Category: Science

  • WVA: SHEER Report is ‘Based on Weak Data’

    WVA: SHEER Report is ‘Based on Weak Data’

    Photo: Parilov

    The EU Scientific Committee on Health, Environmental and Emerging Risks (SCHEER) final report on e-cigarettes is a step backwards for Europe, according to the World Vapers’ Alliance (WVA). Based on weak data, it ignores crucial scientific evidence, experience from consumers and the expert opinions received in the consultation period, the advocacy group said in a statement.

    “This report is a tragedy for public health and will have dire consequences for smokers and vapers alike,” said Michael Landl, director of the WVA. “SCHEER ignores a large amount of scientific evidence on vaping, all of which was provided by experts and consumers to SCHEER during their consultation earlier this year. They chose to ignore it. This is a slap in the face of vapers and of common sense.”

    According to the WVA, the report does not consider crucial independent evidence from Public Health England, which shows that e-cigarettes are 95 percent less harmful than smoking and recently found that vaping is the most used means to quit smoking.

    “Countries like the U.K. and France are actively encouraging smokers to use vaping and switch to this less harmful alternative,” said Landl. “If the EU really wants to tackle smoking-related illnesses, it needs to look very carefully at all of the evidence. Unfortunately, the SCHEER report is biased against vaping, and its recommendations, if transposed into legislation, will damage public health.”

    This report is a tragedy for public health and will have dire consequences for smokers and vapers alike.

    The next few months will see further legislation updates in the EU as outlined in Europe’s Beating Cancer plan, including updates to the Tobacco Products Directive and the Tobacco Excise Directive. In this context, the findings of the SCHEER committee may ultimately be detrimental to the health of Europe’s citizens.

    “It seems like the main objective has been overlooked: reducing the number of smokers and tackling smoking-induced illnesses,” said Landl. “Vaping is not smoking and must not be treated the same. Regulation must be drafted in a way that encourages current smokers to switch. The EU needs to focus on practical solutions to reduce harm and this major point is missing from the SCHEER analysis. Vaping can help smokers quit, but this report ignores that and compares vaping to non-smoking. So it is unsurprising that the results don’t echo reality.”

    The full SCHEER is here.

  • Vaping With Cigarette-Levels of Nicotine May Reduce Exposure

    Vaping With Cigarette-Levels of Nicotine May Reduce Exposure

    E-cigarettes that deliver a cigarette-like amount of nicotine are associated with reduced smoking and reduced exposure to a major cancer-causing chemical in tobacco even with concurrent smoking, according to a new study led by researchers at Penn State College of Medicine and Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU).

    “We found that e-cigarettes that delivered a similar amount of nicotine as traditional, combustible cigarettes, helped reduce smoking and exposure to a harmful carcinogen,” said Jonathan Foulds, a researcher at Penn State Cancer Institute and professor of public health sciences and psychiatry and behavioral health. “This study shows that when smokers interested in reduction are provided with an e-cigarette with cigarette-like nicotine delivery, they are more likely to achieve significant decreases in tobacco-related toxicants, such as lower exhaled carbon monoxide levels.”

    The researchers conducted a randomized controlled trial of 520 participants who smoked more than nine cigarettes a day, were not currently using an e-cigarette device and were interested in reducing smoking but not quitting.

    We found that e-cigarettes that delivered a similar amount of nicotine as traditional, combustible cigarettes, helped reduce smoking and exposure to a harmful carcinogen.

    According to Foulds, the findings represent an important addition to the scientific literature because they suggest that when e-cigarettes deliver nicotine effectively, smokers have greater success in reducing their smoking and tobacco-related toxicant exposure. Caroline Cobb, associate professor of psychology at VCU and lead author, said the study is important for two reasons.

    “First, many e-cigarettes have poor nicotine-delivery profiles, and our results suggest that those products may be less effective in helping smokers change their behavior and associated toxicant exposure,” Cobb said.

