Category: Harm Reduction

E-cigs have positive image
Photo by symphony of love
Daily users of electronic cigarettes view them as almost as satisfying or even more satisfying than traditional cigarettes, according to a story by Henry L. Davis for buffalonews.com citing the results of a small study carried out by the University at Buffalo, New York, US.
Daily users also view the use of electronic cigarettes as being less harmful than the consumption of traditional cigarettes.
The study of 105 US Army Reserve and National Guard soldiers and their partners found that the study participants who vaped daily reported electronic cigarettes as being ‘at least as satisfying’ as cigarettes. Fifty-eight percent of them said that vaping was ‘much more’ satisfying.
Researchers reported also that the perceived level of danger posed by the use of electronic cigarettes decreased as frequency of use increased.
The research, which was funded by the National Institute of Drug Abuse, appears online in the journal Preventive Medicine Reports.
“The results argue that satisfaction, perceived harm or danger and product type seem to all work together to promote use or avoidance,” Lynn Kozlowski, lead author and a professor of community health and health behavior, said in a statement.
“The mistaken belief that e-cigarettes are more harmful than cigarettes can influence some smokers to not use e-cigs. If the type of product they use is less satisfying, this also can influence likelihood of use,” Kozlowski said.
March 7, 2017
Fat cat executives slammed
Photo by Big Eyed Sol
Campaigners have criticised Philip Morris International after it was reported that the tobacco company was supporting an increase in taxes on cigarettes in the UK to encourage smokers to switch to alternative nicotine products.
“It’s very easy for fat cat executives to call for the tax on cigarettes to be increased,” said Simon Clark, director of the smokers’ group Forest (Freedom Organisation for the Right to Enjoy Smoking Tobacco).
“The hardest hit will be the less well-off including the low paid and the elderly who have to survive on a state pension.”
Clark made it clear that Forest supported the development of safer nicotine products including electronic cigarettes because it supported choice.
“But making smoking even more expensive when we already have punitive levels of taxation discriminates against consumers who choose to smoke,” he said.
Clark accused Philip Morris of wanting to force smokers to switch to electronic cigarettes and other products.
“New nicotine products are great because they give smokers a choice,” he said.
“However, many smokers enjoy smoking and don’t want to switch.
“Government, the anti-smoking industry and Philip Morris should respect that choice and focus on education not coercion.”
PMI has put a lot of investment into reduced-risk products, especially its iQOS heated-tobacco device. In September, it inaugurated its first manufacturing facility for the large-scale production of two heated-tobacco alternatives to cigarettes – a facility that was said at the time to represent ‘an anticipated investment of approximately €500 million’.
Towards the end of last year, PMI’s CEO, André Calantzopoulos, in announcing that iQOS would be launched in the UK, said he would like to work with governments towards the “phase-out” of conventional cigarettes. He was quoted by the BBC as saying that the company knew its products harmed their consumers and that the only correct response was to “to find and commercialise” ones that were less harmful. “That is clearly our objective,” he said.
But iQOS is proving to be a hard sell in respect of some authorities. Earlier this year a report in Australia said that PMI was unlikely to get permission to sell its iQOS heated tobacco device in that country under current regulations, and the New Zealand’s Ministry of Health was said in report in that country to have declared that a heated-tobacco product launched in New Zealand by PMI was illegal.
The European Commission has said that it is in favor of a cautious approach to heated-tobacco products because it believes that there is a lack of evidence relating to the short- and long-term health effects of using such devices.
Christopher Hope, chief political correspondent reported in the Daily Telegraph on Friday that Philip Morris international ‘has for the first time asked to be taxed more by [UK] Chancellor Philip Hammond – to encourage smokers to switch to healthier alternatives’
The Telegraph story is at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/03/tax-us-worlds-biggest-cigarette-maker-tells-philip-hammond/.
March 6, 2017
Nicotine ban ‘unethical’
Photo by Vaping360
A group of leading health experts has called the Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration’s (TGA) recent interim decision effectively to ban nicotine-containing electronic cigarettes ‘unethical’ and ‘unscientific’, according to a story by Chloe Booker for the Sydney Morning Herald.
The group says the TGA has exaggerated the dangers of electronic cigarettes while ignoring their ‘substantial health benefits’.
The group of 16 academics, researchers and doctors supported an application to the TGA to allow the use of nicotine at concentrations of 3.6 percent or less in electronic cigarettes as a tobacco harm reduction measure.
However, the TGA made an interim decision in February to continue its ban on nicotine for use in electronic cigarettes. It is due to make a final decision on March 23.
