|Title||Link To Study||Study Publisher||Publish Date||Brief Description||Notes|
|What Is The Title Of The Study?||Post the link||Who published it?||3/12/18||Describe the study in a Tweet (140 Characters or less)||Anything else we should know?|
|Impact of Flavor Descriptors on Youth Interest in Electronic Cigarettes||https://nicotinepolicy.net/blogs/guest-blogs/33-jg/120-impact-1||Nicotine Science and Policy||7/7/2015||Many ENDS flavors appeal to adult smokers without appealing to nonsmoking teens;|
Non-smoking teens do not find ENDS appealing to use; and
Non-smoking teens’ interest in using ENDS does not vary according to which flavor descriptor is associated with the ENDS.
|Sponsored by NJOY|
|Vapers and vaping: E-cigarettes users views of vaping and smoking||https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09687637.2017.1296933||Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy||3/6/2017||None of our interviewees felt that their e-cigarette use had increased their likelihood of smoking even if a small number conceded that this might be the case for other people.||The research reported in this paper was funded by Fontem Ventures which is an e-cigarette manufacturer and non-tobacco based subsidiary of Imperial Brands Group.|
|Advice From Former-Smoking E-Cigarette Users to Current Smokers on How to Use E-Cigarettes as Part of an Attempt to Quit Smoking||https://academic.oup.com/ntr/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/ntr/ntx176/4061315?redirectedFrom=fulltext||Oxford University||8/3/2017||Experienced vapers who used to smoke appear eager to give smokers advice and practical information about vaping that may assist attempts to switch from smoking to vaping.|
|Nicotine Without Smoke: Tobacco Harm Reduction. A report by the Tobacco Advisory Group of the Royal College Of Physicians||https://www.rcplondon.ac.uk/file/3563/download...||Royal College Of Physicians||4/1/2016||As the technology of these and other non-tobacco nicotine products improves, so|
the vision of a society that is free from tobacco smoking, and the harm that
smoking causes, becomes more realistic. Experience to date suggests that, as
predicted in principle in the 2007 report,1 the availability of e-cigarettes has been
beneficial to UK public health
|A Study done by Moffitt Cancer Center in 2013 thate showed vaping works up to 79% of the time compared to less than 10% for most other smoking cessation methods||https://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/threads/dhhs-funded-moffitt-cancer-center-survey-found-79-of-vapers-quit-smoking-but.725563/||Moffitt Cancer Center||2013||Smoking cessation percentages via vaping|
Nicotine as an Addictive Substance: A Critical Examination of the Basic Concepts and Empirical Evidence
|http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/002204260103100202||Journal Of Drug Issues||4/1/2001||Nicotine is either not addicting or harmless as sugar and exercise. |
The effects of nicotine on the brain are similar to those of sugar, salt, exercise, and other harmless substances and events. Apart from numerous conceptual and definitional inadequacies with the addiction concept in general, the notion that nicotine is addictive lacks reasonable empirical support. Nicotine does not have the properties of reference drugs of abuse. There are so many findings that conflict so starkly with the view that nicotine is addictive that it increasingly appears that adhering to the nicotine addiction thesis is only defensible on extra-scientific grounds.
|E-cigarettes around 95% less harmful than tobacco estimates landmark review||https://www.gov.uk/government/news/e-cigarettes-around-95-less-harmful-than-tobacco-estimates-landmark-review||Public Health England||8/19/2015||Key findings of the review include:|
the current best estimate is that e-cigarettes are around 95% less harmful than smoking
nearly half the population (44.8%) don’t realise e-cigarettes are much less harmful than smoking
there is no evidence so far that e-cigarettes are acting as a route into smoking for children or non-smokers
|American Cancer Society Position Statement on Electronic Cigarettes||https://www.cancer.org/healthy/stay-away-from-tobacco/e-cigarette-position-statement.html||American Cancer Society Board||2/1/2018||Based on currently available evidence, using current generation e-cigarettes is less harmful than smoking cigarettes, but the health effects of long-term use are not known|
To help smokers quit, the ACS recommends that clinicians advise their patients to use FDA-approved cessation aids that have been proven to support successful quit attempts. Many smokers choose to quit smoking without the assistance of a clinician and some opt to use e-cigarettes to accomplish this goal. The ACS recommends that clinicians support all attempts to quit the use of combustible tobacco and work with smokers to eventually stop using any tobacco product, including e-cigarettes. Some smokers, despite firm clinician advice, will not attempt to quit smoking cigarettes and will not use FDA approved cessation medications. These individuals should be encouraged to switch to the least harmful form of tobacco product possible; switching to the exclusive use of e-cigarettes is preferable to continuing to smoke combustible products.