    “Second, previous randomized controlled trials examining if e-cigarettes help smokers change their smoking behavior and toxicant exposure have used e-cigarettes with low or unknown nicotine delivery profiles,” Cobb said. “Our study highlights the importance of characterizing the e-cigarette nicotine delivery profile before conducting a randomized controlled trial. This work also has other important strengths over previous studies including the sample size, length of intervention, multiple toxicant exposure measures and control conditions.”

    The study contributes to the ongoing question of what role e-cigarettes play in changing smoking behavior, and the findings support limited safety concerns for the use of the specific e-cigarette and liquid combinations over the short term, even in the context of concurrent cigarette smoking. However, Cobb added, very little is known about the effects of e-cigarettes over the course of years, as opposed to the study’s 24-week period.

  • Broughton Launches Blue-Sky Thinking Hub

    Broughton Launches Blue-Sky Thinking Hub

    Photo: BNS

    Broughton Nicotine Services (BNS) has launched its Blue-Sky Thinking Hub, an “open innovation community” for companies to collaborate and develop ideas within the electronic nicotine-delivery system (ENDS), pharmaceutical and cannabis markets.

    BNS is a contract research organization with more than 10 years’ experience helping ENDS companies bring tobacco-free nicotine-delivery products to market.

    The company has recently added services aligned with a number of new product categories, including modern oral nicotine products, cannabidiol (CBD) and cannabis-delivery devices and work with clients based in the U.S., China, U.K., Europe and the Middle East.

    The Blue-Sky Thinking Hub seeks to engage companies with innovative ideas.

    The Blue-Sky Thinking Hub encourages manufacturers and regulators to build strong relationships to overcome product development and regulatory challenges and work toward total harm reduction. An additional benefit is around considering solutions to potential regulatory concerns as part of the product development.

    “Broughton Nicotine Services is dedicated to helping manufacturers meet regulatory requirements and delivering reduced-harm products to market,” said Nveed Chaudhary, chief regulatory officer at BNS.

    “The Blue-Sky Thinking Hub seeks to engage companies with innovative ideas, which could be anything from new formulations to plastic-free or biodegradable products, technology to discourage and reduce youth access or even alternative charging for devices.

    “Broughton helps these ideas to come to life by providing expert scientific and regulatory advice, contributing to the end goal of global total harm reduction.”

    We invite industry professionals to discuss, debate and develop their ideas for new products aligned with regulatory requirements and to hopefully help influence and shape new policies.

    “We are delighted to be launching the Blue-Sky Thinking Hub, which is the first of its kind in the industry,” said Paul Moran, chief executive at BNS.

    “We invite industry professionals to discuss, debate and develop their ideas for new products aligned with regulatory requirements and to hopefully help influence and shape new policies.

    “Together we can achieve total harm reduction and a smoke-free future.”

  • Juul Labs: Dual Use Often Ends in Transition to Vapor

    Juul Labs: Dual Use Often Ends in Transition to Vapor

    Photo: Juul Labs

    Juul Labs announced findings from its science and research program at the 2021 Annual Meeting of the Society for Research on Nicotine & Tobacco (SRNT), which was held virtually. The studies presented covered a wide range of topics that contribute to the growing body of scientific evidence on ENDS products, including information about their harm reduction potential as well as rates of complete switching to ENDS among adult smokers.

    To better understand patterns of tobacco product use among adult smokers, Juul Labs has developed an extensive behavioral research program that includes measurements of complete switching from combustible cigarettes to the Juul System among adult smokers. Among the data presented at SRNT are the results of a longitudinal study which found that more than 50 percent of adult smokers who purchased the Juul System reported complete switching at a 12-month follow-up assessment. Complete switching was defined as no cigarette smoking in the past 30 days.

    Another new study presented this week examined trends in dual use of the Juul System and cigarettes among adult smokers who recently purchased Juul products, as well as any changes in cigarette consumption among these dual-users. While dual use of Juul products and cigarettes was initially high, it declined over time, and most adult smokers who began by dual-using ultimately switched completely away from cigarettes 12 months after initial purchase. Additionally, over 60 percent of dual-users at 12 months substantially reduced their average daily cigarette consumption. Researchers concluded that dual use is often a transitional stage characterized by reductions in cigarette consumption followed by complete switching away from cigarettes.

