By Melissa Patrick
Kentucky Health News
A recent health journal article summarizes a growing body of research that refutes the oft-made claim that electronic cigarettes are 95 percent less harmful than traditional cigarettes. It calls the estimate a "factoid," or an unreliable piece of information that has been repeated so often it becomes accepted as fact.
The peer-reviewed article in the American Journal of Public Health explains that the "95% safer" claim stems from an assertion made in 2013 by a panel of health experts, and not from anything resembling rigorous scientific study. It says the experts even acknowledged that "a limitation of this study is the lack of hard evidence for the harms of most products."
"What they are basing their claim on is not a peer reviewed study," said Ben Chandler, president and CEO of the Foundation for a Healthy Kentucky, which lobbies for tobacco-free policies. "Basically, it's based on the opinions of certain people."
The assertion gained traction after it was endorsed and publicized in 2015 by Public Health England and the Royal Colllege of Physicians -- and after the vaping industry latched on to it. The vaping industry has placed this "95% safer" claim on billboards, huge signs at points of sale and retail signs throughout stores.
"It is a perfect example of how the industry has used data that is not from sound science to market their product. And that is why this article is important," Ellen Hahn, a University of Kentucy nursing professor and the longtime leader in Kentucky tobacco-prevention efforts, said. "Finally we can say to elected officials and people who are making decisions about programming about how we are going to handle the e-cigarette epidemic, we can finally say, 'Look here, read this. This is saying that we cannot rely on this "95% is safer" anymore.'"
The authors of the article, which includes University of Louisville Professor Aruni Bhatnager, offer an easy-to-read summary of research that shows the many dangers of e-cigarettes, including evidence that they are a gateway for youth to use traditional cigarettes.
Fisrt, they point out that today's electronic cigarettes are 10 to 20 times more powerful than those produced in 2013. This matters because the added power allows vaping products to produce more aerosol, which exposes users and bystanders to increased levels of nicotine and other toxicants. It also increases the potential for malfunction, like the device exploding.
Despite the term "vaping," e-cigarette devices do not produce a vapor, which has liquid particles suspended in the air. Instead, they produce an aerosol, which has liquid and/or solid particles suspended in a gaseous medium.
The authors also note the widespread availability of additional flavors, compared to 2013. These new flavors are generally recognized as safe to eat, but have unknown pulmonary toxicity, says the report.
One of the most striking changes since the early models, according to the authors, is the addition of "nicotine salts," which allow high levels of nicotine to be inhaled more easily with less irritation than traditional cigarettes.
The article also states that there is "ample evidence, unavailable in 2013, that e-cigarette aerosols contain toxicants and that these aerosols are harmful to living cells"
Further, it states that recent evidence shows e-cigarettes are harmful to users, pointing to several studies that show the harms to the lungs and heart.
Hahn reiterated the importance of this finding. "We have plenty of research at this point to say that people who use electronic cigarettes and who inhale them secondhand are at risk of heart and lung disease," she said. "People should care about that because heart and lung disease are rampant in Kentucky."
The authors also note that numerous studies have found e-cigarette use increases the risk that youth and young adults will also smoke combustible tobacco products.
And while there is a difference in the "toxicant content" between e-cigarette aerosols and cigarette smoke, they stress that the aerosol is not harmless and might result in different diseases.
"There is little doubt that exclusive e-cigarette users are unlikely to die from lung cancer that is caused by carcinogenic tobacco-specific nitrosamines or polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, toxicants largely absent from e-cigarette aerosols. What diseases they may die of—and if their deaths are hastened by their e-cigarette use—will be part of the much-needed evidence base upon which valid risk estimates can be built," the authors write.
The article concludes that "the evidence-lacking estimate derived in 2013 cannot be valid today and should not be relied upon further."
Chandler stressed the importance of countering this misinformation and said the industry "needs to stop saying things that are not true and not supportable."
"What we've found out in our focus groups and other research is that one of the biggest problems we face is this lack of information amongst young people about the harmful effects of these products," he said. "They start using the products thinking they are safe and the next thing you know, they are addicted."
