Myth: Alternative nicotine products are as dangerous as smoking: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
(https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-03310-y)
Line 98: Line 98:




2020: Five-Day Changes in Biomarkers of Exposure Among Adult Smokers After Completely Switching From Combustible Cigarettes to a Nicotine-Salt Pod System (PDF 9 pages)
===2020: Five-Day Changes in Biomarkers of Exposure Among Adult Smokers After Completely Switching From Combustible Cigarettes to a Nicotine-Salt Pod System===
(PDF 9 pages)
The results of this study concorded with evidence that complete switching from combustible cigarettes to vapor products may reduce exposure to key carcinogens and other toxicants known to be associated with tobacco-related diseases.
The results of this study concorded with evidence that complete switching from combustible cigarettes to vapor products may reduce exposure to key carcinogens and other toxicants known to be associated with tobacco-related diseases.


2018: Measurements of electronic cigarette-generated particles for the evaluation of lung cancer  
===2018: Measurements of electronic cigarette-generated particles for the evaluation of lung cancer risk of active and passive users===
risk of active and passive users (PDF 23 pages)
(PDF 23 pages)
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 Electronic Vapor Product (EVP) for 12 weeks under real-life settings… 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.  
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 Electronic Vapor Product (EVP) for 12 weeks under real-life settings… 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.  


2017: Comparative tumor promotion assessment of e‐cigarette and cigarettes using the in vitro Bhas 42 cell transformation assay
===2017: Comparative tumor promotion assessment of e‐cigarette and cigarettes using the in vitro Bhas 42 cell transformation assay===
Results from this study suggest that e‐cigarettes may have reduced tumor promoter activity compared to conventional cigarettes and therefore may provide a safer alternative to cigarettes.
Results from this study suggest that e‐cigarettes may have reduced tumor promoter activity compared to conventional cigarettes and therefore may provide a safer alternative to cigarettes.
*COI: BAT
*COI: BAT


2017: Comparing the cancer potencies of emissions from vapourised nicotine products including e-cigarettes with those of tobacco smoke
===2017: Comparing the cancer potencies of emissions from vapourised nicotine products including e-cigarettes with those of tobacco smoke===
Samples of a prototype heat-not-burn device have lower cancer potencies than tobacco smoke by at least one order of magnitude, but higher potencies than most e-cigarettes. Mean lifetime risks decline in the sequence: combustible cigarettes >> heat-not-burn >> e-cigarettes (normal power)≥nicotine inhaler.
Samples of a prototype heat-not-burn device have lower cancer potencies than tobacco smoke by at least one order of magnitude, but higher potencies than most e-cigarettes. Mean lifetime risks decline in the sequence: combustible cigarettes >> heat-not-burn >> e-cigarettes (normal power)≥nicotine inhaler.


2017: Nicotine, Carcinogen, and Toxin Exposure in Long-Term E-Cigarette and Nicotine Replacement Therapy Users
===2017: Nicotine, Carcinogen, and Toxin Exposure in Long-Term E-Cigarette and Nicotine Replacement Therapy Users===
Long-term NRT-only and e-cigarette–only use, but not dual use of NRTs or e-cigarettes with combustible cigarettes, is associated with substantially reduced levels of measured carcinogens and toxins relative to smoking only combustible cigarettes.
Long-term NRT-only and e-cigarette–only use, but not dual use of NRTs or e-cigarettes with combustible cigarettes, is associated with substantially reduced levels of measured carcinogens and toxins relative to smoking only combustible cigarettes.


2017: Comparing the cancer potencies of emissions from vapourised nicotine products  
===2017: Comparing the cancer potencies of emissions from vapourised nicotine products including e-cigarettes with those of tobacco smoke===
including e-cigarettes with those of tobacco smoke (PDF 8 pages)  
(PDF 8 pages)  
-Most e-cigarette analyses indicate cancer potencies <1% that of tobacco smoke and <10% that of a heat-not-burn prototype, although a minority of analyses indicate higher potencies.
-Most e-cigarette analyses indicate cancer potencies <1% that of tobacco smoke and <10% that of a heat-not-burn prototype, although a minority of analyses indicate higher potencies.
-Optimal combinations of device settings, liquid formulation and vaping behaviour normally result in e-cigarette emissions with much less carcinogenic potency than tobacco smoke.
-Optimal combinations of device settings, liquid formulation and vaping behaviour normally result in e-cigarette emissions with much less carcinogenic potency than tobacco smoke.
-Article in Lung Disease News: E-Cigarettes Carry Much Less Risk of Lung Cancer Than Cigarette Smoke, Study Finds  
-Article in Lung Disease News: E-Cigarettes Carry Much Less Risk of Lung Cancer Than Cigarette Smoke, Study Finds  


2016: Have combustible cigarettes met their match? The nicotine delivery profiles and harmful constituent exposures of second-generation and third-generation electronic cigarette users
===2016: Have combustible cigarettes met their match? The nicotine delivery profiles and harmful constituent exposures of second-generation and third-generation electronic cigarette users===
Compared with cigarettes, G2 and G3 e-cigarettes resulted in significantly lower levels of exposure to a potent lung carcinogen and cardiovascular toxicant.
Compared with cigarettes, G2 and G3 e-cigarettes resulted in significantly lower levels of exposure to a potent lung carcinogen and cardiovascular toxicant.


