Category: Science

  • Quitting made easier

    Quitting made easier

    In a study of adult smokers in Scotland given a blu PRO vaping device and liquids, more than a third completely switched to vaping while the others significantly reduced their average smoking frequency, according to a press note by Imperial Brands’ Fontem Ventures subsidiary.
    A new peer-reviewed study funded by Fontem Ventures and published in the Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health of 72 adult smokers willing to try vaping as an alternative to smoking found that after 90 days, 37 percent of them had completely replaced their cigarettes and switched to Fontem Ventures’ blu vaping products.
    “Our data show that it is possible to facilitate significant behavioural change on the part of smokers as a result of providing them with access to high quality e-cigarette products, at least for a short period of time,” said Professor Neil McKeganey, director of the Centre for Substance Use Research, who conducted the study.
    The 72 adult smokers were given access to the blu PRO open system e-cigarette and a range of commercially available blu flavors and nicotine strengths through the duration of the study.
    After 90 days the researchers found:

    • 36.5 percent of the participants had switched to vaping completely;
    • A reduction in daily smoking from 88.7 percent of participants at baseline to 17.5 percent;
    • A reduction in cigarette smoking from an average of 14.38 to an average of 3.19 per day;
    • A decrease in the average number of days per month that participants smoked, from 27.87/30 at baseline to 9.22/30 days after 90-days.
    • Non-tobacco flavor e-liquids were preferred by the majority of participants.

    ‘The number of smokers who switched to vaping completely increased from baseline to day-30 and continued to rise throughout the study duration (90 days),’ the note said. ‘The finding suggests that the use of vaping products may have additional benefits with longer use – i.e. a proportion of smokers completely switched within the first month of use, but a larger proportion needed more than two months to make the switch and gradually switch over a longer period.’
    “All participants found the flavors used were important in helping them to switch or cut down and 92.1 percent believed that the blu PRO had helped them to cut down or replace smoking completely at 90 days,” said McKeganey.
    Meanwhile, Dr Grant O’Connell, corporate affairs manager, at Fontem Ventures said that in contrast to these “impressive results”, licensed nicotine replacement therapies had been shown to be substantially less satisfying to smokers as evidenced by their modest efficacy, in some cases less than 15 percent smoking abstinence after three months use.
    “The 40 percent of UK smokers who have not even tried an e-cigarette should be encouraged to try products such as blu as an alternative to smoking. It is also clear from the data that vapers who continue to smoke, termed dual users, are undergoing a longer-term transition from smoking to non-smoking, moving through different stages of use that are not evident in snapshot surveys,” said O’Connell.
    The study can be downloaded here.

  • It's time for action

    It's time for action

    The US Food and Drug Administration has failed to approve a single reduced-harm nicotine product in the past year, despite having unveiled a new ‘roadmap’ in July 2017 that emphasized the role such products can play in reducing tobacco-related illness, according to a piece by Michelle Minton at cei.org.
    ‘That lapse does a huge disservice to millions of smokers who could benefit from switching from cigarettes to a far less harmful product,’ Minton said.
    ‘A year ago, the FDA claimed it would balance regulation against encouraging the development of harm-reducing products. But with each passing week it’s become clear that the biggest roadblock on the path to tobacco harm reduction is the agency’s own cumbersome product approval process.’
    Minton pointed out that it would be easy for the FDA to encourage the development of less harmful nicotine products for smokers. The market already provided alternatives in the form of e-cigarettes, smokeless tobacco, and heat-not-burn devices, she said. All that was needed to make these products available and viable as smoking cessation tools was for the FDA to establish a regulatory structure that made it easier and cheaper for manufacturers to earn FDA approval to sell the products and advertise them as being of lower risk than combustible cigarettes.
    But the FDA seemed to have done nothing to reform its pre-market tobacco approval gauntlet. During the past two years, the agency had received 367 premarket tobacco applications, which are required for the products to be sold legally in the US. None had been approved. The agency had received also 35 Modified Risk Tobacco Product applications (MRTP), which would allow tobacco products to be advertised as lower risk. The agency had not approved any such application, ever.
    Minton pointed out that snus had helped Sweden get its smoking rate down to five percent, lower by far than any other EU nation and the US; and, as a result, Sweden had one of the lowest incidences of lung cancer and oral cancers in the EU.
    While snus could be sold in the US, it could not be advertised as being of lower risk than cigarettes, even though it was. Consequently, US consumers saw little reason to switch from smoking to smokeless tobacco.
    So far, the FDA had considered MRTPs from several snus companies, including Swedish Match, which submitted an application in 2014 and was denied two and half years later. Currently, R.J. Reynolds, which submitted an MRTP in March 2017, was still waiting on a decision from the FDA.
    [In December 2016, the FDA announced a partial ruling offering Swedish Match two years to submit an amended application, and TR understands that the company is finalizing its amendment and plans to submit it soon.]