The article includes an appendix of research to back up their conclusions.
Kentucky Health News
A recent health journal article summarizes a growing body of research that refutes the oft-made claim that electronic cigarettes are 95 percent less harmful than traditional cigarettes. It calls the estimate a "factoid," or an unreliable piece of information that has been repeated so often it becomes accepted as fact.
"What they are basing their claim on is not a peer reviewed study," said Ben Chandler, president and CEO of the Foundation for a Healthy Kentucky, which lobbies for tobacco-free policies. "Basically, it's based on the opinions of certain people."
The assertion gained traction after it was endorsed and publicized in 2015 by Public Health England and the Royal Colllege of Physicians -- and after the vaping industry latched on to it. The vaping industry has placed this "95% safer" claim on billboards, huge signs at points of sale and retail signs throughout stores.
"It is a perfect example of how the industry has used data that is not from sound science to market their product. And that is why this article is important," Ellen Hahn, a University of Kentucy nursing professor and the longtime leader in Kentucky tobacco-prevention efforts, said. "Finally we can say to elected officials and people who are making decisions about programming about how we are going to handle the e-cigarette epidemic, we can finally say, 'Look here, read this. This is saying that we cannot rely on this "95% is safer" anymore.'"
The authors of the article, which includes University of Louisville Professor Aruni Bhatnager, offer an easy-to-read summary of research that shows the many dangers of e-cigarettes, including evidence that they are a gateway for youth to use traditional cigarettes.
Fisrt, they point out that today's electronic cigarettes are 10 to 20 times more powerful than those produced in 2013. This matters because the added power allows vaping products to produce more aerosol, which exposes users and bystanders to increased levels of nicotine and other toxicants. It also increases the potential for malfunction, like the device exploding.
Despite the term "vaping," e-cigarette devices do not produce a vapor, which has liquid particles suspended in the air. Instead, they produce an aerosol, which has liquid and/or solid particles suspended in a gaseous medium.
The authors also note the widespread availability of additional flavors, compared to 2013. These new flavors are generally recognized as safe to eat, but have unknown pulmonary toxicity, says the report.
One of the most striking changes since the early models, according to the authors, is the addition of "nicotine salts," which allow high levels of nicotine to be inhaled more easily with less irritation than traditional cigarettes.
The article also states that there is "ample evidence, unavailable in 2013, that e-cigarette aerosols contain toxicants and that these aerosols are harmful to living cells"
Further, it states that recent evidence shows e-cigarettes are harmful to users, pointing to several studies that show the harms to the lungs and heart.
Hahn reiterated the importance of this finding. "We have plenty of research at this point to say that people who use electronic cigarettes and who inhale them secondhand are at risk of heart and lung disease," she said. "People should care about that because heart and lung disease are rampant in Kentucky."
The authors also note that numerous studies have found e-cigarette use increases the risk that youth and young adults will also smoke combustible tobacco products.
And while there is a difference in the "toxicant content" between e-cigarette aerosols and cigarette smoke, they stress that the aerosol is not harmless and might result in different diseases.
"There is little doubt that exclusive e-cigarette users are unlikely to die from lung cancer that is caused by carcinogenic tobacco-specific nitrosamines or polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, toxicants largely absent from e-cigarette aerosols. What diseases they may die of—and if their deaths are hastened by their e-cigarette use—will be part of the much-needed evidence base upon which valid risk estimates can be built," the authors write.
The article concludes that "the evidence-lacking estimate derived in 2013 cannot be valid today and should not be relied upon further."
Chandler stressed the importance of countering this misinformation and said the industry "needs to stop saying things that are not true and not supportable."
"What we've found out in our focus groups and other research is that one of the biggest problems we face is this lack of information amongst young people about the harmful effects of these products," he said. "They start using the products thinking they are safe and the next thing you know, they are addicted."
The article includes an appendix of research to back up their conclusions.
from Kentucky Health News https://ift.tt/36Q3DzN
0 Response to "Summary of research shows electronic cigs are not 95% safer than traditional cigarettes, as one alleged 'factoid' claims-HEALTHYLIVE"
Post a Comment