  • Higher-Nicotine Juul Products May Facilitate Switching

    Higher-Nicotine Juul Products May Facilitate Switching

    Photo: Juul Labs

    The nicotine delivery of Juul products available in the United States and Canada (59 mg/mL or 5 percent nicotine by weight) more closely resembles the nicotine delivery and experience of cigarette smoking than Juul products available in the European Union, which contain 18 mg/mL and/or 9 mg/mL of nicotine, according to a new study from Juul Labs published in Nicotine & Tobacco Research.

    Researchers posited that heavier and more dependent smokers in particular may require the greater nicotine delivery of the higher nicotine concentration Juul pods (59 mg/mL) in order to successfully transition away from cigarettes.

    The new study, which consisted of 24 adult smokers, assessed the nicotine delivery and subjective effects of combustible cigarettes compared to the Juul system with three nicotine concentrations: 59 mg/mL (U.S. and Canada), 18 mg/mL (U.K. and Canada) and 9 mg/mL (U.K.).

    At each of five study visits, participants used one of four Juul products or smoked their usual brand of cigarette during controlled (10 puffs) and ad libitum use (5 minutes) sessions. Blood samples were collected, and levels of nicotine in the bloodstream were measured for each study product. Subjective effects, including relief of craving for cigarettes and withdrawal symptoms, were assessed 30 minutes after participants used each product.

    The higher concentration (59 mg/mL) Juul product delivered significantly greater levels of nicotine and significantly reduced craving and withdrawal compared to the Juul with 18 mg/mL and 9 mg/mL nicotine concentrations. Researchers concluded that the lower nicotine delivery and craving relief from the 18 mg/mL and 9 mg/mL Juul pods available in the EU may limit the product’s ability to provide a satisfying alternative to cigarette smoking—particularly for more dependent adult smokers living in that region.

    “When considering laws and regulations governing nicotine concentration in ENDS, policymakers should bear in mind that the availability of a variety of alternative nicotine products may facilitate even more smokers transitioning away from cigarettes,” said Mark Rubinstein, vice president of global scientific affairs at Juul Labs.

  • Research: Juul Nicotine Can Compete With Combustibles

    Research: Juul Nicotine Can Compete With Combustibles

    Photo: Ethan Parsa from Pixabay

    The Juul System may deliver a sufficiently satisfying level nicotine to compete with combustible cigarettes for adult smokers, according to new research.

    Published in the journal Drug and Alcohol Dependence, the clinical study compared the nicotine delivery profile of the Juul System with other nicotine-containing products, including cigarettes, to assess their pharmacokinetic profiles. The study found that while the initial nicotine delivery for the Juul System was similar to that of combustible cigarettes, the maximum and total amount of nicotine delivered was lower than that of combustible cigarettes, on par with another ENDS product, and higher than nicotine gum.

    “When considering laws and regulations governing nicotine, policymakers should bear in mind that providing a similar nicotine effect and experience to combustible cigarettes is critical to facilitate an adult smoker’s transition away from smoking,” said Mark Rubinstein, vice president of science at Juul Labs in a statement. “E-cigarettes have the potential to displace combustible cigarettes, but only if they deliver nicotine at levels to satisfy smokers.”

  • BAT: Scientific Committee Must Enhance Review Quality

    BAT: Scientific Committee Must Enhance Review Quality

    Credit: Ousa Chea

    The largest tobacco in Europe wants the European Commission scientific committee to enhance the quality of its ongoing review into e-cigarettes. British American Tobacco (BAT) highlighted several serious flaws in the committee’s research.

    “The results of the review may pave the way for revisions to rules that affect millions of vapers across the EU,” BAT stated in a press note. The e-cigarette maker’s response highlights major flaws with the methodology and conclusions of the review.

    The company states that, among other issues:

    • Fails to contextualize the risks of e-cigarettes relative to those associated with continued smoking.
    • Makes inaccurate claims regarding e-cigarettes many of which have been widely debunked by the scientific and public health communities.
    • Contains false assumptions that e-cigarette aerosol is the same as tobacco smoke.
    • Neglects landmark independent studies showing that many smokers view e-cigarettes as an acceptable alternative to smoking.
    • Relies on data from non-EU markets and studies on products pre-dating the current Tobacco Products Directive that are not relevant to the current EU context.