  • Realistic policies sought

    Realistic policies sought

    The next European Commission should enhance its collaboration with the EU’s Scientific Advisory Mechanism (SAM), which would provide bias-free consultancy and eventually adjust the Tobacco Product Directive to the reality, according to Japan Tobacco International’s Ramunas Macius speaking during an interview with EURACTIV.com.
    Macius, the corporate development vice president for reduced-risk products at JTI, was speaking with EURACTIV’s Sarantis Michalopoulos on the sidelines of the Quo vadis, EU evidence-based policy making? Addressing the ‘evidence – policy’ gap event.
    Asked whether policymakers could rely on science without considering the public’s view on specific matters, Macius said that scientific experiments had been the driver of human progress.
    “And therefore science should be the bedrock of wisdom in all policymaking,” he said.
    “In terms of public opinion, policymakers need to peer beyond the noisy campaigners to see how consumers are truly being affected.
    “These real-world data points can be just as valuable as results from test tubes.”
    The interview is here.

  • CORESTA reporting

    CORESTA reporting

    The CORESTA (Co-operation Centre for Scientific Research Relative to Tobacco) Secretariat has given details of the documents that it has published and the projects that it has launched since May.
    The following documents have been published and can be downloaded from the Documents section of the CORESTA website at www.coresta.org.

    • Method No. 64 “Routine Analytical Cigar-Smoking Machine – Specifications, Definitions and Standard Conditions” updated

    (2018-05-15) (CSM-121-1-CRM-64)

    • Report “2017 Collaborative Study on Carbonyl Containing Compounds in Electronic Cigarette Liquids”

    (2018-05-17) (EVAP-127-1-CTR)

    • Method No. 46 “Atmosphere for Conditioning and Testing Cigars of all Sizes and Shapes” updated

    (2018-06-11) (CSM-121-3-CRM-46)

    • Report “5th Round Robin Test for Multi-Capillary Ventilation Calibration Standards (2016/2017)”

    (2018-06-19) (PTM-124-CTR)

    • Guide No. 1 “Agrochemical Guidance Residue Levels (GRLs)” updated

    (2018-06-28) (ACAC-195-CTG-01)

    • Report “Sub-Group Collaborative Study on Blue Mould – Final Report”

    (2018-07-03) (BM-025-CTR)

    • Report “Joint Experiment Technical Study (JETS) Report 17/1 Maleic Hydrazide in Tobacco”

    (2018-07-27) (AA-130-CTR)

    • Report “Tobacco Virus Collaborative Study (1996-2011)”

    (2018-08-07) (VIR-030-CTR)

    • Report “2018 Moisture (Oven Volatiles), Water by Karl Fischer and Gas Chromatography Interlaboratory Study”

    (2018-08-20) (TTPA-171-1-CTR)

    • Report “2018 Proficiency Study for Water Activity of Tobacco and Tobacco Products”

    (2018-08-20) (TTPA-172-1-CTR)

    • Method No. 57 “Determination of Water in Tobacco and Tobacco Products by Gas Chromatographic Analysis” updated

    (2018-08-21) (TTPA-188-2-CRM-57)

    • Method No. 56 “Determination of Water in Tobacco and Tobacco Products by Karl Fischer Method” updated

    (2018-08-30) (TTPA-188-1-CRM-56)
    Meanwhile, a list of active projects is available on the CORESTA website under the
    Study Groups/Active Projects section:

    • Project 186: BMK SG – Meta-analysis of Cigarette Smoke Exposure Biomarkers
    • Project 187: RAC SG – CM8 & CM9 Collaborative Studies – 2018
    • Project 188: TTPA SG – Systematic Review of CRMs 56 and 57 (completed)
    • Project 189: AA SG – 14th FAPAS CPA Analysis Proficiency Test – 2018
    • Project 190: Consumer Reported Outcome Measures (CROM) Consortium (approval pending)
    • Project 191: PTM SG – 7th Round Robin Test on Filter Ventilation Calibration Standards
    • Project 192: PTM SG – Systematic Review of CORESTA Guide No. 4
    • Project 193: TTPA SG – Collaborative Study for the Determination of Nicotine in Tobacco and Tobacco Products
    • Project 194: SMA SG – Systematic Review of CRM 78
    • Project 195: ACAC SG – CORESTA Guide No. 1: Addition of CPA Fluopyram to GRL list (completed)
  • E-cig stance challenged

