| (10 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
'''Studies, Surveys, Papers, and Case Studies''' | '''Studies, Surveys, Papers, and Case Studies''' | ||
*Sometimes it's necessary to view the PDF version to access the full study. | *Sometimes it's necessary to view the PDF version to access the full study. | ||
*This page is for referencing the possible benefits of [[Abbreviations|'''ENDS''']] products vs. smoking cigarettes from a Public Health standpoint. (Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems are also known as vapor technology, | *This page is for referencing the possible benefits of [[Abbreviations|'''ENDS''']] products vs. smoking cigarettes from a Public Health standpoint. (Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems are also known as vapor technology, e-cigarettes, ecigs, EVP, etc.) | ||
*If you'd prefer someone else to add a study to a topic, there is a subject section called "Suggested studies to add to this page". You may put the link in that section for one of the regular page editors to address. | *If you'd prefer someone else to add a study to a topic, there is a subject section called "Suggested studies to add to this page". You may put the link in that section for one of the regular page editors to address. | ||
*If you'd like to help add content to this page, please see the directions at the bottom of the page. | *If you'd like to help add content to this page, please see the directions at the bottom of the page. | ||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
=2nd Hand Vapor= | =2nd Hand Vapor= | ||
===2022: [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11739-022-03061-2 Computational modeling method to estimate secondhand exposure potential from exhalations during e-vapor product use under various real-world scenarios]=== | ===2022: [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11739-022-03061-2 Computational modeling method to estimate secondhand exposure potential from exhalations during e-vapor product use under various real-world scenarios]=== | ||
| Line 16: | Line 15: | ||
*...room air levels of nicotine, formaldehyde, acrolein, and acetaldehyde levels were significantly below OSHA PELs or American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA) limit... | *...room air levels of nicotine, formaldehyde, acrolein, and acetaldehyde levels were significantly below OSHA PELs or American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA) limit... | ||
===2020: [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7504617/ Comparative Indoor Pollution from Glo, Iqos, and Juul, Using Traditional Combustion Cigarettes as Benchmark: Evidence from the Randomized SUR-VAPES AIR Trial]=== | |||
*Glo, Iqos, and Juul have significantly less intense and persistent effects on indoor pollution in comparison to combustible tobacco cigarettes. | |||
===2018: [https://academic.oup.com/ntr/article/21/10/1371/5040053 Characterization of the Spatial and Temporal Dispersion Differences Between Exhaled E-Cigarette Mist and Cigarette Smoke]=== | ===2018: [https://academic.oup.com/ntr/article/21/10/1371/5040053 Characterization of the Spatial and Temporal Dispersion Differences Between Exhaled E-Cigarette Mist and Cigarette Smoke]=== | ||
*For both product categories, the particle concentrations registered following each puff were in the same order of magnitude. However, for e-cigarettes the particle concentration returned rapidly to background values within seconds; for conventional cigarettes it increased with successive puffs, returning to background levels after 30–45 minutes. Unlike for the e-cigarette devices tested, such temporal variation was dependent on the room ventilation rate. Particle size measurements showed that exhaled e-cigarette particles were smaller than those emitted during smoking conventional cigarettes and evaporated almost immediately after exhalation, thus affecting the removal of particles through evaporation rather than displacement by ventilation. | *For both product categories, the particle concentrations registered following each puff were in the same order of magnitude. However, for e-cigarettes the particle concentration returned rapidly to background values within seconds; for conventional cigarettes it increased with successive puffs, returning to background levels after 30–45 minutes. Unlike for the e-cigarette devices tested, such temporal variation was dependent on the room ventilation rate. Particle size measurements showed that exhaled e-cigarette particles were smaller than those emitted during smoking conventional cigarettes and evaporated almost immediately after exhalation, thus affecting the removal of particles through evaporation rather than displacement by ventilation. | ||