|Nicotine, Carcinogen, and Toxin Exposure in Long-Term E-Cigarette and Nicotine Replacement Therapy Users: A Cross-sectional Study||http://annals.org/aim/article-abstract/2599869/nicotine-carcinogen-toxin-exposure-long-term-e-cigarette-nicotine-replacement||Annals Of Internal Medicine||3/21/2017||Conclusion:|
Former smokers with long-term e-cigarette–only or NRT-only use may obtain roughly similar levels of nicotine compared with smokers of combustible cigarettes only, but results varied. Long-term NRT-only and e-cigarette–only use, but not dual use of NRTs or e-cigarettes with combustible cigarettes, is associated with substantially reduced levels of measured carcinogens and toxins relative to smoking only combustible cigarettes.
|How The FDA Manipulates The Media||https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-the-fda-manipulates-the-media/||Scientific American||10/1/2016||the FDA and other scientific publications threaten and intimidate journalists to control the timing and narrative that is published in exchange for early access to the information.|
|E-cigarette use and associated changes in population smoking cessation: evidence from US current population surveys||https://www.bmj.com/content/358/bmj.j3262||The British Medical Journal||7/26/2017||The substantial increase in e-cigarette use among US adult smokers was associated with a statistically significant increase in the smoking cessation rate at the population level. These findings need to be weighed carefully in regulatory policy making regarding e-cigarettes and in planning tobacco control interventions.|
|Electronic cigarette use among patients with cancer: Reasons for use, beliefs, and patient-provider communication.||https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/pon.4721||journal of psycho-oncology||4/19/2018||Most participants identified smoking cessation as the reason for initiating (81%) and continuing (60%) e‐cigarette use. However, 51% of patients reported current dual use of combustible cigarettes and e‐cigarettes, and most patients reported never having discussed their use of e‐cigarettes with their oncology provider (72%). Patients characterized e‐cigarettes as less addictive, less expensive, less stigmatizing, and less likely to impact cancer treatment than combustible cigarettes (Ps < .05), and more satisfying, more useful for quitting smoking, and more effective at reducing cancer‐related stress than nicotine replacement therapies (Ps < .05).||Funding Information National Cancer Institute. Grant Numbers: R01 CA154596, P30CA76292|
|TOBACCO SMOKERS COULD GAIN 86 MILLION YEARS OF LIFE IF THEY SWITCH TO VAPING, STUDY FINDS||https://gumc.georgetown.edu/news/Tobacco_Smokers_Could_Gain_86%20Million_Years_of_Life_if_they_Switch_to_Vaping_Study_Finds||Georgetown University Medical Center||10/2/2017||Published in the journal Tobacco Control, the first study to model public health outcomes if cigarette smoking was replaced by e-cigarettes “supports a policy strategy that encourages replacing cigarette smoking with vaping to yield substantial life year gains,” says the study’s lead author David Levy, PhD, professor of oncology at Georgetown Lombardi.|
For the study, Levy and a team of 10 investigators looked at such variables as harm from e-cigarettes, and amount of youth uptake, and the rate of cessation among others.
Two projections, one described as optimistic and one pessimistic, were made based on different scenarios regarding the relative harms of e-cigarettes compared to cigarettes as well as differences in the timing of smoking initiation, cessation and switching. Both scenarios conclude there still would be considerable premature deaths averted, but also a much larger number of life years saved.
