Electronic Cigarettes. Potential Harms and Benefits

Drummond, M. Bradley; Upson, Dona

doi:10.1513/annalsats.201311-391fr

Cited by 119 publications

(111 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

106

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…There are also two further cultural disruptors that have significant implications for both the maintenance of normative prohibition and for the normalisation proposition as previously developed. First is the explosion of the virtual market place of the internet as a source of drugs -hard to police and relatively easy to use (EMCDDA, 2015); and second, the new technology of e-cigarettes and techniques of vaping, the subject of heated debate as to whether this is normalising smoking and may serve as a gateway to use of other smokable drugs, or whether it is a public health breakthrough in assisting smoking cessation (Cressy, 2014;Drummond & Upson, 2014;Triggle, 2014). What is of interest for the normalisation debate is the smart advertising, design and market segmentation underpinning the new vaping market, creating a new clientele for a new, previously nonexistent product and means of using and inhaling a substance.…”

Section: Normalisation In a Contemporary Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

The normalisation of drug supply: The socialsupplyof drugs as the “other side” of the history of normalisation

Coomber

Moyle

South

2015

Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims: Describes how the relative normalisation of recreational drug use in the UK has been productive of, and fused with, the relatively normalised and non-commercial social supply of recreational drugs. Methods: Semi-structured interviews with 60 social suppliers of recreational drugs in two studies (involving a student population n ¼ 30 and general population sample n ¼ 30). Respondents were recruited via purposive snowball sampling and local advertising. Findings: Both samples provided strong evidence of the normalised supply of recreational drugs in micro-sites of friendship and close social networks. Many social suppliers described ''drift'' into social supply and normalised use was suggested to be productive of supply relationships that both suppliers and consumers regard as something less than ''real'' dealing in order to reinforce their preconceptions of themselves as relatively non-deviant. Some evidence for a broader acceptance of social supply is also presented. Conclusions: The fairly recent context of relative normalisation of recreational drug use has coalesced with the social supply of recreational drugs in micro-sites of use and exchange whereby a range of ''social'' supply acts (sometimes even involving large amounts of drugs/money) have become accepted as something closer to gift-giving or friendship exchange dynamics within social networks rather than dealing proper. To some degree, there is increasing sensitivity to this within the criminal justice system.

show abstract

Section: Normalisation In a Contemporary Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

The normalisation of drug supply: The socialsupplyof drugs as the “other side” of the history of normalisation

Coomber

Moyle

South

2015

Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Discussion E-cigarettes are a controversial issue. Some experts suggested that e-cigarette use should be restricted or banned [19] because of their potential to increase tobacco cigarette consumption (reducing motivation to completely quit, acting as a gateway to smoking for non-smokers, or increasing smoking social acceptability) [19][20][21][22][23][24][25], and because concerns have been raised on the potential harms from propylene glycol [19,24], cartridge manufacturing and content quality (as refills may contain toxins and cause nicotine poisoning) [16,19,24], and on the potential risks from second-hand electronic smoking in indoor environments [15,19]. On the contrary, other experts claimed that e-cigarettes may be the centrepiece of a harm reduction strategy (being more attractive and cheap than other nicotine replacement therapies and facilitating smoking cessation, reduction or abstinence), that there is no evidence of undesirable uptake from non-smokers, that e-cigarettes pose only a small fraction of the risks of tobacco cigarettes (as tested liquids and aerosols contain negligible concentrations of toxicants and carcinogens, for e-cigarette users), n. of tobacco cigarettes smoked per day (or puffs per day for e-cigarette only smokers).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electronic cigarettes efficacy and safety at 12 months: cohort study

Flacco

Fiore

Vecchia

et al. 2015

European Journal of Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo evaluate the safety and efficacy as a tool of smoking cessation of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes), directly comparing users of e-cigarettes only, smokers of tobacco cigarettes only, and smokers of both. DesignProspective cohort study. Final results are expected in 2019, but given the urgency of data to support policies on electronic smoking, we report the results of the 12-month follow-up. Data SourcesDirect contact and structured questionnaires by phone or via internet. MethodsAdults (30-75 years) were included if they were smokers of 1 tobacco cigarette/day (tobacco smokers), users of any type of e-cigarettes, inhaling 50 puffs weekly (e-smokers), or smokers of both tobacco and e-cigarettes (dual smokers). Carbon monoxide levels were tested in a sample of those declaring tobacco smoking abstinence. edu).Funding: The authors have no support or funding to report.Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist. Main Outcome MeasuresSustained smoking abstinence from tobacco smoking at 12 months, reduction in the number of tobacco cigarettes smoked daily. Data SynthesisWe used linear and logistic regression, with region as cluster unit. ResultsFollow-up data were available for 236 e-smokers, 491 tobacco smokers, and 232 dual smokers (overall response rate 70.8%). All e-smokers were tobacco ex-smokers. At 12 months, 61.9% of the e-smokers were still abstinent from tobacco smoking; 20.6% of the tobacco smokers and 22.0% of the dual smokers achieved tobacco abstinence. Adjusting for potential confounders, tobacco smoking abstinence or cessation remained significantly more likely among e-smokers (adjusted OR 5.19;), whereas adding ecigarettes to tobacco smoking did not enhance the likelihood of quitting tobacco and did not reduce tobacco cigarette consumption. E-smokers showed a minimal but significantly higher increase in self-rated health than other smokers. Non significant differences were found in self-reported serious adverse events (eleven overall). ConclusionsAdding e-cigarettes to tobacco smoking did not facilitate smoking cessation or reduction. If e-cigarette safety will be confirmed, however, the use of e-cigarettes alone may facilitate quitters remaining so. Registration NumberNCT01785537.

show abstract

“…Although ECs appear to deliver lower levels of some chemicals compared with regular cigarettes, there is no evidence that they are a healthier alternative. 18 Drummond warned that the perception of ECs as a harm-reduction tool without adequate evidence can be likened to the promotion by tobacco companies of 'light' cigarettes, which were proven not to be safer. 18 …”

Section: Safety Of Ecsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…18 Drummond warned that the perception of ECs as a harm-reduction tool without adequate evidence can be likened to the promotion by tobacco companies of 'light' cigarettes, which were proven not to be safer. 18 …”

Section: Safety Of Ecsmentioning

confidence: 99%