Public health implications of vaping in the USA: the smoking and vaping simulation model

Abstract

Background Nicotine vaping products (NVPs) are increasingly popular worldwide. They may provide public health benefits if used as a substitute for smoking, but may create public health harms if used as a gateway to smoking or to discourage smoking cessation. This paper presents the Smoking and Vaping Model (SAVM), a user-friendly model which estimates the public health implications of NVPs in the USA. Methods SAVM adopts a cohort approach. We derive public health implications by comparing smoking- and NVP-attributable deaths and life-years lost under a No-NVP and an NVP Scenario. The No-NVP Scenario projects current, former, and never smoking rates via smoking initiation and cessation rates, with their respective mortality rates. The NVP Scenario allows for smoking- and NVP-specific mortality rates, switching from cigarette to NVP use, separate NVP and smoking initiation rates, and separate NVP and smoking cessation rates. After validating the model against recent US survey data, we present the base model with extensive sensitivity analyses. Results The SAVM projects that under current patterns of US NVP use and substitution, NVP use will translate into 1.8 million premature smoking- and vaping-attributable deaths avoided and 38.9 million life-years gained between 2013 and 2060. When the NVP relative risk is set to 5%, the results are sensitive to the level of switching and smoking cessation rates and to a lesser extent smoking initiation rates. When the NVP relative risk is raised to 40%, the public health gains in terms of averted deaths and LYL are reduced by 42% in the base case, and the results become much more sensitive to variations in the base case parameters. Discussion Policymakers, researchers, and other public health stakeholders can apply the SAVM to estimate the potential public health impact of NVPs in their country or region using their own data sources. In developing new simulation models involving NVPs, it will be important to conduct extensive sensitivity analysis and continually update and validate with new data. Conclusion The SAVM indicates the potential benefits of NVP use. However, given the uncertainty surrounding model parameters, extensive sensitivity analysis becomes particularly important.

Estimating the reduction in US mortality if cigarettes were largely replaced by e-cigarettes

“…Our findings are consistent with recent modelling by Levy et al ( 2021 ), which considers a more gradual switch to e-cigarettes using current rather than optimistic patterns of switching to e-cigarettes. As we do, they estimate substantial potential benefits of e-cigarettes, while emphasising the dependence of these estimates on the assumed risk of e-cigarettes relative to cigarettes and the rate of decline in smoking.…”

Closing the gaps in tobacco endgame evidence: a scoping review

“…Only two of the eight evidence syntheses describing reduced risk products examined substitute nicotine products other than e-cigarettes (smokeless tobacco4 and heated tobacco products34), reflecting the much greater focus on e-cigarettes since their development. However, despite the rapid expansion of e-cigarettes in some markets, particularly the UK, USA and NZ, the rate of decline in smoking in these countries has not been at a rate that would achieve an endgame,76–78 suggesting additional policies to encourage smoking cessation are needed. Interestingly, the two countries that have proposed implementing a VLNC standard for cigarettes—the USA and NZ—have both linked this policy to the availability of reduced risk nicotine products to satisfy the consumer demand for nicotine and to reduce demand for illicit tobacco products, which could increase if a mandatory VLNC standard was implemented 8 79.…”

Public health impact of a US menthol cigarette ban on the non-Hispanic black population: a simulation study

“…SAVM17 projects never, current and former smoking prevalence using age-specific and sex-specific initiation and cessation rates estimated by applying an age–period–cohort model to the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) 23–26. Using prevalence estimates from the 2014/2015 Tobacco Use Supplement to the Current Population Survey to calibrate to NHB smoking initiation, we scaled US cigarette initiation rates by 0.91, calculated as the ratio of NHB ages 18–34 years to total US ages 18–34 years smoking prevalence.…”