the community.^5,30 In order to resolve these competing explanations for our observation that smokers had greater odds of reporting suspected infection, future studies need to assess the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection by smoking status in large representative randomly selected samples of the population.

Beyond smoking, the current findings are also difficult to reconcile with nicotine being substantially protective of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Bayes factors indicated there was sufficient evidence to rule out large differences in suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection by NRT use and medium differences by e-cigarette use. However, the current study was not able to address the possibility that nicotine may protect against the development of more severe COVID-19 disease among people who become infected.

Protective behaviours, such as hand washing, are important in slowing the transmission of infections like SARS-CoV-2. Here we found that, regardless of smoking status or nicotine use, the majority of respondents (>85%) reported that they wash their hands most of the time after coming home, before preparing food and before eating. Fewer people reported washing their hands most of the time before touching their face, and recent ex-smokers had significantly lower odds than never smokers of reporting doing so. The primary route through which people become infected with SARS-CoV-2 is through cells in the lungs and mucus membranes of the eyes, nose and mouth.³¹ Avoiding face touching without first washing one’s hands could therefore be an important and understudied behaviour to reduce transmission.¹²

Public health bodies have advised smokers that quitting may reduce their risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes.¹⁵ This advice is based on the observation that despite being hospitalised at lower than expected rates, current smoking is associated with greater disease severity among those who are hospitalised.⁵ This advice has been shared through the news and in social media campaigns, such as “#QuitForCovid” in the UK.^14,32 Here, we found that, while COVID-19 triggered quit attempts among some smokers in England, far more attempts were triggered by other reasons like future health concerns. It is possible that conflicting news stories, reporting the possibility that smoking is protective against COVID-19,^33,34 may have partially undermined attempts to encourage people to quit smoking. Some organisations have also advised people to stop vaping, arguing that e-cigarette use makes one susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection — despite little evidence to support this.^5,16 In our sample, one in ten current e-cigarette users attempted to quit vaping due to concerns about COVID-19. These attempts to quit vaping might stem from the deteriorating perceptions about the harms associated with e-cigarette use among smokers in England.^35,36

There was a concern that social distancing measures might increase the amount people smoke inside their home, especially for disadvantaged individuals who may live in housing without easy access to outdoor smoking areas. Reassuringly, we found that the majority of participants reported smoking the same number of cigarettes inside the home, and equal numbers reported smoking more or fewer cigarettes. There was no significant association between smoking more inside the home and SES or children in the household. However, given our small sample and the wide confidence intervals, we may have lacked sufficient data to detect differences.

This study benefits from using a representative sample of the population in England, including questions about current e-cigarette and NRT use, and distinguishing between never, current, recent ex-smokers and long-term ex-smokers. However, there were a number of limitations. First, for some comparisons, sample sizes were small which meant there was substantial uncertainly in estimates. Second, suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection was self-reported and not confirmed with a viral or antibody test. Given that many other infections share symptoms with COVID-19, some participants may have misdiagnosed themselves. In addition, it is likely that most participants with asymptomatic cases did not report being infected. Third, individuals with the most severe cases of COVID-19 were likely censored from our analysis, because they may have died or been hospitalised. Thus, if nicotine reduces risk of severe symptoms, fewer infected nicotine users would be censored from the analysis than non-users, leading to an upward bias in the OR between these groups. However, at its peak, only 0.02% of the UK population were in hospital with COVID-19.³⁷ This means censoring likely had a negligible effect on the estimated proportion of participants with suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection, which ranged from 14.5% of never smokers to 22.2% of recent ex-smokers. Fourth, social desirability bias may have led participants to overreport their engagement in hand washing in order to be viewed favourably by their interviewer. Fifth, because reported engagement in hand washing was so high, there may have been a ceiling effect whereby we were unable to detect differences by smoking status, e-cigarette use or NRT use. Finally, only current e-cigarette users were asked whether they had attempted to quit vaping because of concerns about COVID-19, which meant we did not capture those who had already quit vaping.

In conclusion, these results do not support the hypothesis that smoking or nicotine is protective against SARS-CoV-2 infection, with current smokers and long-term ex-smokers reporting significantly greater odds of suspected infection than never smokers and no significant difference in odds of suspected infection by use of e-cigarettes or NRT. With the exception of washing hands before touching one’s face, there was high engagement in hand washing irrespective of nicotine product use. Approximately one in ten current e-cigarette users reported attempting to quit vaping due to COVID-19. As countries begin to relax social distancing measures, it is important to continue tracking how nicotine product use interacts with SARS-CoV-2 infection, and how this pandemic will influence smoking, vaping and quitting behaviours in the population.

Competing interests

JB has received unrestricted research funding from Pfizer, who manufacture smoking cessation medications. LS has received honoraria for talks, an unrestricted research grant and travel expenses to attend meetings and workshops from Pfizer, and has acted as paid reviewer for grant awarding bodies and as a paid consultant for health care companies. RW has undertaken consultancy for companies that manufacture smoking cessation medications (Pfizer, J&J, and GSK). All authors declare no financial links with tobacco companies or e-cigarette manufacturers or their representatives.

Funding

Cancer Research UK fund the Smoking Toolkit Study and the salaries of OP and SJ (C1417/A22962). HTB holds a funded studentship from Public Health England (558585/180737). Funders had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis and interpretation of the data; preparation, review or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

Supplementary Material