    E-cig stance challenged

    The recent advisory issued by India’s Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare to the State government seeking a ban on the sale of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) is based on poor advice and a lack of scientific evidence, according to a story by Bindu Shajan Perappadan at thehindu.com quoting a group representing electronic cigarette users across the country.
    The Association of Vapers India (AVI) has hit back at the Center and questioned the motive behind the advisory.
    ‘ENDS products are being examined across the world for their benefit in harm reduction and as a pathway to smoking cessation,’ the AVI said in a press note. ‘The advisory must be withdrawn immediately…’
    Evidence that had been produced during the past two years had shown that a smoker who switched to vaping cut her health risk by more than 95 percent, the AVI said.
    And it questioned why the government had not banned tobacco cigarettes if it was so concerned about nicotine.
    At the same time, the AVI rubbished the government’s contention that vaping would increase smoking rates among teenagers, citing evidence to the contrary based on a survey of 60,000 teenagers by UK-based Public Health England.
    “This claim is bogus as smoking rates among the youth are declining in all countries that have allowed vaping,” said AVI director Samrat Chowdhery. “In fact, overall smoking rates have declined at a historical rate after vaping was introduced. This clearly points to the tremendous harm reduction potential of vaping.”
    Meanwhile, Deepak Mukarji of The Alternatives, which advocates harm reduction in respect of people and the planet, said the Alternatives was disappointed with the Central government’s directive on e-cigarettes. This retrograde step denied harm reduction and potentially lifesaving alternatives to smokers by ignoring science and its emerging technologies.
    Evidence that the government claimed to have, the AVI said, was either outdated or intentionally misinterpreted; and it was out of line with the view widely accepted by all major scientific institutions that the use of e-cigarettes was substantially less harmful than was smoking combustible cigarettes.
    The association blamed the government also for presenting a wrong picture by selectively citing World Health Organization data that 30 countries had banned e-cigarettes, while holding back information that 65 nations had allowed and regulated such products.

  • The evidence is in

    The evidence is in

    Electronic-cigarette campaigners have headed to Australia’s capital Canberra to convince federal politicians to lift bans on nicotine vaping products, according to a story by Michael Black at abc.net.au.
    A recent CSIRO [Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, an independent Australian federal government agency responsible for scientific research] report found regular use of vaping devices was likely to harm a person’s health, but it suggested there were likely benefits in replacing regular cigarettes with e-cigarettes.
    Brian Marlow, the campaign manager for Legalise Vaping Australia, said the report quantified points his organization had been making for years.
    “They’ve shown the gateway theory, that vaping leads to smoking, just doesn’t exist; they’ve shown that vaping reduces smoking rates; they’ve shown that it’s safer than smoking,” he said.
    “This is not a harmless technology, it’s just significantly less harmful than tobacco and that’s what we’re trying to get across.”
    Currently, there are various bans across Australia that restrict the sale of e-cigarettes and liquids containing nicotine.
    Many vapers purchase products online and some don’t know that it’s technically illegal to do so.

  • Making the connection

    Making the connection

    The findings of new US research will surely feed into the debate about whether it is better to take your cannabis neat, as generally in North America, or mixed with tobacco, the European way.
    According to a story at sciencedaily.com, researchers at the Center for BrainHealth® at the University of Texas, Dallas, investigated the effects on the brain of concurrent cannabis and nicotine use, versus the use of solely cannabis and solely nicotine.
    The results, recently published in the journal Brain Structure and Function, apparently show that not only were the effects in these three categories different, but also that the group using both nicotine and cannabis more closely resembled the control (non-user) group in brain connectivity. The isolated nicotine and isolated cannabis users showed equally less connectivity in general.
    ‘Previous research in rats has suggested that nicotine may be a ‘gateway drug’ leading to cannabis and other drug use,’ the story reports.
    ‘Studies performed with rats exposed to THC – the main psychoactive compound found in marijuana – demonstrated an increased likelihood to self-administer nicotine that was not observed with rats exposed to heroin or cocaine, suggesting that there is something unique about the cannabis-nicotine interaction.’
    “Most of the literature to date has focused on associations of isolated cannabis and nicotine use, even though concurrent cannabis and nicotine use is more prevalent in society than cannabis use alone,” said the study’s lead author, Dr. Francesca M. Filbey, the Bert Moore Chair in BrainHealth at UT Dallas. “Our findings confirm the limitations of existing research.”
    While the outcome of the study could be, in part, due to the opposing effects nicotine and cannabis have on the brain, the difference in the brains of concurrent users versus isolated users of each product begs for further research in functional connectivity metrics in these populations, Filbey added.

