TobaccoReporter logo

Tag: Center of Excellence for the Acceleration of Harm Reduction

  • CoEHAR: Lung Damage Unproven in Study

    CoEHAR: Lung Damage Unproven in Study

    Photo: Chinnapong

    A recent study comparing lung inflammation between smokers and nonsmokers does not prove any causality between the use of e-cigarettes and lung damage, according to researchers from the Center of Excellence for the acceleration of Harm Reduction (CoEHAR) in Catania, Italy.

    A recently published study by a team of American researchers compared the scans of the lungs of five electronic cigarette users, five tobacco cigarette smokers and five subjects who never smoked or vaped. Data suggested preliminary evidence that e-cigarette users had greater pulmonary inflammation than cigarette smokers and never smoke/vape controls, implying even a greater damage to health.

    In a letter to the editor of The Journal of Nuclear Medicine, the CoEHAR researchers expressed their concern about the study. “The very small sample size and low reproducibility of the tests does not allow us to give a precise and scientific answer on pulmonary inflammation caused by vaping because it does not take into consideration fundamental factors, such as the prior exposure to tobacco smoking,” said CoEHAR founder Riccardo Polosa in a statement.

    “The very small sample size and low reproducibility of the tests does not allow us to give a precise and scientific answer on pulmonary inflammation caused by vaping because it does not take into consideration fundamental factors, such as the prior exposure to tobacco smoking.

    Riccardo Polosa, founder. CoEHAR

    Because it is impossible to decouple the health impact of e-cigarette aerosol emissions from prior tobacco smoke exposure, only long-term follow-up of exclusive vapers who have never smoked can verify potential harm caused by electronic cigarettes use.

    CoEHAR stresses the need to develop and adopt shared scientific research standards and a greater control of publication processes: “We often opposes poor quality designed scientific results that are published in prestigious journals without proper scrutiny: researches that only feed an unfounded anti-vape rhetoric based on preconceptions that try to dissuade smokers from making choices that are less harmful to their health,” said Polosa.

  • Study: Vaping Reduces Heart Risks Compared to Smoking

    Study: Vaping Reduces Heart Risks Compared to Smoking

    Photo: New Africa

    A new study carried out by the Center of Excellence for the Acceleration of Harm Reduction in Sicily confirms that vaping presents a lower risk to heart health than does smoking.

    The researchers replicated a 2017 BAT study, which demonstrated that the endothelial cell migration inhibition caused by cigarette smoke is not caused by e-cigarette aerosol exposure. (The endothelium is a membrane lining the heart and blood vessels).

    Using the Vype ePen3 and the heated-tobacco products Glo Pro and IQOS 3 Duo, the Replica study corroborated the findings of the BAT study.

    Riccardo Polosa

    “The interesting fact is that switching to combustion-free products reduces vascular damages and prevents the possibility of the onset of smoking-related diseases, such as arteriosclerosis and hypertension,” said Massimo Caruso, an author of the study. “Once again, our research has challenged the notion that e-cigarettes or heated tobacco cause similar damage to that of combustible cigarettes.”

    The study is part of the Replica Project, whose mission is to replicate studies conducted by tobacco companies—whose research is routinely dismissed as conflicted—in order to independently assess their scientific validity.

    “By replicating the findings generated by tobacco industry studies on e-cigarettes and heated tobacco products, we are proving that these results are robust and trustworthy,” CoEHAR founder Riccardo Polosa told Filter.

  • Study: Most E-Cigarette Research Flawed

    Study: Most E-Cigarette Research Flawed

    Photo: Roman Samokhin

    Errors are disturbingly common in e-cigarette research, resulting in misinformation and distortion of scientific truth, according to a new study.

    Under the guidance of Cother Hajat of the United Arab Emirates University and Riccardo Polosa, founder of the Center of Excellence for the Acceleration of Harm Reduction (CoEHAR) at the University of Catania, a team of international researchers examined the 24 most frequently cited vaping studies published in medical journals.

    The researchers found almost all of the examined studies to be methodologically flawed. Among other shortcomings, the studies lacked a clear hypothesis, used inadequate methodology, failed to collect data relevant to the study objectives and did not correct for obvious confounding factors.

    “Most of the included studies utilized inappropriate study design and did not address the research question that they set out to answer. In our paper, we offer practical recommendations that can massively improve the quality and rigor [of] future research in the field of tobacco harm reduction,” said Hajat.

    Riccardo Polosa

    “Systematic reiteration of the same errors that result in uninformative science is the new pandemic,” said Polosa. “I’m astounded that such low-quality studies have made it through editorial review in prestigious scientific journals. The credibility of tobacco control scientists and their research is on the line.”

    The findings are concerning, according to the academics, because without methodologically valid scientific research, it is impossible to generate balanced and accurate information for the adoption of more effective tobacco control policies and healthier lifestyles. “The dissemination of inaccurate information about combustion-free alternatives in the news media contributes to public skepticism and uncertainty, particularly among smokers,” the center wrote in a press release. “Many smokers may be discouraged from switching to less harmful nicotine-delivery products as a result of this.”

    This investigator-initiated study was sponsored by ECLAT, a spin-off of the University of Catania, with the help of a grant from the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World, which in turn is backed by Philip Morris International.