===2017 [https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/hhe/reports/pdfs/2015-0107-3279.pdf?fbclid=IwAR37EOr5p5EwptMhuyrIwEDkfi4qbMh0nRwu6yz2VkY0Um-q138f3LfK64Y Evaluation of Chemical Exposures at a Vape Shop]=== | ===2017 [https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/hhe/reports/pdfs/2015-0107-3279.pdf?fbclid=IwAR37EOr5p5EwptMhuyrIwEDkfi4qbMh0nRwu6yz2VkY0Um-q138f3LfK64Y Evaluation of Chemical Exposures at a Vape Shop]=== | ||
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
*Concentrations of vaping-related chemicals in our air samples were below occupational exposure limits. | *Concentrations of vaping-related chemicals in our air samples were below occupational exposure limits. | ||
*Citation: NIOSH 2017. Evaluation of chemical exposures at a vape shop. By Zwack LM, Stefaniak AB, LeBouf RF. Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Health Hazard Evaluation Report [tel:2015-0107-3279 2015-0107-3279] | *Citation: NIOSH 2017. Evaluation of chemical exposures at a vape shop. By Zwack LM, Stefaniak AB, LeBouf RF. Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Health Hazard Evaluation Report [tel:2015-0107-3279 2015-0107-3279] | ||
===2017 Dr. Michael Siegel - [http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2017/05/vape-shop-air-sampling-by-california.html Vape Shop Air Sampling by California State Health Department Suggests that Second Hand Vape Exposure is Minimal]=== | ===2017 Dr. Michael Siegel - [http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2017/05/vape-shop-air-sampling-by-california.html Vape Shop Air Sampling by California State Health Department Suggests that Second Hand Vape Exposure is Minimal]=== | ||
*This study, although conducted under very high exposure conditions in a small, non-ventilated vape shop with many employees and customers vaping and clouds of vapor visible, did not document any dangerous levels of exposure to any hazardous chemical. Nicotine exposure was essentially non-existent. Formaldehyde exposure was no different than in many indoor and outdoor environments at baseline. Acetone, acetoin, other aldehydes, toluene, benzene, and xylene were not detected. Chemicals that have been associated with "popcorn lung" were also not detected by the standard method. | *This study, although conducted under very high exposure conditions in a small, non-ventilated vape shop with many employees and customers vaping and clouds of vapor visible, did not document any dangerous levels of exposure to any hazardous chemical. Nicotine exposure was essentially non-existent. Formaldehyde exposure was no different than in many indoor and outdoor environments at baseline. Acetone, acetoin, other aldehydes, toluene, benzene, and xylene were not detected. Chemicals that have been associated with "popcorn lung" were also not detected by the standard method. | ||
*This study adds to the evidence that under real-life conditions, "secondhand vaping" does not appear to pose any significant health risks. | *This study adds to the evidence that under real-life conditions, "secondhand vaping" does not appear to pose any significant health risks. | ||
===2015: [https://sci-hub.se/10.1016/j.chroma.2015.07.094 A rapid method for the chromatographic analysis of volatile organic compounds in exhaled breath of tobacco cigarette and electronic cigarette smokers]=== | |||
*Tobacco cigarette smoke provided the samples containing highest concentrations of all compounds analyzed. Besides nicotine it contained benzene, toluene, xylenes, ethylbenzene and naphthalene in high abundance as well as other compounds such as isoprene, pent-1-ene, n-pentane, n-hexane, n-heptane and others. | |||
*This composition was in strong contrast with that of vapor from the e-cigarettes in which all these compounds were virtually absent except nicotine | |||
===2014: [https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2458-14-18 Peering through the mist: systematic review of what the chemistry of contaminants in electronic cigarettes tells us about health risks]=== | ===2014: [https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2458-14-18 Peering through the mist: systematic review of what the chemistry of contaminants in electronic cigarettes tells us about health risks]=== | ||
| Line 35: | Line 38: | ||
