| Line 71: | Line 71: | ||
*Even if they should not be considered as risk-free products, however, HTPs and ECs lead to an appreciable risk reduction in comparison to cigarettes, both for cancer and non-cancer diseases. According to the current knowledge, and more specifically to the data presented here, HTPs and ECs might be considered as an acceptable reduced risk substitute for cigarettes for legal-age smokers who would otherwise continue smoking cigarettes. | *Even if they should not be considered as risk-free products, however, HTPs and ECs lead to an appreciable risk reduction in comparison to cigarettes, both for cancer and non-cancer diseases. According to the current knowledge, and more specifically to the data presented here, HTPs and ECs might be considered as an acceptable reduced risk substitute for cigarettes for legal-age smokers who would otherwise continue smoking cigarettes. | ||
*A more pronounced cancer risk reduction was observed when comparing the mean lifetime cancer risk for the considered ECs with that for cigarette smoke. This reduction was about two orders of magnitude (ratio of 0.009 and 0.014) with 2.42·10–4 and 3.95·10–4 for ECs compared to 2.73·10–2 for cigarettes. In terms of consumers, this would mean that 1 out of 36 cigarette smokers vs. 1 out of 4132 or 1 out of 2531 EC consumers may develop a cancer if the cancer root cause would be only associated with exposure to the considered HPHCs. | *A more pronounced cancer risk reduction was observed when comparing the mean lifetime cancer risk for the considered ECs with that for cigarette smoke. This reduction was about two orders of magnitude (ratio of 0.009 and 0.014) with 2.42·10–4 and 3.95·10–4 for ECs compared to 2.73·10–2 for cigarettes. In terms of consumers, this would mean that 1 out of 36 cigarette smokers vs. 1 out of 4132 or 1 out of 2531 EC consumers may develop a cancer if the cancer root cause would be only associated with exposure to the considered HPHCs. | ||
===2018 [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0021850217301155 Measurements of electronic cigarette-generated particles for the evaluation of lung cancer risk of active and passive users]=== | |||
*In this study, we have demonstrated that no clinically relevant, product-related safety findings were observed for smokers of Combustible Cigarettes (CC) switching to an [[Special:MyLanguage/Abbreviations|Electronic Vapor Product (EVP)]] for 12 weeks under real-life settings. Adverse Effects (AEs) reported by subjects switching to the EVP occurred primarily within the first week after switching, and only 1.3% of all AEs reported were considered to be almost definitely related to the product. Up to a third of all reported AEs in the EVP group were related to nicotine withdrawal symptoms, which were observed to decrease after the first two weeks from product switch. EVP use was associated with significant decreases in exposure to nicotine and other chemicals such as benzene and acrolein, typically found in CC smoke. Changes were also observed in the level of WBC, haemoglobin, RBC and LDL cholesterol, which although minor, were consistent with those observed after smoking cessation. The data presented in this study shows the potential that EVPs may offer to smokers looking for an alternative to CCs. | |||
*[https://sci-hub.se/10.1016/j.jaerosci.2017.10.006 PDF Version] | |||
===2017: [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5429854/ Reduced biological effect of e-cigarette aerosol compared to cigarette smoke evaluated in vitro using normalized nicotine dose and RNA-seq-based toxicogenomics]=== | ===2017: [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5429854/ Reduced biological effect of e-cigarette aerosol compared to cigarette smoke evaluated in vitro using normalized nicotine dose and RNA-seq-based toxicogenomics]=== | ||
edits