In response, the group has made a submission calling the ban ‘unethical’ and ‘unscientific’.
It has pointed out what it believes are ‘fundamental flaws’ in the TGA’s reasoning, which they say is not supported by evidence or overseas experience.
A major concern for the TGA is that electronic cigarettes could provide a gateway for young people to take up smoking, but the group says this is ‘unjustified and overblown’ as overseas experience shows the opposite – that young people are vaping instead.
The group pointed to 2014 research that estimated six million Europeans had quit smoking by using electronic cigarettes and a review that had found vaping was at least 95 percent safer than smoking.
Ideology was behind the ban and why Australia’s most prominent health organisations, such as the Cancer Council and Heart Foundation, supported it, University of New South Wales Associate Professor Colin Mendelsohn said.
“It’s political, it’s emotional, it’s ideological – it’s ‘we’ve always done it this way’,” he said.
“They are finding little problems in the research and are basically throwing smokers under the bus.”
March 6, 2017
Children bequeathed lethal environments
Photo by Zaskoda
The World Health Organization says that more than one in four deaths of children under five years of age are attributable to unhealthy environments.
In a press note issued today about two new reports, the WHO said the five main causes of death in children under five years of age were linked to the environment.
‘Every year, environmental risks – such as indoor and outdoor air pollution, second-hand smoke, unsafe water, lack of sanitation, and inadequate hygiene – take the lives of 1.7 million children under five years,’ the press note said, citing the reports.
‘The first report, Inheriting a Sustainable World: Atlas on Children’s Health and the Environment reveals that a large portion of the most common causes of death among children aged one month to five years – diarrhoea, malaria and pneumonia – are preventable by interventions known to reduce environmental risks, such as access to safe water and clean cooking fuels.
‘A companion report, Don’t pollute my future! The impact of the environment on children’s health, provides a comprehensive overview of the environment’s impact on children’s health, illustrating the scale of the challenge. Every year:
- 570,000 children under five years die from respiratory infections, such as pneumonia, attributable to indoor and outdoor air pollution, and second-hand smoke.
- 361,000 children under five years die due to diarrhoea, as a result of poor access to clean water, sanitation, and hygiene.
- 270,000 children die during their first month of life from conditions, including prematurity, which could be prevented through access to clean water, sanitation, and hygiene in health facilities as well as reducing air pollution.
- 200,000 deaths of children under five years from malaria could be prevented through environmental actions, such as reducing breeding sites of mosquitoes or covering drinking-water storage.
- 200,000 children under five years die from unintentional injuries attributable to the environment, such as poisoning, falls, and drowning.
There was no mention in the press note about the effects of poverty on small children.
March 6, 2017
E-cigs a ‘no-brainer’
Photo by peretzpup
The Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration’s (TGA) recent interim decision to effectively ban nicotine-containing electronic cigarettes could potentially cost millions of people more than A$6,000 a year – and it’s the poor who will be the hardest hit, according to a story by Joe Hilderbrand for news.com.au.
Tobacco Treatment Specialist Dr. Colin Mendelsohn of the University of New South Wales’ School of Public Health was said to have calculated that a smoker on 20 cigarettes a day spent $7,300 a year on cigarettes – with that amount increasing by 12.5 percent each year as a result of tobacco tax hikes.
By contrast, Mendelsohn assessed that the typical cost of vaping using nicotine electronic cigarettes would be $1,150 per year – representing an annual saving of $6,150 for every smoker who switched.
Meanwhile, studies had found that vaping was 95 percent safer than smoking.
“So vaping is at least 85 percent less expensive than smoking and 95 percent safer, Mendelsohn was quoted as saying. “You will be richer and healthier if you make the switch to vaping. To me, that’s a no brainer.”
The revelation about the cost savings potentially available to vapers comes as a new study has found that financially stressed smokers are often going without meals rather than cigarettes and that the more smokers are driven into poverty the less likely they are to quit.
There are about 2.6 million daily smokers in Australia, according to the latest Australian Bureau of Statistics figures – almost 15 percent of the adult population. And they are overwhelmingly concentrated in poorer areas.
Hildebrand’s story is at: http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/health/health-problems/decision-could-cost-millions-of-australians-6000-a-year/news-story/aee8a80a977219665fd73315f42c5112.
March 2, 2017
There is another way
The authors of a new booklet are urging US lawmakers and regulators to rethink traditional strategies for combating tobacco smoking and its negative health outcomes.