|Health impact of E-cigarettes: a prospective 3.5-year study of regular daily users who have never smoked||https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-14043-2||Nature (.com)||11/17/2017||We report health outcomes (blood pressure, heart rate, body weight, lung function, respiratory symptoms, exhaled breath nitric oxide [eNO], exhaled carbon monoxide [eCO], and high-resolution computed tomography [HRCT] of the lungs) from a prospective 3.5-year observational study of a cohort of nine daily EC users (mean age 29.7 (±6.1) years) who have never smoked and a reference group of twelve never smokers. No significant changes could be detected over the observation period from baseline in the EC users or between EC users and control subjects in any of the health outcomes investigated.||Scientific Reports volume 7, Article number: 13825 (2017)|
|Nicotine replacement therapy versus control for smoking cessation||http://cochranelibrary-wiley.com/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD000146.pub5/full3||Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group||5/31/2018||Nicotine replacements like the patch can help people quit smoking||Can we find a study about vaping as a cessation tool and compare it to these results?|
|Health impact of E-cigarettes: a prospective 3.5-year study of regular daily users who have never smoked||https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-14043-2||Nature (.com)||11/17/2017||Although electronic cigarettes (ECs) are a much less harmful alternative to tobacco cigarettes, there is concern as to whether long-term ECs use may cause risks to human health. We report health outcomes (blood pressure, heart rate, body weight, lung function, respiratory symptoms, exhaled breath nitric oxide [eNO], exhaled carbon monoxide [eCO], and high-resolution computed tomography [HRCT] of the lungs) from a prospective 3.5-year observational study of a cohort of nine daily EC users (mean age 29.7 (±6.1) years) who have never smoked and a reference group of twelve never smokers. No significant changes could be detected over the observation period from baseline in the EC users or between EC users and control subjects in any of the health outcomes investigated. Moreover, no pathological findings could be identified on HRCT of the lungs and no respiratory symptoms were consistently reported in the EC user group. Although it cannot be excluded that some harm may occur at later stages, this study did not demonstrate any health concerns associated with long-term use of EC in relatively young users who did not also smoke tobacco.|
In a small sample of young-adult never-smoking, daily EC users who were carefully followed for approximately 3½ years, we found no decrements in spirometric indices, development of respiratory symptoms, changes in markers of lung inflammation in exhaled air or findings of early lung damage on HRCT, when compared with a carefully matched group of never-smoking non-EC users. Even the heaviest EC users failed to exhibit any evidence of emerging lung injury as reflected in these physiologic, clinical or inflammatory measures. Moreover, no changes were noted in blood pressure or heart rate. Since the EC users who we studied were never smokers, potential confounding by inhalation of combustion products of tobacco were obviated.
While the sample size was small, the results of this study may provide some preliminary evidence that long-term use of ECs is unlikely to raise significant health concerns in relatively young users. Further studies in a larger sample of EC users with and without a history of tobacco smoking are warranted.
|Why a ban on e-cigarettes may not be the best policy||https://www.straitstimes.com/opinion/why-a-ban-on-e-cigarettes-may-not-be-the-best-policy#main-content||The Straits Times||6/9/2018||flavor bans should be considered with proper science in mond||Not a scientific journal article but written by a scientist. Great for introducing layman’s to the topic.|
|The American Cancer Society Public Health Statement on Eliminating Combustible Tobacco Use in the United States||https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.3322/caac.21455?utm_source=VAPEnews.com&utm_campaign=e1081cdce7-ACS_DOUBLE_DOWN_06_12_18&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_3044bba587-e1081cdce7-191495793&|
|Evidence for harm reduction in COPD smokers who switch to electronic cigarettes||https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5162097/||Biomed Central - Journal Of Resperatory Research||12/16/2016||A marked reduction in cigarette consumption was observed in ECs users. A significant reduction in COPD exacerbations was reported in the COPD EC user group, their mean (±SD) decreasing from 2.3 (±1) at baseline to 1.8 (±1; p = 0.002) and 1.4 (±0.9; p < 0.001) at F/up1 and F/up2 respectively. A significant reduction in COPD exacerbations was also observed in ECs users who also smoked conventional cigarettes (i.e. ‘dual users’). COPD symptoms and ability to perform physical activities improved statistically in the EC group at both visits, with no change in the control group.|
These findings suggest that ECs use may aid smokers with COPD reduce their cigarette consumption or remain abstinent, which results in marked improvements in annual exacerbation rate as well as subjective and objective COPD outcomes.
|Hiding in plain sight: Treating tobacco dependency in the NHS||https://www.rcplondon.ac.uk/projects/outputs/hiding-plain-sight-treating-tobacco-dependency-nhs||Royal College Of Physicians||6/26/2018||Smoking cessation is not just about prevention. For many diseases, smoking cessation represents effective treatment.|
"Allowing e-cigarettes to be used on NHS sites can support smokers in remaining smoke free and help sustain smoke-free policy"
|An Online Survey of New Zealand Vapers||https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29382129||International Journal Of Environmental Research and Public Health||1/29/2018||This survey of committed vapers suggests that, in New Zealand, with its advanced and highly dissuasive tobacco control program, vaping is almost exclusively used as a cessation tool. For many, it appears to have been successful.|
The majority of participants (159, 73%) were smokers when they started vaping, and now only vaped. One had subsequently stopped vaping. All considered that their vaping and their stopping smoking were related. The majority (79%) said that they had used vaping to help them stop smoking. Twenty (12%) reported that they had not intended to stop smoking when they started to vape. The remainder had used vaping to avoid relapse to smoking.
51 vaping participants (23%) reported some smoking during the course of these surveys indicating that they were both vaping and smoking. Two of these came from the ex-smoker group. Of these 51, 34 (67%) only smoked occasionally (less than once a day). There were no apparent differences in demographic characteristics, in types of equipment used, the proportion of tobacco flavors used, and in the problems and attitudes experienced between those who only vaped and those who both vaped and smoked, whether smoking was regular, or not.
