June 10, 2014
Sara Marini and colleagues just published an interesting paper, "Short-term effects of electronic and tobacco cigarettes on exhaled nitric oxide," in Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology that shows that, among smokers, inhaling e-cigarette aerosol has the same effect on the production of exhaled nitric oxide as inhaling a cigarette whether the e-cigarette has nicotine or not.
They also provide another confirmation that e-cigarettes produce more and smaller particles than conventional cigaretttes.
Nitric oxide (NO) is important because it makes smooth mucle relax and the fact that exposure to e-cigarette aerosol reduces exhaled NO in the lungs may help explain why people who use e-cigarettes have a drop in lung function. (The fact that smoke reduces NO production in arteries is an important reason that smoking and passive smoking contribute to heart attacks.)
The results in this paper are also evidence that the fact that e-cigarettes and cigarettes generate the aerosol differently doesn't matter in terms of this biological effect.
Here is the abstract of the paper:
June 10, 2014
We just submitted this comment to the FDA. (The figures are in the PDF of the comment that is tied to this link.)
FDA Should Restrict E-cigarette Marketing to Protect Youth as Part of the Currently Proposed Regulation
Docket No. FDA-2014-N-0189
LM Dutra, ScD1; RA Grana, PhD1; L Lempert, JD1; JK Cataldo, RN, PhD1; SA Glantz, PhD1; BL Halpern-Felsher, PhD2; PM Ling, MD1; L Popova, PhD1; M Walsh, EdD1
1 Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education
University of California San Francisco
2 Department of Pediatrics, Stanford University
June 10, 2014
June 9, 2014
Clive Bates, a private consultant and well-established e-cigarette advocate, has organized a remarkable letter to WHO Director General on 26 May 2014 signed by 53 public health specialists criticising WHO for not enthusiastically embracing e-cigarettes as a harm reduction technique.[1]
The most notable thing about the letter, which contains several sweeping scientific statements, is that it does not contain a single reference to the scientific literature, particularly the substantial literature that does not support the political position the letter advocates.
Here are a few broad reactions before getting in to the specifics:
June 8, 2014
Randy Uang, Richard Barnes, and I have just completed your state report on Illinois, Tobacco Policymaking in Illinois, 1965-2014: Gaining Ground in a Short Time, which can be downloaded for free here.
Here is the Executive Summary:
Health and Budgetary Costs of Tobacco Use in Illinois
- Tobacco-induced diseases cost $785 million in state Medicaid expenditures in 2005; over1 percent of the state budget in the 2010s went to treating the health effects of tobacco.
Tobacco Industry Influence
June 8, 2014
My colleague Suzaynn Schick and some others just submitted this public comment to FDA.
The FDA should not exempt “premium” cigars from regulation (i.e., reject "Option 2) and should include the fifth FTC warning (Tobacco Use Increases the Risk of Infertility, Stillbirth and Low Birth Weight) on the packaging of all cigars.
Although large, expensive cigars may be used differently by different sectors of society, there are still plenty of people in the U.S. who can afford to smoke them regularly. Premium cigar smokers should neither be excluded from the education that health warnings provide, nor spared the emotional distress the warnings may provoke. All tobacco and nicotine deliver products need to be labeled clearly and consistently. Failure to do so creates the false impression that products without health warnings are less risky to use than labeled products. In the case of premium cigars, this is certainly not true.