*There was no evidence of potential for exposures of e-cigarette users to contaminants that are associated with risk to health at a level that would warrant attention if it were an involuntary workplace exposures. | *There was no evidence of potential for exposures of e-cigarette users to contaminants that are associated with risk to health at a level that would warrant attention if it were an involuntary workplace exposures. | ||
*Exposures of bystanders are likely to be orders of magnitude less, and thus pose no apparent concern. | *Exposures of bystanders are likely to be orders of magnitude less, and thus pose no apparent concern. | ||
===2012: [https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.3109/08958378.2012.724728?scroll=top&needAccess=true&journalCode=iiht20 Comparison of the effects of e-cigarette vapor and cigarette smoke on indoor air quality]=== | ===2012: [https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.3109/08958378.2012.724728?scroll=top&needAccess=true&journalCode=iiht20 Comparison of the effects of e-cigarette vapor and cigarette smoke on indoor air quality]=== | ||
| Line 173: | Line 175: | ||
= Ethics = | |||
=== 2021: [https://academic.oup.com/ntr/issue/23/1 Ethics and Harm Reduction Approaches in Tobacco Control] (Special journal edition) === | |||
* This special issue of ''Nicotine and Tobacco Research'' focuses on the ethical aspects of tobacco harm reduction as a strategy in tobacco control. Several of the papers arise from presentations given in May 2018 at a Summer Academy on population-level bioethics hosted by the Brocher Foundation, organized by Samia Hurst, Dan Wikler, Nir Eyal, and Monica Magalhaes, specifically focusing on tobacco control. This event led to a call for papers for this journal. | |||
* The polarization of this debate and the impact this has on trainees and early career researchers and professionals in the field of nicotine and tobacco is discussed in the commentary by Carroll and colleagues. | |||
* This further motivates the search for ethical principles, which can explain why participants in these debates take the positions they do, and assist us to find an ethical position that can clarify and guide policy choice. | |||
* Thomas and colleagues consider the debate from the point of view of three major analytical approaches in bioethics—utilitarianism, (individual oriented) bioethics, and public health ethics—arguing that the first is not adequate to tackle the problems, but that the latter approaches are in fact complementary and draw to similar conclusions. | |||
* The papers in this issue consider what may be familiar problems to most readers of this journal, but in possibly unfamiliar ways drawing from the discipline of philosophy. | |||
=== 2019: [https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-019-09402-x A critical analysis of Australia’s ban on the sale of electronic nicotine delivery systems] === | |||
* Australia does not allow adult smokers to buy or use electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) that contain nicotine without a prescription. This paper critically evaluates the empirical and ethical justifications provided for the policy by Federal and State governments, public health advocates and health organisations. | |||
* We also argue that even if the evidence were stronger, it would not justify denying adult smokers the right to use ENDS either to quit smoking or as a long-term alternative to smoking cigarettes. | |||
* We outline ENDS policies that would more ethically address the public health concerns that motivated the current policy by allowing adult smokers to access ENDS for smoking cessation or tobacco harm reduction under tight regulations that discourage commercial promotion and adolescent use. | |||
* Hall, W., Morphett, K. & Gartner, C. A ''Neuroethics'' '''14''' (Suppl 3), 323–331 (2021). <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-019-09402-x</nowiki> | |||
=Mental Health= | =Mental Health= | ||
| Line 200: | Line 218: | ||
===See Also=== | ===See Also=== | ||
*[[ | *[[Nicotine therapeutic benefits|Mental Health under: Nicotine Therapeutic Benefits]] | ||
| Line 206: | Line 224: | ||
=Never Smokers= | =Never Smokers= | ||
=== 2024: [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38546715/ A Global Health Survey of People Who Vape but Never Smoked: Protocol for the VERITAS (Vaping Effects: Real-World International Surveillance) Study] === | |||
* There is only limited information about the health effects of regular vaping. Research on the health status of people who used to smoke faces the challenge that previous smoking may have caused unknown health effects. Only studies of people who vape but have never smoked combustible cigarettes can enable the detection of harms attributable to vaping. | |||