In a press note issued yesterday, The Heartland Institute said that for decades, lawmakers and regulators had used taxes, bans, and strong regulations in an attempt to reduce the negative health effects of smoking. And recently, some had sought to extend those policies to electronic cigarettes.
‘A new booklet published by The Heartland Institute titled Vaping, E-Cigarettes, and Public Policy Toward Alternatives to Smoking urges policymakers to re-think that tax-and-regulate strategy,’ it said.
‘Health professionals have long known that the smoke created by combustible cigarettes, rather than the nicotine, is what makes smoking harmful. Smokeless tobacco and e-cigarettes provide a much safer and healthier alternative delivery system for nicotine.
‘Tobacco harm reduction is a proven strategy for helping smokers reduce their tobacco use or quit altogether.
‘Dr. Brad Rodu, lead author of Vaping, E-Cigarettes, and Public Policy Toward Alternatives to Smoking, has been at the forefront of tobacco harm reduction research and policy development for more than 20 years. He is a professor of medicine at the University of Louisville, where he is a member of the James Graham Brown Cancer Center and holds an endowed chair in tobacco harm reduction research.
‘Dr. Rodu and his co-authors – Matthew Glans and Lindsey Stroud of The Heartland Institute – encourage policymakers to be mindful of the extensive research that supports tobacco harm reduction and understand that “bans, excessive regulations, or high taxes on e-cigarettes could encourage smokers to stay with more-harmful traditional cigarettes”.’
The booklet discusses issues including:
■ Indoor and outdoor bans on vaping.
■ Prohibiting e-cigarette purchases by minors.
■ Regulating flavors.
■ Myths and facts about e-cigarettes.
■ The idea there is an epidemic of children being poisoned by e-cigarettes.
■ E-cigarettes as a gateway to smoking.
■ How e-cigarettes help smokers quit.
■ History of failed anti-smoking campaigns.
■ The case for tobacco harm reduction.
■ ‘Quit or Die’ as the only strategy.
A free PDF of the booklet is available at: https://www.heartland.org/_template-assets/documents/publications/Vaping%20E-Cigarettes%20and%20Public%20Policy.pdf.
March 2, 2017
Flavor ban one step closer
Photo by ‌Bahadorjn
In the US, New Jersey has moved one step closer to banning the sale and distribution of most flavored electronic smoking products, according to a story by Brent Johnson for NJ Advance Media.
The state Assembly’s health committee voted 7-2, with two abstentions, on Monday to approve the bill, which would ban the sale of vaping devices and products in flavors other than clove, menthol and tobacco. Currently there are hundreds of flavors available, such as honey, chocolate and cherry.
New Jersey already bans the sale or distribution of flavored cigarettes, except those with clove, menthol or tobacco flavors.
If passed by both houses of the state legislature and then signed by the governor, the new bill would extend that law to ban electronic smoking devices, cartridges, and liquid refills with flavors other than the three allowed.
Sponsors of the bill say its goal is to prevent vaping products from being targeted at young people, and possibly luring them into smoking tobacco products.
But opponents of the proposed ban say electronic cigarettes are less risky than are tobacco cigarettes, and can help people quit smoking. Plus, they say, banning the products would cause many vape shops to close.
Kevin Roberts, a former spokesman for Governor Chris Christie who now represents Logic Technology, the nation’s third-largest supplier of electronic cigarettes, said Monday that the bill went against “public health goals and would undoubtedly push countless individuals back toward conventional cigarettes and their known harms”.
March 1, 2017
E-cig gagging order mooted
Photo by wynged wyrdz
As part of its anti-vaping legislation, Canada’s federal government is attempting to limit public access to scientific data, according to Derek James From writing a guest column on torontosun.com.
Bill S-5, which was introduced in November 2016, would prohibit manufacturers or purveyors of electronic cigarettes from sharing scientific information comparing the health effects of smoking traditional combustible tobacco cigarettes with vaping.
This ban is said to be so broad that merely making Canadians visiting a vape shop aware of a peer-reviewed scientific journal article could result in a fine of up to $500,000 and a two year prison term.
From, who is a lawyer with the Canadian Constitution Foundation in Calgary, said the restriction would almost certainly attract constitutional scrutiny as a violation of the right to freedom of expression.
He said that, in 2015, Public Health England, an agency of the UK Department of Health, had issued a press release announcing the results of an independent expert review that found that vaping electronic cigarettes was 95 percent less harmful than was smoking traditional cigarettes.