Both smokers and non-smokers cited “to avoid going back to smoking” as the most common reason for continuing to vape. However, unlike the “Vape only” group where 29% (95% CI; 23–38%) said that the main reason they still vaped was that they enjoyed vaping, only one of the group who still smoked (95% CI; 0–18%) reported this as the major reason for continuing vaping. Other differences were seen in a higher proportion of participants intending to cut down, rather than stop smoking, amongst the continuing smokers (95% CI; 12–31%) than in the “Vape only” group (95% CI; 5–9%). A quarter (13) cited “to stop smoking” as the main reason to continue vaping.
|Health impact of E-cigarettes:|
a prospective 3.5-year study of
regular daily users who have never
|https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-14043-2||Nature.com Scientific Reports||11/17/2017||Although electronic cigarettes (ECs) are a much less harmful alternative to tobacco cigarettes, there is concern as to whether long-term ECs use may cause risks to human health. We report health outcomes (blood pressure, heart rate, body weight, lung function, respiratory symptoms, exhaled breath nitric oxide [eNO], exhaled carbon monoxide [eCO], and high-resolution computed tomography [HRCT] of the lungs) from a prospective 3.5-year observational study of a cohort of nine daily EC users (mean age 29.7 (±6.1) years) who have never smoked and a reference group of twelve never smokers. |
No significant changes could be detected over the observation period from baseline in the EC users or between EC users and control subjects in any of the health outcomes investigated. Moreover, no pathological findings could be identified on HRCT of the lungs and no respiratory symptoms were consistently reported in the EC user group. Although it cannot be excluded that some harm may occur at later stages, this study did not demonstrate any health concerns associated with long-term use of EC in relatively young users who did not also smoke tobacco.
|The American Cancer Society Public Health Statement|
on Eliminating Combustible Tobacco Use in the
|https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.3322/caac.21455?utm_source=VAPEnews.com&utm_campaign=e1081cdce7-ACS_DOUBLE_DOWN_06_12_18&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_3044bba587-e1081cdce7-191495793&||American Cancer Society - Wiley.com||7/10/1905||In this rapidly changing tobacco landscape, it is critical that consumers receive|
accurate information about different tobacco products and the role of nicotine in
tobacco-related disease. Many consumers are misinformed about the harms of electronic
nicotine delivery systems. Many adults believe, erroneously, that ENDS are as harmful as combustible tobacco products,
and the level of public understanding has deteriorated over time. In 2012, only
11.5% of respondents to a national survey held this view. By 2015, 35.7% of
respondents mistakenly believed that the harm associated with electronic cigarettes
(e-cigarettes) was “about the same” as that of smoking conventional cigarettes.5 At
the same time, the Monitoring the Future study reports that, as of 2017,
“e-cigarettes have one of the lowest levels of perceived risk for regular use of all
drugs, including alcohol” among adolescents
|Changing patterns of first e-cigarette flavor used and current flavors used by 20,836 adult frequent e-cigarette users in the USA||https://harmreductionjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12954-018-0238-6||Harm Reduction Journal||7/10/1905||This study identified an increasing popularity of non-tobacco flavors and declining popularity of tobacco flavors by over 15,000 adult frequent e-cigarette users who formerly smoked cigarettes. The findings suggest that access to a variety of non-tobacco flavored e-liquid may be important for encouraging and assisting adults to use e-cigarettes in place of conventional cigarettes. Restricting the availability of non-tobacco flavors could reduce adult smokers’ interest in switching to e-cigarettes or rationalize a return to cigarette smoking among frequent e-cigarette users whose journey towards smoking abstinence started with, progressed to, and is being sustained by frequent use of e-cigarettes containing non-tobacco flavors. A tobacco products regulatory framework that balances adult smokers’ increasingly common preference to try to quit smoking by using e-cigarettes that do not taste like cigarettes, with measures that reduce the appeal and use of e-cigarettes by non-smokers and youth, may accelerate the US progress towards the end of the tobacco smoking epidemic that causes the premature death of approximately 480,000 Americans each year||Acknowledgements|
The authors are grateful to Julie Woessner and Alex Clark (Consumer Advocates for Smoke-free Alternatives Association), Stefan Didak and Danielle Bloss (Not Blowing Smoke), Gregory Conley (American Vaping Association), Cynthia Cabrera (Cating Group), and the Board of the Smoke-Free Alternatives Trade Association, without whose assistance this study would not have been possible. Above all, the authors wish to thank the 22,411 individuals who participated in this study—their time and contributions are greatly appreciated.