* Large prospective studies of well-characterized electronic cigarette users with and without a history of combustible cigarette smoking are warranted to establish the long-term effects of regular vaping on respiratory health. | |||
** We will conduct a global cross-sectional survey of individuals from 6 world regions. Respiratory symptoms will be assessed using a validated questionnaire-the Respiratory Symptom Experience Scale (RSES). Current vapers who are nonusers of other tobacco or nicotine products will be compared with matched controls who are nonusers of vapes and other tobacco or nicotine products. | |||
** This will be a multicountry, cross-sectional internet-based survey of 750 adults aged ≥18 years who satisfy the criteria for inclusion in either a cohort of people who exclusively vape and who are nonusers of other tobacco or nicotine products ("vapers cohort"; target N=500) or a cohort of nonvapers who are also nonusers of other tobacco or nicotine products ("controls cohort"; target N=250). | |||
* Participant recruitment started in April 2023, and enrollment was completed by November 2023 with 748 participants. Results will be reported in 2024. | |||
* https://www.researchprotocols.org/2024/1/e54236<br /> | |||
===2020: [https://www.nber.org/papers/w27507 E-Cigarettes and Respiratory Disease: A Replication, Extension, and Future Directions]=== | ===2020: [https://www.nber.org/papers/w27507 E-Cigarettes and Respiratory Disease: A Replication, Extension, and Future Directions]=== | ||
*The statistical associations between e-cigarette use and respiratory disease are driven by e-cigarette users who are also current or former smokers of combustible tobacco. | *The statistical associations between e-cigarette use and respiratory disease are driven by e-cigarette users who are also current or former smokers of combustible tobacco. | ||
| Line 229: | Line 254: | ||
=Pregnancy= | =Pregnancy= | ||
Please visit the [[Nicotine_-_Pregnancy_-_Nursing|Nicotine - Pregnancy - Nursing]] page for more information. | |||
=Perception - safety vs harm - effects on use= | |||
=== 2023: [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37544328/ Medicalisation of vaping in the UK? E-cigarette users' perspectives on the merging of commercial and medical routes to vaping.] === | |||
* An important paper, investigates the co-existence, synergies and tensions between the two models of vaping for public health - the medicalised and consumer-based approaches - drawing on the insights of users. Great subject, because these two models have entirely different modes of engagement and action. We would ideally like both to work, but it could be problematic if one compromised the impact of the other. | |||
** Three qualitative themes were identified: pro-partnership, anti-partnership and medicalisation dissonance. Medicalisation was discussed for its potential to reassure smokers about e-cigarette harms and its potential to reach smokers from disadvantaged backgrounds. Concerns were raised about cost-effectiveness, quality of support, conflicts of interest and limiting product choice. Most participants rated interventions involving partnership working as potentially helpful in switching from smoking to vaping. There were no statistically significant associations between age, gender and socioeconomic status, and helpfulness ratings. | |||
* Being qualitative, the paper is sprinkled with revealing quotes from vapers... e.g. | |||
** [Millions of] people are now using e-cigarettes in the UK and that this change came about with no involvement of any health professionals whatever. My guess is that the best thing would be for health professionals to leave things as they are, while doing everything they can to counteract adverse media reportage and trumpet the benefits of switching from smoking to e-cigarette use. (Survey participant 21) | |||
* The authors see complementary benefits in pursuing both models... | |||
** Conclusion: Both commercial and medical routes to vaping offer perceived benefits to vapers and may complement and reinforce each other to support smoking cessation. | |||
* Ward E, Dawkins L, Holland R, Pope I, Notley C. Perspect Public Health. 2023 Aug 6:17579139231185481. doi: 10.1177/17579139231185481. Online ahead of print. PMID: 37544328 | |||
=== 2023: [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37182238/ Awareness and beliefs about FDA e-cigarette regulation in the premarket application review era.] === | === 2023: [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37182238/ Awareness and beliefs about FDA e-cigarette regulation in the premarket application review era.] === | ||
