Public Health of England: E-cigarettes are 95% less harmful than cigarettes
E-cigarette safety study
With all the too common claims that electronic cigarettes expose users to harmful chemicals, and present only risks of poisoning or explosions, and that they are a gateway to smoking and that "we just do not know yet" If they are safer than cigarettes, it is very refreshing to see a public health agency endorse the available scientific information and the extinction of a rational, evidence-based calculation of the potential risks of vaping. Public Health of England has reviewed the additional evidence released since the publication of its latest report, and its conclusion supports the repeated comparison that electronic cigarettes are 95 percent less harmful than smoking.
The report could add nothing new - from being a review of the evidence already available - but it highlights the large differences between the public perception of vaping risk and what science actually says, not to mention levels Criminal limits of irrationality over vaping of organizations based in the United States.
The FDA says that "consumers presently have no information [...] whether there are any benefits associated with the use of these products," while Public Health England say that encouraging smokers to switch "could help reduce tobacco-related Disease, death and health inequalities. "
Why the difference? The simple answer is that one group is trying to communicate accurately the facts, while the other is more concerned about sowing mistrust, even if it is not justified. It is not difficult to guess what it is.
The Report: e-cigarettes - Evidence Update
Risks of E-cigarette
The report is available in its entirety here (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/454516/Ecigarettes_an_evidence_update_A_report_commissioned_by_Public_Health_England.pdf), but with more than 100 pages , It's probably not something that most smokers or vapers really want to read in their entirety. However, it is very broad, and addresses many of the exaggerated risks of Vaping frequently repeated by the media.
Among other findings, the report notes that:
- There is no evidence that electronic cigarettes are having a negative effect on the decline in smoking rates, and are actually likely to be helping in the Fight against smoking. The use of E-cigarettes is not a "renormalization" of smoking.
- The hypothesis of the gateway is poorly defined, and there is no evidence to suggest that electronic cigarettes are serving as a gate Of consumption. It is even suggested that the use of this terminology should be completely abandoned until the hypothesis can really be tested (do not hold your breath waiting for that to happen).
- Regular Vaping among Non-Smokers Adults or juveniles) is uncommon (consistently at 0.2 percent or less). Experimentation is quite common, but seldom progresses to regular vaping.
- There is evidence that electronic cigarettes help smokers quit, and that they help reduce the amount they smoke. In addition, the report recognizes its apparent efficacy among those who do not intend to quit smoking. They also ask for more research in this area in general.
- Electronic cigarettes pose no risk of nicotine poisoning when used as directed, but e-liquid should be sold in packs Child-proof. There is no cause for concern about the accuracy of nicotine labeling, despite frequent statements to the contrary.
- The limits on nicotine content of e-liquids by EU regulations Will likely negatively affect the heaviest smokers looking to make the change.
- Regulators should consider the extent to which currently proposed standards will restrict the availability of safe and effective products - The goal should be to maximize the benefits of electronic cigarettes while keeping risks to a minimum. They add that "The attractiveness of [electronic cigarettes] may rest on the fact that they are not drugs."
- There is no reason to treat electronic cigarettes in the same way as cigarettes. They say that it is not appropriate to include the e-cigarette in smoke-free policies in health trusts and prisons "unless there is a sound justification for doing so."
- There are no health risks identified by Use of the e-cigarette to transeurs, and levels of nicotine released are insignificant.
- The New England Journal of Medicine study on formaldehyde and mouse study suggesting a reduction in antibacterial defenses Were poorly performed and do not represent a realistic concern for the vapers.
E-cigarettes are 95 percent less harmful than cigarettes, but almost half of the public thinks otherwise
The Public Perception of Vaping Risks
One of the key points of Public Health in England that are pushing with the release of the new report is the evidence-based conclusion that electronic cigarettes are 95 percent less harmful than cigarettes - and possibly even More secure than that. The reason for this is that the public - most of whom only learn about electronic cigarettes through often-addicted research news reports-- do not seem to accept this conclusion.
The report cites public opinion polls about their perceived risk of electronic cigarettes as compared to regular cigarettes, which in general show that while a slight majority correctly responds that electronic cigarettes are less harmful than cigarettes, around Of 45 percent, or do not know, believe that they are just as harmful or think they are even more harmful than cigarettes. The report highlights that the number of people who responded correctly that e-cigarettes are less harmful than tobacco cigarettes, is declining in recent years in both the UK and the US, Although current smokers or vapers still predominantly have the right view.
For the vapers, this has been the reality we have experienced for some time, but this report - and the accompanying press statements - emphasizes the realistic estimation of vaping risks (probably in less than a day reduces by 20 % Of the risk of smoking) and the need to publicize this estimate to correct the inaccurate view held by many members of the public. The report has gained some media attention, but with many still pushing the hypothetical risks, conveying the message will likely be an uphill battle.
Unintentionally highlighting the irrational anti-vaping attitudes of American organizations
This line of the report is all you need to know about e-cigarette safety: "While vaping may not be 100% safe, most tobacco-related disease-causing chemicals are absent and The chemicals that are present represent a very limited danger. "
It is concise, simple and completely rational. The contrast between this and statements from organizations such as the CDC and FDA in the US Are surprising. FDA's website on electronic cigarettes can be summarized simply as "we do not know yet and could be bad". The CDC is strangely treating vaping as if it were as bad as smoking, and it avoids talking about its relative risks as much as possible. Think about the implications of such advice: if you are a smoker, looking at a reliable public health information agency about a product that can save lives and the only thing that gets is statements full of uncertainty or refusal to recognize their reduced risks , There is a significant possibility that potential vapors might think "well, I might as well continue to smoke."
And, of course, the FDA and the CDC are just the worst offenders. The California Department of Public Health is fast becoming the primary source of misinformation about vaping, with its report pushing the central message that electronic cigarettes are a "threat to community health," as well as claims That electronic cigarettes emit a "concoction of toxic chemicals for human cells in the form of an aerosol," pose a huge risk of poisoning and deliver "nicotine, a very addictive neurotoxin." They even look at the same evidence As public health England, or was the recent report written by some irrational anti-nicotine extremist?
When public health is your concern, E-Cigs Are Your Friend
Vaping is much safer than smoking
Overall, the updated Public Health Report from England presents an accurate and rational assessment of the evidence and highlights the damage caused by the continuous spread of misleading information about electronic cigarettes. If the public health groups in the U.S. Ever decide that smokers deserve reliable information about a product that can save lives, it remains to be seen, but in the meantime, smokers at least can look to public health organizations in other countries for an evaluation Needs the minimal risks and odds of electronic cigarettes.