(Added content) |
(Added content) |
||
| Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
*This study provides important evidence that should be taken into consideration in further investigative approaches, to clarify the different sensitivity of the various bacterial species to e-liquids, including the respiratory microbiota, to highlight the possible role of flavors and nicotine. | *This study provides important evidence that should be taken into consideration in further investigative approaches, to clarify the different sensitivity of the various bacterial species to e-liquids, including the respiratory microbiota, to highlight the possible role of flavors and nicotine. | ||
*Citation: Virginia Fuochi, Massimo Caruso , Rosalia Emma, Aldo Stivala, Riccardo Polosa, Alfio Distefano and Pio Maria Furneri *, “Investigation on the Antibacterial Activity of Electronic Cigarette Liquids (ECLs): A Proof of Concept Study”, Current Pharmaceutical Biotechnology (2020) 21: 1. doi:10.2174/1389201021666200903121624 | *Citation: Virginia Fuochi, Massimo Caruso , Rosalia Emma, Aldo Stivala, Riccardo Polosa, Alfio Distefano and Pio Maria Furneri *, “Investigation on the Antibacterial Activity of Electronic Cigarette Liquids (ECLs): A Proof of Concept Study”, Current Pharmaceutical Biotechnology (2020) 21: 1. doi:10.2174/1389201021666200903121624 | ||
===2020: [https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.10.21.20216630v1 SACCHARIN TRANSIT TIME IN EXCLUSIVE E-CIGARETTES AND HEATED TOBACCO PRODUCTS USERS: A CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY]=== | |||
Ex-smokers who have switched to exclusive regular use of combustion-free nicotine delivery systems (i.e. ECs/e-cigarettes and HTPs/heated tobacco products) exhibit similar saccharin transit time as never and former smokers. This suggests that combustion-free nicotine delivery technologies are unlikely to have detrimental effects on MCC (mucociliary clearance) function | |||
| Line 45: | Line 49: | ||
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. | ||
===2020: [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31960343/ Vaping effects on asthma: results from a web survey and clinical investigation]=== | |||
Almost all of the asthmatics who previously smoked would recommend switching to e-cig, and vaping did not worsen their asthma symptoms. Furthermore, switching from tobacco smoking to e-cigs showed a significant improvement in asthma control and quality of life, not showing, in the period studied, to affect pulmonary function tests. | |||
[https://sci-hub.se/10.1007/s11739-019-02247-5 PDF Version] | |||
| Line 54: | Line 63: | ||
===2018: [https://www.dovepress.com/health-effects-in-copd-smokers-who-switch-to-electronic-cigarettes-a-r-peer-reviewed-fulltext-article-COPD Health effects in COPD smokers who switch to electronic cigarettes: a retrospective-prospective 3-year follow-up]=== | ===2018: [https://www.dovepress.com/health-effects-in-copd-smokers-who-switch-to-electronic-cigarettes-a-r-peer-reviewed-fulltext-article-COPD Health effects in COPD smokers who switch to electronic cigarettes: a retrospective-prospective 3-year follow-up]=== | ||
The present study suggests that EC use may ameliorate objective and subjective COPD outcomes and that the benefits gained may persist long-term. EC use may reverse some of the harm resulting from tobacco smoking in COPD patients | The present study suggests that EC use may ameliorate objective and subjective COPD outcomes and that the benefits gained may persist long-term. EC use may reverse some of the harm resulting from tobacco smoking in COPD patients | ||
===2017: [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-14043-2?fbclid=IwAR1YUw7H95R1mAOuD6JcjsQG3Kl6-qtdbzp2s2zx9UnJGn_w79VcnkpE2kY Health impact of E-cigarettes: a prospective 3.5-year study of regular daily users who have never smoked]=== | |||
In a small sample of young-adult never-smoking, daily EC users who were carefully followed for approximately 3½ years, we found no decrements in spirometric indices, development of respiratory symptoms, changes in markers of lung inflammation in exhaled air or findings of early lung damage on HRCT, when compared with a carefully matched group of never-smoking non-EC users. Even the heaviest EC users failed to exhibit any evidence of emerging lung injury as reflected in these physiologic, clinical or inflammatory measures. Moreover, no changes were noted in blood pressure or heart rate. Since the EC users who we studied were never smokers, potential confounding by inhalation of combustion products of tobacco were obviated. | |||
| Line 89: | Line 102: | ||
===2016: [https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/changes-in-the-frequency-of-airway-infections-in-smokers-who-switched-to-vaping-results-of-an-online-survey-2155-6105-1000290.pdf Changes in the Frequency of Airway Infections in Smokers Who Switched to Vaping: Results of an Online Survey]=== | ===2016: [https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/changes-in-the-frequency-of-airway-infections-in-smokers-who-switched-to-vaping-results-of-an-online-survey-2155-6105-1000290.pdf Changes in the Frequency of Airway Infections in Smokers Who Switched to Vaping: Results of an Online Survey]=== | ||
Results: “Altogether 941 responses were received. Overall, 29% of responders reported no change in respiratory symptoms, 5% reported worsening, and 66% reported an improvement (95% CI=62.9-69.0).” | Results: “Altogether 941 responses were received. Overall, 29% of responders reported no change in respiratory symptoms, 5% reported worsening, and 66% reported an improvement (95% CI=62.9-69.0).” | ||
===2016: [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27011045/ Persisting long term benefits of smoking abstinence and reduction in asthmatic smokers who have switched to electronic cigarettes]=== | |||
This prospective study confirms that EC use ameliorates objective and subjective asthma outcomes and shows that these beneficial effects may persist in the long term. EC use can reverse harm from tobacco smoking in asthma patients who smoke. The evidence-based notion that substitution of conventional cigarettes with EC is unlikely to raise significant respiratory concerns, can improve counseling between physicians and their asthmatic patients who are using or intend to use ECs. | |||
===2016: [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/eci.12651 Changes in breathomics from a 1‐year randomized smoking cessation trial of electronic cigarettes]=== | ===2016: [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/eci.12651 Changes in breathomics from a 1‐year randomized smoking cessation trial of electronic cigarettes]=== | ||
Conclusion: “Smokers invited to switch to electronic cigarettes who completely abstained from smoking showed steady progressive improvements in their exhaled breath measurements and symptom scores. FeNo and eCO normalization is highly supportive of improved respiratory health outcomes and adds to the notion that quitting from tobacco smoking can reverse harm in the lung.” | Conclusion: “Smokers invited to switch to electronic cigarettes who completely abstained from smoking showed steady progressive improvements in their exhaled breath measurements and symptom scores. FeNo and eCO normalization is highly supportive of improved respiratory health outcomes and adds to the notion that quitting from tobacco smoking can reverse harm in the lung.” | ||
===2016: [https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/changes-in-the-frequency-of-airway-infections-in-smokers-who-switched-to-vaping-results-of-an-online-survey-2155-6105-1000290.php?aid=77944 Changes in the Frequency of Airway Infections in Smokers Who Switched To Vaping: Results of an Online Survey]=== | |||
The switch from smoking to vaping was associated with a reduced incidence of self-reported respiratory infections. | |||
edits