1 / 54

E-cigarettes and tobacco-related harm: Evidence and its regulatory implications

E-cigarettes and tobacco-related harm: Evidence and its regulatory implications. Professor Peter Hajek Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine. Declaration of interest. I have no links with any e-cigarette manufacturers. Contents. Current controversy Review of evidence

nizana
Download Presentation

E-cigarettes and tobacco-related harm: Evidence and its regulatory implications

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. E-cigarettes and tobacco-related harm: Evidence and its regulatory implications Professor Peter Hajek Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine

  2. Declaration of interest • I have no links with any e-cigarette manufacturers

  3. Contents • Current controversy • Review of evidence • Potential harms and benefits

  4. Story so far • E-cigarettes (EC) were invented by Lik Hon in HK in 2003 • Their growing ‘grass root’ popularity is unprecedented • Tobacco industry joined only in 2012 • EC continue to evolve, if they get to match cigarettes in delivering what smokers want, they are likely to replace cigarettes on population scale

  5. E-cigarette 5

  6. E-cigarettes - second generation 6

  7. Current controversy • Over 200 opinion pieces have been published on e-cigarettes so far • Early commentators mostly wanted EC banned or regulated much more severely than cigs, e.g. as medicines • EC compared to NRT, not to cigarettes (impact of pharma industry) • BMA remains anti-EC • More recent comments increasingly warn against favouring cigarettes

  8. Strongly negative and positive commentaries

  9. EU decision • European Parliament voted on regulating EC as medicines on 8th October 2013 • It turned the proposal down • Such regulation would stop further EC development and spread

  10. EU Commission still pushed ahead with anti-EC agenda • EU Commission announced rules much stricter than for cigarettes (from 2016): • Nicotine concentration limited to 1/3 of that provided by average cigarette (20mg/ml) • ‘Consistent delivery’ required • Each product and modification to apply for approval • Small containers only • Countries can ban flavourings

  11. How to make a rational decision? • Commentators mostly agree that evidence is needed to consider potential harms and benefits • We have recently reviewed available data* *Hajek, Etter, Benowitz, Eisenberg, McRobbie, Addiction, in press

  12. Evidence so far • Survey data • EC content and safety • Effects on smokers

  13. Surveys of EC users • EC use was marginal up to 2008-2009, increasing every year since then • So far, only 12%-14% of smokers who try EC become daily users • EC users tend to be younger and better educated, no link to gender

  14. EC use in England (Smoking Toolkit data) N=11,666 adults who smoke or who stopped in the past year; increase p<0.001

  15. Use by non-smokers • Recent US report: In 2012, among never smokers, Middle School (11-14): 0.5% tried EC; High School (14-18): 0.7% did • In 2011, 40% of US children tried cigarettes by the age of 18; about half will become daily smokers • UK surveys (ASH) – little evidence of use by never smokers or children • Daily use in never smokers: Two surveys looked and found none

  16. Interpretation of evidence • Harm: The negligible experimentation was interpreted as highly alarming and even as showing that EC lures kids to smoking • Benefit: People try cigs. If they try EC instead, given no recorded progression, this may reduce smoking uptake. • An empirical question • Evidence: There was a significant decline in youth smoking, no sign of increase

  17. Surveys of users • Caution: Responders are enthusiasts • EC consistently helped to quit or reduce smoking, perceived as less addictive • Most popular flavours tobacco, mint and fruit • Most popular strength 18 mg/ml – but 20-30% EC users use >20mg/ml

  18. EC content • E-liquids and vapours can contain some impurities and toxicants • Concentrations are much lower than in smoke, and unlikely to affect health • Passive exposure is unlikely to be harmful • Nicotine in vapour and in users linked poorly to nicotine in e-liquid

  19. Tobacco Specific Nitrosamine Levels Cahn & Siegel et al Journal of Public Health Policy 2010

  20. Interpretation of evidence • Some studies report presence of nitrosamines, metals etc. without commenting on clinical significance; negative comments then present this as evidence of risk • Levels of toxicants detected so far are well within levels considered safe in environment and in inhalation medicines

  21. EC safety • No SAEs in any study so far • AEs mostly irritation and cough, same in control conditions and in online forums on adverse effects • FDA monitoring: 47 reports, 8 serious, 2 linked to EC (infant choking on EC cartridge and burns from exploding EC) • Case study of lipoid pneumonia

  22. Toxicity of nicotine • Common claim: 30-60mg lethal if ingested • Traced to 19th century made-up figure • Suicide attempts by up to 1,500mg in e-liquid: ‘Voluminous vomiting’ and full recovery in a few hours • Nicotine sulphate in weed killers can kill • Nicotine from tobacco and NRT: Millions exposed, fatal poisonings extremely rare