  • Reducing harm with e-cigs

    Electronic cigarette use may reverse some of the harm resulting from tobacco smoking in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), according to a PR Newswire story – relayed by the TMA – based on a study published in the International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease by Dr. Riccardo Polosa, MD, PhD, the director of the Institute for Internal Medicine and Clinical Immunology at the University of Catania, Italy.
    The study found too that e-cigarette use may improve COPD outcomes over the long term.
    The researchers evaluated changes in objective and subjective respiratory parameters among 44 COPD patients and compared those who stopped smoking or substantially reduced it by switching to e-cigarette use with COPD patients who were smokers not using e-cigarettes at the time of the study.
    They found that after three years, the group’s patients significantly reduced their smoking, and had reduced respiratory infections and COPD exacerbations. Their respiratory physiology was not worsened by e-cigarette use and their overall health status and physical activity improved consistently.
    Improved outcomes were even seen among dual users.
    Co-researcher Dr. Caruso said, “the finding that COPD exacerbations were halved in patients who stopped or considerably reduced their smoking habit following switching to ECs was an important finding that confirms the potential for harm reversal of these products”.

  • The latest from California

    The latest from California

    The dual use of electronic cigarettes and conventional cigarettes – the most common use pattern among e-cigarette users – ‘appears to be more dangerous than using either product alone,’ according to a ScienceDaily story citing the results of a study conducted by the University of California, San Francisco, US.
    The study found that the use of e-cigarettes alone every day can nearly double the odds of a heart attack.
    And it found that the risks compound, so that daily use of both e-cigarettes and conventional cigarettes raises the heart attack risk five-fold when compared to people who don’t use either product.
    The study, involving nearly 70,000 people, was published on August 22 in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine. The data were first presented in February in Baltimore at the 2018 annual meeting of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco.
    “Most adults who use e-cigarettes continue to smoke cigarettes,” said senior author Stanton Glantz, PhD, a UCSF professor of medicine and director of the UCSF Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education.
    “While people may think they are reducing their health risks, we found that the heart attack risk of e-cigarettes adds to the risk of smoking cigarettes,” Glantz said. “Using both products at the same time is worse than using either one separately. Someone who continues to smoke daily while using e-cigarettes daily increases the odds of a heart attack by a factor of five.”
    But the research also reported some good news if smokers quit:
    “The risk of heart attack starts to drop immediately after you stop smoking,” said Glantz. “Our results suggest the same is true when they stop using e-cigarettes.”

  • A rational approach

    A rational approach

    Malaysia’s Minister of Health, Dzulkefly Ahmad, has been asked whether he has been reading the evidence about electronic cigarettes coming out of the UK.
    This question was raised in an opinion piece in the Malay Mail by Sarah Zailana Hamid, who made the point that while nobody was saying that e-cigarettes were absolutely safe, what was being said was that they were less harmful than were combustible cigarettes.
    She said she hoped that Malaysia would move towards a similar stance as that recommended in a report published on Friday by the UK House of Commons Science and Technology Committee.
    Such a stance would allow for the usage of e-cigarettes while conducting annual reviews to determine the long-term effects with a publicly funded health committee providing oversight.
    ‘Because if our government insists on waiting until those long-term effects are visible, we will be looking at no alternative to smoking and thus, letting the Malaysian smoking population continue to miss the opportunity for a less harmful choice,’ she said.
    ‘The report also pointed out the stigma over vaping, and how the second-hand vapor had “negligible health risks”. Thus, the media should bear some responsibility for demonising the vaping community in the past which led to the overreaction from our authorities and the general public.
    ‘Truth be told, there is a need for an independent study of Malaysians on e-cigarettes and such devices, a monitoring of their long-term health effects, while the government allows these products to be promoted as an alternative to traditional cigarettes for people trying to quit smoking.
    ‘I do hope that Dzulkefly manages to push through such a change so that we can truly move forward towards a healthier Malaysia with the principle of harm reduction rather than an outright ban.’