[ad_1]
Are we on the verge of losing the war on cigarettes by winning a battle against vaping? "If we lose this opportunity" to get rid of cigarettes, David Abrams told CBS News: "I think we will have missed the biggest public health opportunity we have seen in 120 years." The question is whether vaping is better for health than cigarettes, and how a lot better – a point on which British and American researchers strongly disagree:
"My research shows that e-cigarettes are significantly less harmful than cigarettes," said Dr. Lion Shahab, associate professor at University College London.
Public Health England describes e-cigarettes as "at least 95% less harmful" than tobacco cigarettes.
Professor David Abrams, a professor at New York University, said this estimate was correct. "In fact, I would go further," he said. "I do not think we're looking at cancer biomarkers, it could be 98% or 99% for cancer."
Vaping is not safeAbrams notes that nicotine is always addictive and has its own health problems. The elimination of tar and carbon monoxide present in smoking, however, creates a considerable difference between health problems. In addition, the pressure to ban e-cigarettes will make it much more difficult for today's cigarette smokers to move to a much less harmful transitional product. Abrams estimates that a ten-year push to get cigarette smokers to e-cigarettes could save six to seven million lives a year.
Just How? 'Or' What Much less harmful e-cigs are at the center of the debate. CBS this morning Another video report discussed the controversy, as US researchers studying the long-term impacts of vaping believe the problem could be as serious, at least outside the lungs. Current animal research shows trends in arterial changes that could lead to significant heart disease with decades of use, which would also result in an avoidable excess of deaths:
But other American scientists, such as Mark Olfert, associate professor at the West Virginia University School of Medicine, draw very different conclusions.
"I would say it's 95% harmful," said Olfert, "because … in any study, I found that looking at it significantly in out of the lung, that's to find damage and damage. "
In a recent study, Olfert examined an eight-month exposure – the equivalent of 25 human years. What he found is that the arteries of animals have stiffened almost as much as those exposed to cigarette smoke during the same period.
"More rigid arteries mean a higher risk of stroke, heart attack, atherosclerosis, aneurysms and many vascular effects," said Olfert. "This is extremely alarming because it tells me that e-cigarettes will simply not be safer than cigarettes."
To a certain extent, both sides seem to be talking to each other. Abrams and British scientists do not claim that vaping is completely harmless and recognize that long-term risks have not yet been established. However, given the choice between the health effects of cigarettes and e-cigarettes – the actual and rational choice of current smokers – would not to choose to lose the effects on lung health? The results highlighted by Olfert are present at the same level or worse for cigarettes, which remain on the market.
It is the eruption of acute illnesses and deaths that cause concern, which, according to Abrams, is legitimate – but largely misguided. Media coverage creates a social panic about legitimate vaping when deaths and injuries are linked to domestic vaping:
"I think all we've seen in the FDA and CDC reports is that it's people who bought marijuana oils on the street illegally manufactured or in some kind of street version as a street drug dirty, "he said. .
"We have not seen any cases where a legendary electronic cigarette made commercially and used by smokers is the source of these diseases," said Abrams. "And I would say that for smokers, they should not be scared by what they see and that electronic cigarettes should always be used instead of cigarettes if they are already replaced."
It is also motivated by the nature of the vaping industry, which is largely made up of the same tobacco companies that have spent decades ahem, Less than honest about health impacts. They spent a long time long Time permeates our heads and calls this precipitation, not only on the health impacts but also on the marketing of young people. This is one of the concerns of American researchers: vaping has been sold not only to smokers but also to teenagers and young adults. More recent restrictions have at least forced some changes to this approach, but it is hard to blame scientists for addressing the next generation of nicotine delivery devices with much skepticism.
Nevertheless, this skepticism should not override science, especially if it can help wean cigarette smokers away. Right now, it seems we're about to make the perfect enemy of good-enough-for-now.
Addendum: Congratulations to CBS News for its very fair and balanced approach to this controversy. It is not easy for news magazines to spend as much time and effort presenting all facets of a problem.
[ad_2]
Source link