  23. Conclusions on EC safety • Effects on users with asthma and other respiratory diseases and general effects of long-term EC use are not known • Risks, if any, are likely to be a small fraction of the risks of smoking • E-liquid should be in child-proof containers • There is little risk of nicotine poisoning for users

  24. Effects on users • EC reduces urges to smoke • EC use leads to reduced smoking and to smoking cessation in healthy smokers, even those not intending to quit; and in smokers with schizophrenia • EC with low nicotine vs patches, no support: Similar small effect on cessation, but EC better on smoking reduction and user approval

  25. EC nicotine delivery • Variable, but improving

  26. Vansickel et al Addiction 2012 • 20 smokers • 6 x 10-puff bouts on nicotine containing e-cigarette

  27. Vinsickel & EissenbergNicotine & Tobacco Research 2012 • 8 experienced e-cig users abstained overnight • Used their own e=cigs • 6 used 18 mg/ml • 2 used 24 mg/ml • Smoked 10 puffs and then had an hour of ad-lib e-cig use • Significant decrease in withdrawal symptoms

  28. Nicotine absorption from first and new-generation electronic cigarettes Farsalinos et al, Sci. Rep. 2014 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep04133

  29. EC regulation • EC are subject to standard regulation for safety, content, consumer protection etc. • They need to comply with • EU Directive 2001/95/EC(6) on general product safety • EU Restriction of Hazardous Substances Directive (ROHS) • In UK: Chemicals Regulation, in EU, European Regulation on Classification, Labelling and Packaging of Substances and Mixtures • Weights and Measures Regulation; CE (Conformité Européenne); Importing Goods Regulation; etc. • EC are evolving (nicotine delivery, taste, ease of use, etc.) and this allows innovation

  30. Proposed EU and US regulation • Administrative and financial burden: Big tobacco can, small manufacturers cannot • Likely impact: • Monopoly of tobacco industry • Stopping e-cig development – changing the licensed products would be too costly and tobacco industry does not want to lose cigs • Keeping EC inefficient and increasing cost • Protecting cigarettes

  31. Key outcomes if EC remain a consumer product • Negative: Increased smoking (and smoking related morbidity and mortality) • Positive: Decreased smoking (and smoking related morbidity and mortality)

  32. Three routes to the negative outcome: Hypothesis 1 • Chemicals in EC cause morbidity and mortality close to smoking • Evidence so far: Some risk may yet emerge, but without combustion toxicants linked to cancer and CVD, harm, if any, will be a small fraction of the harm from smoking

  33. Three routes to the negative outcome: Hypothesis 2 • Smokers who would otherwise quit remain smoking and smoke at the same rate • Evidence: EC use is associated with smoking reduction and cessation. No evidence that it deters from quitting

  34. Three routes to the negative outcome: Hypothesis 3 • Gateway for young people who would not try cigarettes, generating entry to smoking higher than EC-generated exit • Evidence: No regular use by never smokers has been recorded so far

  35. One route to positive outcomes • EC reduce cigarette use on population level • Evidence: EC reduces cigarette use and facilitates cessation on individual level, positive effects on population level are now appearing as well

  36. Population effects in England • Smoking Toolkit Study by Robert West at UCL

  37. Aids used in most recent quit attempt (smokinginengland.info/latest-statistic) N=4,935 adults who smoke and tried to stop or who stopped in the past year

  38. Prevalence of nicotine/cigarette use Cigarette consumption has decreased as has overall nicotine use N=64,222 adults, decrease p<0.001 for both lines

  39. Success rate for stopping in those who tried The success rate in those who have tried to stop smoking is the highest for at least 7 years Base: Smokers who tried to stop n the past year Graph shows prevalence estimate and upper and lower 95% confidence intervals

  40. Nicotine use by never smokers and long-term ex-smokers E-cigarette use by never smokers is negligible N=8,380 from Nov 2013

  41. The nicotine/cigarette market The cigarette and nicotine market are both declining Nicotine data only from last year smokers nondaily nicotine: <1 pw=0.1, 1+ pw=0.5 N=42,347 adults

  42. Cigarette smoking prevalence Cigarette smoking prevalence continues to decline www.smokinginengland.info Base: All adults Graph shows prevalence estimate and upper and lower 95% confidence intervals

  43. What does the available evidence suggest? • The positive outcome is much more likely – unless regulators prevent it

  44. Additional evidence:Swedish snus

  45. Proof of concept • Swedish Snus was banned in Europe on the same pre-cautionary principle invoked for EC regulation (risk to children, ‘gateway to smoking’) • Allowed in Sweden and Norway, enabling a natural experiment • Led to a significant decrease in smoking related morbidity and mortality

  46. Daily smoking and snus use in men aged 35-44, Sweden Statistics Sweden/SCENIHR 2008

  47. Current smokers, European Union, 2012Eurobarometer 385, 2012

  48. Snus use and cancer riskLuo et al, Lancet 2007;329:2015

More Related