    The SCHEER Committee (Scientific Committee on Health, Environmental and Emerging Risks) is an advisory body that was tasked with producing a scientific review of the health effects of e-cigarettes as part of the European Commission’s forthcoming review of the Tobacco Products Directive.

    “If future regulations on vaping were to be based on the review as it stands now, they would be based on flawed evidence. We call on the SCHEER Committee to address the serious gaps in the review and reflect the weight of evidence supporting the harm reduction potential of e-cigarettes relative to continued smoking,” said Eric Sensi-Minautier, VP EU Affairs at BAT. “It’s important that the Commission bases any change to the rules on vaping on accurate scientific advice that has been conducted to the highest standards, to make sure the millions of European vapers who use e-cigarettes as an alternative to smoking can continue to access them. We take the science around e-cigarettes seriously and are leading our own weight of evidence review to advance understanding of this growing product category.”

    BAT highlights the need for greater transparency and cooperation between all stakeholders including industry, government, scientists, public health bodies and academics.

  • Rogers: Anti-Science War Being Waged on Vapor

    Rogers: Anti-Science War Being Waged on Vapor

    scientist holding vial
    Credit: Science in HD

    The coronavirus pandemic has taught us for certain that public health experts should stick to public health. After suffering through months of the COVID-19 lockdowns and surges, Americans are fully aware how politics and misinformation can negatively impact public health.

    The fact is that when the medical and health communities lose their focus on data and science – distracted by partisan advocates and social justice campaigns – Americans pay the ultimate price in terms of their health and well-being.

    Just in the last several months, the American public has been bombarded with conflicting reports over the effectiveness of wearing masks to combat COVID-19; whether Hydroxychloroquine is a safe therapy for coronavirus; and the safety of a COVID-19 vaccine. Health and science have been politicized and weaponized for political purposes.

    Outside of coronavirus, we have witnessed other “campaigns” that put ideology over science: the anti-vaxxer movement, the anti-GMO movement, and the ongoing disinformation over e-cigarettes.

    The Center for Medicine in the Public Interest’s Robert Goldberg recently wrote: “… for all the harm anti-vaccination fabrications have had on public health, a more recent campaign of medical disinformation about the dangers of e-cigarettes is likely to be more damaging by far.”

    The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) notes “nearly half a million Americans die prematurely of smoking or exposure to secondhand smoke. (That is about one of every 5 deaths.) Another 16 million live with a serious illness caused by smoking. Smoking-related illness in the United States costs more than $300 billion each year in health care spending and lost productivity.”

    E-cigarettes, while not a cure for nicotine dependence, can help reduce the death and disease caused by combustible tobacco. Public Health England (PHE), the United States equivalent of the CDC, concluded best estimates show e-cigarettes are 95% less harmful to your health than normal cigarettes, and when supported by a smoking cessation service, help most smokers to quit tobacco altogether.”

    When politics takes precedence over science, we are left with both bad policy and bad science. How does Senator Dick Durbin, D-IL, erroneously declaring on the floor of the United States Senate that “vaping doesn’t guarantee any end to tobacco addiction” help the millions of Americans desperately trying to quit tobacco? What’s more, how does the Democratic leader in the Senate, Chuck Schumer, D-NY, calling vaping devices “ticking time bombs” offer clarity and confidence to smokers looking for alternatives that will help them quit the habit? Senator Schumer actually went so far as to demand that the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission take an active role in a “war on vaping.” These assertions betray an anti-corporate ideology (companies that manufacture e-cigs are greedy, evil), not a pro-science stance.

    Almost 40 million Americans are addicted to smoking cigarettes. According to the CDC, smoking tobacco is the “leading cause of preventable disease, disability, and death in the United States’ resulting in 480,000 deaths annually in the United States” – which breaks down to 1,300 smoking-related deaths per day, 54 deaths per hour, or almost one death per minute. One dead American every minute and we are playing politics with adult vaping. It is irrational and anti-science.