Fontem Ventures, a company that makes e-cigarettes, and a wholly owned subsidiary of Imperial Brands PLC (formerly Imperial Tobacco) provided funding for this study. Fontem Ventures had no input or control over the study design, implementation, data analysis, interpretation, or reporting of findings. The authors alone are responsible for the contents, production, and decision to submit this manuscript.
|If the data contradict the theory, throw out the data: Nicotine addiction in the 2010 report of the Surgeon General||https://harmreductionjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1477-7517-8-12||Harm Reduction Journal||2011||In its discussion of nicotine addiction, the current report of the SG presents a false picture of the current scientific knowledge in this field. The report loses credibility by uncritically endorsing research that supports its outdated model of nicotine addiction while ignoring research that refutes this model. The confirmatory bias of the report is reflected in its omission of all research on non-nicotine factors in smoking, including extensive research with de-nicotinized tobacco, in ignoring the methodological limitations and contradictory findings in regard to nicotine reinforcement in animals and in humans, and in cherry picking and ignoring evidence incompatible with its conclusions pertaining to tolerance, withdrawal and craving.||Competing interests|
RD and HF have received fees for consulting to Imperial Tobacco Group PLC. However, all their research, including this review, is supported exclusively by academic funds.
|Peering through the mist: systematic review of what the chemistry of contaminants in electronic cigarettes tells us about health risks||https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2458-14-18||Biomed Central - Journal of Public Health||2014||Current state of knowledge about chemistry of liquids and aerosols associated with electronic cigarettes indicates that there is no evidence that vaping produces inhalable exposures to contaminants of the aerosol that would warrant health concerns by the standards that are used to ensure safety of workplaces. However, the aerosol generated during vaping as a whole (contaminants plus declared ingredients) creates personal exposures that would justify surveillance of health among exposed persons in conjunction with investigation of means to keep any adverse health effects as low as reasonably achievable. Exposures of bystanders are likely to be orders of magnitude less, and thus pose no apparent concern.|
|Effect of Smoking Abstinence and Reduction in Asthmatic Smokers Switching to Electronic Cigarettes: Evidence for Harm Reversal||https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4053879/||International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health||2014||The e-cig may help smokers with asthma to reduce their cigarette consumption or remain abstinent and hence reduce the burden of smoking-related asthma symptoms. The positive findings observed with e-cigs allows us to advance the hypothesis that these products may be valuable for smoking cessation and/or tobacco harm reduction also in asthma patients who smoke. Large randomized controlled trials are now needed to confirm and expand these preliminary observations.||Riccardo Polosa has received grant support from anti-asthma drug manufacturers including CV Therapeutics, NeuroSearch A/S, Sandoz, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Boehringer-Ingelheim; has served as a speaker for CV Therapeutics, Novartis, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Roche; has served as a consultant for CV Therapeutics, Duska Therapeutics, Neuro-Search A/S, Boehringer-Ingelheim, and Forest Laboratories; and has received payment for developing educational presentations from Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, and Almirall. Riccardo Polosa has also received lecture fees and research funding from GlaxoSmithKline and Pfizer, manufacturers of stop smoking medications; he has also served as a consultant for Pfizer and Arbi Group Srl, an italian e-cigs distributor. Riccardo Polosa’s research on e-cigs, smoking and asthma is supported by Lega Italiana AntiFumo (LIAF). Jaymin B. Morjaria has received honoraria for speaking and financial support to attend meetings/advisory boards from anti-asthma drug manufacturers including Wyeth, Chiesi, Pfizer, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Teva, GlaxoSmithKline/Allen & Hanburys, Napp, Almirall, and Novartis. Pasquale Caponnetto, Massimo Caruso, Simona Strano, Eliana Battaglia, and Cristina Russo declare no conflicts of interest.|
|Dependence levels in users of electronic cigarettes, nicotine gums and tobacco cigarettes||https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4920051/||Drug and Alcohol Dependence Journal||2014||Some e-cigarette users were dependent on nicotine when used in e-cigarettes, but these products were less addictive than tobacco cigarettes. E-cigarettes may be as addictive or less addictive than the nicotine gum, which itself is not very addictive.||This study was partly funded by the Swiss Tobacco Prevention Fund (Swiss Federal Office of Public Health), grant 12.000189 to JFE. The Swiss Tobacco Prevention Fund had no role in the design or conduct of the study, interpretation of the data or decision to submit the paper for publication.|
TE is supported by the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the U.S. National Institutes of Health under Award Number P50DA036105 and the Center for Tobacco Products of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health or the Food and Drug Administration.