Stanton Glantz, PhD's blog

Five myths about e-cigs and some of the evidence that they are, well, myths

The latest e-cig love fest at the 2017 E-cig Summit in England has been bouncing around the internet, so I thought it would be worth summarizing some of the evidence debunking common e-cig myths.  The list of citations is nowhere near exhaustive, but illustrates why these myths are myths. Read more »

New Smokefree Movies ad highlights investors' concerns about smoking in movies

This ad ran in Variety and Hollywood Reporter beginning November 21, 2017.
  Read more »

Smoke Screen: Big Vape is copying Big Tobacco’s playbook

Liza Gross just published an excellent in-depth investigation that puts the e-cigarette advocacy network, including such key players as David Sweanor, Bill Godshall, Brad Rodu, and Joel Nitzkin as well as the tobacco companies’ network of right wing think tanks that are supporting e-cigarettes in the larger context of the tobacco industry’s efforts to deny science and keep people smoking.
She also talks about how any scientist who presents data they don’t like gets attacked.
  Read more »

Big Tobacco used the UN Global Compact to promote its interests; UN finally expelled them

Yvette van der Eijk, Patricia A McDaniel, Stella A Bialous and I just published “United Nations Global Compact: an ‘Inroad’ into the UN and reputation boost for the tobacco industry” in Tobacco Control.  Read more »

More evidence that e-cigarettes are as bad as cigs in terms of heart disease risk

Mark Olfert and his colleagues recently published “Chronic exposure to electronic cigarette (E-cig) results in impaired cardiovascular function in mice” in Journal of Applied Physiology.  In this study they exposed mice to e-cigarette aerosol for 8 months and found changes in their blood vessels that indicate heightened heart disease risk.  (These results are consistent with short-term studies in humans show that people who use e-cigarettes immediately have compromised functioning of their blood vessels.) &nb Read more »

Stan Glantz video lecture: “A Public Health Framework for Legalized Retail Marijuana: Avoiding a New Tobacco Industry”

I gave a 45 minute lecture at the UC Sacramento Center on November 1, 2017 on “A Public Health Framework for Legalized Retail Marijuana: Avoiding a New Tobacco Industry.”  You can view the lecture here and get copies of the slides and a policy brief here.

PMI's IQOS heat-not-burn tobacco products just as bad as cigarettes in terms of adverse effects on blood vessel function

Matthew Springer and his group presented an important new study that adds to the case the Philip Morris’ IQOS has effects just like cigarettes.  Here is AHA’s description of the study.      
Heat-not-burn tobacco products may be ‘not so hot’ at protecting blood vessel function
  Read more »

PMI’s Own Data on Biomarkers of Potential Harm in Americans Show that IQOS is Not Detectably Different from Conventional Cigs

I just submitted this public comment to the FDA on PMI's Modified Risk Tobacco Product application for IQOS.  The tracking number is 1k1-8zrx-juh9 and a PDF of the comment is avaiable here.
PMI’s Own Data on Biomarkers of Potential Harm in Americans Show that Read more »

Implementing legalized marijuana needs to give protecting public health higher priority

This letter, sent to the San Francisco supervisor who is sponsoring legislation on how to implement legalized marijuana in San Francisco, urges her to keep public health issues in mind.  So far, the health community has been all but absent from the public discussion (except Americans for Nonsmokers Rights).  (A PDF of the letter on letterhead is here.)
November 3, 2017
Supervisor Malia Cohen
City Hall
San Francisco, CA Read more »

Pro-tobacco industry bias in the journal Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology

Clayton Velicer, Gideon St. Helen, and I just published “Tobacco papers and tobacco industry ties in Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology” in the Journal of Public Health Policy.   RTP  is one of the journals that the tobacco and other industries use to publish their work.  We show a strong pro-tobacco industry orientation in the editors and conclusions in the papers published there.  Scientists and regulators need to be aware of these biases. 
  Read more »

Syndicate content