* A survey of awareness and attitudes about regulation of e-cigarettes, among adults who smoke and youth (15-20): | * A survey of awareness and attitudes about regulation of e-cigarettes, among adults who smoke and youth (15-20): | ||
* Awareness that FDA regulates e-cigarettes was low among adults who smoke (25.4 %) and youth (18.5 %). Awareness that FDA authorizes e-cigarettes was also low among adults who smoke (10.8 %) and youth (12.7 %). | * Awareness that FDA regulates e-cigarettes was low among adults who smoke (25.4 %) and youth (18.5 %). Awareness that FDA authorizes e-cigarettes was also low among adults who smoke (10.8 %) and youth (12.7 %). | ||
| Line 301: | Line 333: | ||
===2018: [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29570695/ Lack of Substantial Post-Cessation Weight Increase in Electronic Cigarettes Users]=== | ===2018: [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29570695/ Lack of Substantial Post-Cessation Weight Increase in Electronic Cigarettes Users]=== | ||
“Conclusion: Within the study limitations, EC use may help smokers attenuate cigarette consumption or remain abstinent, as well as reduce their post-cessation weight increase. The potential role of the e-vapour category for harm minimization in relation to tobacco and/or food abuse requires confirmation from larger prospective studies. Moreover, the observed lack of post-cessation weight gain in those who reduced substantially cigarette consumption by switching to ECs (i.e., dual users) is an interesting finding and calls for further research investigating the role of nicotine in weight control. Meanwhile, these preliminary findings should be communicated to smokers and particularly to weight-conscious smokers intending to quit. | *“Conclusion: Within the study limitations, EC use may help smokers attenuate cigarette consumption or remain abstinent, as well as reduce their post-cessation weight increase. The potential role of the e-vapour category for harm minimization in relation to tobacco and/or food abuse requires confirmation from larger prospective studies. Moreover, the observed lack of post-cessation weight gain in those who reduced substantially cigarette consumption by switching to ECs (i.e., dual users) is an interesting finding and calls for further research investigating the role of nicotine in weight control. Meanwhile, these preliminary findings should be communicated to smokers and particularly to weight-conscious smokers intending to quit. | ||
By combining substantial reduction of smoking with prevention of post-cessation weight gain, EC-based interventions may promote an overall improvement in quality of life. Considering that the negative effects of weight increase could overshadow the health benefits of smoking abstinence, it is important to stimulate more research in this area.” | *By combining substantial reduction of smoking with prevention of post-cessation weight gain, EC-based interventions may promote an overall improvement in quality of life. Considering that the negative effects of weight increase could overshadow the health benefits of smoking abstinence, it is important to stimulate more research in this area.” | ||
===2018: [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28525609/ E-cigarettes and Weight Loss—Product Design Innovation Insights From Industry Patents]=== | ===2018: [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28525609/ E-cigarettes and Weight Loss—Product Design Innovation Insights From Industry Patents]=== | ||
| Line 333: | Line 364: | ||
=Suggested studies to add to this page= | =Suggested studies to add to this page= | ||
[[File:Data reliability.png|alt=The data reliability pyramid. Shows the quality of various data from expert opinion at the bottom to systematic review at the top (lowest quality at bottom, highest at top)|center|frame|The data reliability pyramid]] | |||
=== 2023: [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37041005/ Vaping: Government announces "swap to stop" scheme to cut smoking rates.] === | === 2023: [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37041005/ Vaping: Government announces "swap to stop" scheme to cut smoking rates.] === | ||
| Line 363: | Line 395: | ||
Click on the category link below for more studies by topic on ENDS and Nicotine. | Click on the category link below for more studies by topic on ENDS and Nicotine. | ||
[[Category:Studies, Surveys, and Papers]] | [[Category:Studies, Surveys, and Papers]] | ||
[[Category:THR Advocacy Group]] | |||
[[Category:Smoking cessation]] | |||
edits