2016: Exposure to Nicotine and Selected Toxicants in Cigarette Smokers Who Switched to  
===2016: Exposure to Nicotine and Selected Toxicants in Cigarette Smokers Who Switched to Electronic Cigarettes: A Longitudinal Within-Subjects Observational Study===
Electronic Cigarettes: A Longitudinal Within-Subjects Observational Study (PDF 8 pages
(PDF 8 pages)
After switching from tobacco to e-cigarettes, nicotine exposure remains unchanged, while exposure to selected carcinogens and toxicants is substantially reduced.
After switching from tobacco to e-cigarettes, nicotine exposure remains unchanged, while exposure to selected carcinogens and toxicants is substantially reduced.


2016: The mutagenic assessment of an electronic-cigarette and reference cigarette smoke using the Ames assay in strains TA98 and TA100 (PDF 10 pages)
===2016: The mutagenic assessment of an electronic-cigarette and reference cigarette smoke using the Ames assay in strains TA98 and TA100===
(PDF 10 pages)
-In the presence and absence of metabolic activation, e-cigarette ACM and aerosol were deemed non-mutagenic in tester strains TA98 and TA100, under the test conditions described previously, despite clear positive control responses. Conversely, 3R4F cigarette smoke TPM and freshly generated whole smoke were clearly positive.  
-In the presence and absence of metabolic activation, e-cigarette ACM and aerosol were deemed non-mutagenic in tester strains TA98 and TA100, under the test conditions described previously, despite clear positive control responses. Conversely, 3R4F cigarette smoke TPM and freshly generated whole smoke were clearly positive.  
-In the case of freshly generated cigarette smoke, a positive response in both strains was observed within 24 min, whereas e-cigarette aerosols remained negative up to 3 h.
-In the case of freshly generated cigarette smoke, a positive response in both strains was observed within 24 min, whereas e-cigarette aerosols remained negative up to 3 h.


2016: Patients with lung cancer: Are electronic cigarettes harmful or useful?  
===2016: Patients with lung cancer: Are electronic cigarettes harmful or useful?===
Based on current knowledge, for patients with lung or other forms of cancer who would otherwise continue to smoke, e-cigarettes offer an alternative way to quit smoking while they undergo medical treatment. The option to switch to e-cigarettes should be considered by healthcare practitioners with patients with cancer who would otherwise continue to smoke.  
Based on current knowledge, for patients with lung or other forms of cancer who would otherwise continue to smoke, e-cigarettes offer an alternative way to quit smoking while they undergo medical treatment. The option to switch to e-cigarettes should be considered by healthcare practitioners with patients with cancer who would otherwise continue to smoke.  


2015: Development of an in vitro cytotoxicity model for aerosol exposure using 3D reconstructed human airway tissue; application for assessment of e-cigarette aerosol (PDF 11 pages)
===2015: Development of an in vitro cytotoxicity model for aerosol exposure using 3D reconstructed human airway tissue; application for assessment of e-cigarette aerosol===
(PDF 11 pages)
-Despite being tested with a more intense puffing regime, e-cigarette aerosol showed no acute cytotoxicity in this study when compared with traditional 3R4F reference cigarette smoke.
-Despite being tested with a more intense puffing regime, e-cigarette aerosol showed no acute cytotoxicity in this study when compared with traditional 3R4F reference cigarette smoke.
-Under the study conditions cigarette smoke demonstrated a dose-dependent response that resulted in near-complete cell death after a 6 h exposure period. In contrast, e-cigarette aerosol showed no decrease in tissue viability following a 6 h exposure, despite appropriate positive control responses. Furthermore, cytotoxicity appears to be unaffected by different e-cigarette formulations as tested in this study.
-Under the study conditions cigarette smoke demonstrated a dose-dependent response that resulted in near-complete cell death after a 6 h exposure period. In contrast, e-cigarette aerosol showed no decrease in tissue viability following a 6 h exposure, despite appropriate positive control responses. Furthermore, cytotoxicity appears to be unaffected by different e-cigarette formulations as tested in this study.


2014: Levels of selected carcinogens and toxicants in vapor from electronic cigarettes (PDF 16 pages)  
===2014: Levels of selected carcinogens and toxicants in vapor from electronic cigarettes===
(PDF 16 pages)  
Results: The levels of potentially toxic compounds in e-cigarette vapor is from 9 to 450-fold lower than those in the smoke from conventional cigarettes, and in many cases comparable to the trace amounts present in pharmaceutical preparation (Note: Reference product was a medicinal nicotine inhaler.). Our findings support the idea that substituting tobacco cigarettes with electronic cigarettes may substantially reduce exposure to tobacco-specific toxicants.
Results: The levels of potentially toxic compounds in e-cigarette vapor is from 9 to 450-fold lower than those in the smoke from conventional cigarettes, and in many cases comparable to the trace amounts present in pharmaceutical preparation (Note: Reference product was a medicinal nicotine inhaler.). Our findings support the idea that substituting tobacco cigarettes with electronic cigarettes may substantially reduce exposure to tobacco-specific toxicants.


2014: Evaluation of Toxicant and Carcinogen Metabolites in the Urine of E-Cigarette Users  
===2014: Evaluation of Toxicant and Carcinogen Metabolites in the Urine of E-Cigarette Users Versus Cigarette Smokers===  
Versus Cigarette Smokers  (PDF 6 pages)  
(PDF 6 pages)  
Conclusion: “With respect to the compounds analyzed here, e-cigarettes have a more favorable toxicity profile than tobacco cigarettes.”
Conclusion: “With respect to the compounds analyzed here, e-cigarettes have a more favorable toxicity profile than tobacco cigarettes.”
<br>
<br>