    Are e-cigarettes healthy? Should young people who do not smoke pick up a vaping habit? No, of course not. But these are the wrong questions and not the issue up for public discussion. Rather, the more relevant questions are: “Is vaping a safer alternative to smoking?” “Does vaping help smokers quit tobacco?” And here the answer to both questions is the same: an unequivocal, loud “yes.”

    Politicians and ideologically-driven advocates should not be explicitly working to scare tobacco users from using a product that, relative to smoking, does less harm to their health, and is proven to be an effective means in helping them quit smoking altogether.

    In 1983, U.S Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, declared to his opponents in a policy debate that “you are entitled to your own views, but you are not entitled to your own facts.” What was true in 1983 is still true in 2020. The facts are clear. Vaping bans and politicized attacks on vaping devices hurt those who want to kick the smoking habit.

    Here are the facts. Millions of Americans are dying from cigarette smoking because quitting tobacco is extraordinarily difficult. Research, published last year in the New England Journal of Medicine, offers powerful evidence that vaping can help smokers quit cigarettes. Anti-smoking activists and government regulators promoting vaping bans and, in Senator Schumer’s words, fighting a ‘war on vaping’ are not advancing science or good public-health policy. On the contrary, these advocates and politicians are fighting technologies and products that could save millions of American lives.

    Let’s stop the war on vaping; let’s take the politics out of health.

    This column initially appeared at realclearhealth.com.Jerry Rogers is the editor of RealClearHealth and the host of the ‘Jerry Rogers Show’ on WBAL NewsRadio.

  • Evidence Shows Vaping Most Effective Way to Quit Smoking

    Evidence Shows Vaping Most Effective Way to Quit Smoking

    Vapes containing nicotine are more effective in helping people quit smoking than patches or gum, and safer than cigarettes, although more evidence is needed on their potential long-term impacts, a new review of evidence found on Wednesday.

    Studies suggest vaping could boost the number of people who stop smoking, according to an article by Reuters.

    “There is now evidence that electronic cigarettes with nicotine are likely to increase the chances of quitting successfully compared to nicotine gum or patches,” said Jamie Hartmann-Boyce, an expert at the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group who co-led the review.

    The review was conducted by Cochrane, an organisation that pools the best scientific research to help assess the relative effectiveness of health interventions.

    E-cigarettes have been around for about a decade, and increased in popularity significantly in recent years. Unlike gum and patches, they mimic cigarette smoking because they are hand-held and generate a vapour.

    The World Health Organization says tobacco kills up to half of all its users, clocking up a death toll of more than 8 million people a year.

    A 2016 Cochrane Review also found e-cigarettes were more likely to help smokers quit than nicotine patches or gum, but the available body of evidence at that time was slimmer.

    A spate of vaping-related lung injuries and deaths in the United States last year threw a spotlight on vaping and e-cigarettes, and prompted bans on some types of the products.

    But the outbreak was not linked to vapes that contain nicotine, and appeared to be waning late last year as evidence grew that vitamin E acetate, a cutting agent used in marijuana vapes, could be behind the cases.

  • Wales Teens Vape Less, Smoke More Cigarettes

    Wales Teens Vape Less, Smoke More Cigarettes

    E-cigarette use among young people has fallen for the first time in Wales, according to research by Cardiff University.

    But the decline in 11 to 16-year-olds smoking has stalled, the study found.

    The 2019 Student Health and Wellbeing Survey asked more than 100,000 pupils from 198 secondary schools across Wales about their smoking habits. The findings show 22 percent of young people had tried an e-cigarette, down from 25 percent in 2017, according to the BBC.

    Those vaping weekly or more often had also declined from 3.3 percent to 2.5 percent over the same period. Experimenting with vaping is still more popular than trying tobacco (11 percent), according to the data.

    But the long-term decline in those regularly smoking had stalled, with 4 percent of those surveyed smoking at least weekly in 2019, the same level as in 2013. Young people from poorer backgrounds were still more likely to start smoking than those from richer families, according to the findings.