‘They also found no evidence that vaping is a “gateway” to smoking,’ From wrote. ‘Finally, they warned that nearly half of the population was not aware of the health benefits of switching from smoking to vaping.
‘Yet, once Bill S-5 becomes law, anyone selling e-cigarettes in Canada would be breaking the law if they even provided this U.K. Department of Health report and its life-saving information to customers.’
March 1, 2017
U.S. government at a crossroads
Jeff Stier
A new report says that this is a critical moment in determining how the U.S. federal government is going to deal with alternative products to smoking.
‘The federal government can either allow people to make free choices that might help save their lives or be co-opted by misguided public health extremists who aim to eradicate tobacco and even nicotine altogether, regardless of the potential damage to millions of Americans who want to stop smoking,’ the report warns.
The report, Rethinking tobacco policy: The federal government should stop blocking alternatives to smoking, was written by Daren Bakst and Jeff Stier, and appears on The Heritage Foundation website.
A summary of the report says that Congress and the Trump Administration can both help smokers move away from smoking and lower regulatory burdens by embracing tobacco harm reduction as a preferred strategy. ‘This requires no government interventionist policies,’ it says. ‘Instead, the federal government simply needs to step aside and allow the market to make it possible for smokers to have access to innovative products that can help them stop smoking.’
Three key takeaways from the report are given as:
* As a result of private innovation in the marketplace, important alternatives to smoking can reduce the risks associated with the delivery of nicotine.
* When it comes to the alternatives to smoking, the federal government is blocking products and much-needed innovation that could help save the lives of Americans.
* Congress and the Trump Administration should move the government away from blocking access to products that may help individuals reduce their cigarette smoking.
The report’s recommendations include:
* Congress should reform the Tobacco Control Act of 2009.
* Federal agencies should correct misleading information and provide proper information to the public.
* Congress and the Administration should make tobacco harm reduction the policy norm throughout the federal government.
Daren Bakst is research fellow in agricultural policy in the Center for Free Markets and Regulatory Reform, of the Institute for Economic Freedom, at The Heritage Foundation.
Jeff Stier (pictured) is a senior fellow at the National Center for Public Policy Research in Washington, DC, and heads its Risk Analysis Division. The full report is here.

February 28, 2017
End-game within reach
A new report proposes the immediate and accelerated implementation of three actions aimed at ending cigarette use by US adults.
* Increase excise taxes at the federal level and in many states with four goals: lowering smoking rates, harmonizing taxes across state borders to reduce the illegal trade, covering the costs of smoking-related disease, and encouraging a shift from cigarettes to reduced-risk products and complete cessation.
* Encourage health and life insurers, employers, and health professionals actively to promote smoking cessation measures supported by the US Preventive Services Task Force and the 2014 US Surgeon General’s Report.
* Establish a more rational tobacco, nicotine, and alternative products regulatory framework that is based on their relative risks, and that is adaptable to the increased speed of innovation in new technology development.
The report, Ending cigarette use by adults in a generation is possible, was the work of a team of tobacco control and health experts whose goal was to assess the views of 120 US tobacco control experts about what they saw as some of the key areas and priorities for significantly reducing or eliminating the use of the cigarette.
According to the report’s executive summary, each year cigarette smoking directly kills 480,000 Americans. ‘It also harms many millions more through secondary effects,’ it says. ‘The economic toll is enormous and costly, with an annual medical bill of over $170 billion. Yet, the public and media’s focus has largely shifted to other health issues. Mainstream tobacco control largely centers on measures to slow youth uptake, which will yield mortality and health gains, but will only reach its full impact 50 years from now.
‘There is an urgent need to accelerate progress to end cigarette smoking in adults. That requires fully implementing historically-validated tobacco control measures – especially tobacco taxes – and integrating new science-based reduced-risk products into tobacco control. Simultaneously, we need to pursue a long-term approach to nicotine that is coherent with, and proportionate to, the risks associated with other public health measures required to address psychoactive substances.
‘We consulted 120 key tobacco control leaders across the United States… They represent a broad swath of tobacco control experience and expertise, ranging from researchers and academics, to advocates, state and urban tobacco control staff, government officials, and local front-line workers. Their input is integrated into a proposed strategy to achieve the goal of reducing cigarette smoking in adults to less than 10 percent in all communities nationwide by 2024.
‘This is not a consensus report. We considered all inputs, and focus here on what represents the needed balance between what has worked to reduce smoking in the US, and additional steps that are now needed. These steps draw upon advances in technology and deeper insights into what drives behavior change.’
February 28, 2017