Tabaco

Abstract
There continues to be a high prevalence of smoking in many European countries. In Germany, for example, there are over 20 million smokers, most of whom exhibit little desire to quit. In other countries, the adoption of smoke-free products (SFPs), including e-cigarettes (ECs), heated tobacco products (HTPs), and oral nicotine pouches (NPs), is helping smokers to transition away from cigarettes. In Germany, debate about SFPs primarily focuses on their potential harms to non-smokers, particularly the underage population. This debate seems one-sided: raising concerns alone does not sufficiently inform the 20 million smokers about the comparative health risks of cigarettes and SFPs, an issue increasingly echoed by practitioners and researchers. Instead, the current discourse is dominated by misconceptions, as evidenced by surveys on smokers’ perceptions of the relative health risks of cigarettes and SFPs. Considering the gravity of the topic, it is essential to revisit the scientific facts. The growing evidence shows that SFPs, including ECs, HTPs, and NPs, expose users to significantly fewer numbers and lower concentrations of toxicants relative to combustible cigarettes. In vitro studies and biomarkers of harm in SFP users suggest that these lower emissions translate to reduced risks of harm. It is the nature of science that the evidence will never be complete, but the totality of data should be considered when discussing the correct handling of SFPs. At present, these data suggest that SFPs can play a useful role in curbing the individual and societal risks associated with smoking.

Leia o artigo completo

Abstract
Background: Smokers have an increased incidence and severity of periodontal disease. Although cigarette smoke contains >4,000 chemical components that could affect periodontal tissues, less is understood about the effect of smokeless tobacco. Therefore, this study compares the effects of cigarette smoke extract (CSE) and smokeless tobacco extract (STE) on cell survival and motility of periodontal ligament (PDL) and gingival fibroblasts in vitro.
Methods: PDL and gingival fibroblasts were exposed to various concentrations of CSE, STE, or nicotine alone. Viable cells were labeled with calcein acetoxymethyl, visualized using fluorescent microscopy, and quantified using a fluorescence multi-well plate reader. In vitro wounding and collagen gel contraction assays were used to assess cell motility.
Results: Both gingival and PDL fibroblasts displayed reduced cell viability with increasing concentrations of CSE and STE. Based on relative nicotine content, CSE was significantly more cytotoxic than STE. PDL fibroblasts were also more sensitive to both CSE and STE compared with gingival fibroblasts. Finally, sublethal doses of CSE reduced cell motility and gel contraction, whereas STE had less effect. Nicotine alone ≤0.5 mM had little to no effect in any of these assays.
Conclusions: Many of the underlying effects of tobacco products on periodontal tissues may be due to direct inhibition of normal fibroblast function. CSE is found to be more deleterious to the function of both PDL and gingival fibroblasts than STE. PDL fibroblasts appear to be more sensitive to CSE and STE than gingival fibroblasts. Therefore, cigarette smoke may have more profound effects than smokeless tobacco.
Keywords: Cell Movement; cell survival; fibroblasts; periodontal ligament; smoking tobacco, smokeless.

Leia o artigo completo

Abstract
Introduction: Most adult cigarette smokers who use e-cigarettes are dual cigarette and e-cigarette (CC-EC) users, yet little is known about relative consumption of cigarettes to e-cigarettes and any associated harm reduction.
Methods: Rate of substitution from cigarettes to e-cigarettes at week 6 and change in biomarkers of exposure and potential harm were examined among dual dual cigarette and e-cigarette users [64/114 (56%); 35 Black, 29 Latino] in an e-cigarette switching randomized trial.
Results: Dual users averaged 79% substitution of cigarettes for e-cigarettes at week 6, resulting in a reduction from baseline of 70.0 ± 54.1 cigarettes per week (p < .001). Total nicotine consumption remained stable (baseline: 1160.5 ± 1042.1 pg/mL of cotinine, week 6: 1312.5 ± 1725.9 pg/mL of cotinine, p = .47), while significant reductions were seen in the potent lung carcinogen 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridul)-1-butanol (NNAL) (-55.9 ± 88.6 ng/ml, p < .001), carbon monoxide (-6.3 ± 8.6 ppm, p < .001), and self-reported respiratory symptoms (-3.3 ± 8.0, p = .002). No significant changes were found in blood pressure or spirometry. Greater substitution from cigarettes to e-cigarettes was associated with larger reductions in NNAL (r = -.29, p = .02).
Conclusions: The predominant dual-use pattern was characterized by regular e-cigarette and intermittent cigarette use. Findings demonstrate the short-term harm reduction potential of this dual-use pattern in Black and Latino smokers and suggest that the greatest benefit, aside from cessation of both products, is achieved by higher substitution of e-cigarettes for cigarettes. Findings need confirmation in a larger sample with longer follow-up in dual users with greater variability in the rate of substitution.

Leia o artigo completo

Abstract
Introduction: Little is known about the international impact of E-cigarette or Vaping-Associated Lung Injury ('EVALI') on youth perceptions of vaping harms.
Methods: Repeat cross-sectional online surveys of youth aged 16-19 years in England, Canada, and the United States before (2017, 2018), during (2019 August/September), and after (2020 February/March, 2020 August) the 'EVALI' outbreak (N = 63380). Logistic regressions assessed trends, country differences, and associations between exposure to negative news stories about vaping and vaping harm perceptions.
Results: Exposure to negative news stories increased between 2017 and February-March 2020 in England (12.6% to 34.2%), Canada (16.7% to 56.9%), and the United States (18.0% to 64.6%), accelerating during (2019) and immediately after (February-March 2020) the outbreak (p < .001) before returning to 2019 levels by August 2020. Similarly, the accurate perception that vaping is less harmful than smoking declined between 2017 and February-March 2020 in England (77.3% to 62.2%), Canada (66.3% to 43.3%), and the United States (61.3% to 34.0%), again accelerating during and immediately after the outbreak (p < .001). The perception that vaping takes less than a year to harm users' health and worry that vaping will damage health also doubled over this period (p ≤ .001). Time trends were most pronounced in the United States. Exposure to negative news stories predicted the perception that vaping takes less than a year to harm health (Adjusted Odds Ratio = 1.55, 1.48-1.61) and worry that vaping will damage health (Adjusted Odds Ratio = 1.32, 1.18-1.48).
Conclusions: Between 2017 and February-March 2020, youth exposure to negative news stories, and perceptions of vaping harms, increased, and increases were exacerbated during and immediately after 'EVALI'. Effects were seen in all countries but were most pronounced in the United States.
Implications: This is the first study examining changes in exposure to news stories about vaping, and perceptions of vaping harms, among youth in England, Canada, and the United States before, during, and after 'EVALI'. Between 2017 and February-March 2020, youth exposure to negative news stories, and perceptions of vaping harms, increased, and increases were exacerbated during and immediately after 'EVALI'. By August 2020, exposure to negative news stories returned to 2019 levels, while perceptions of harm were sustained. Exposure to negative news stories also predicted two of the three harm perception measures. Overall, findings suggest that 'EVALI' may have exacerbated youth's perceptions of vaping harms internationally.

Leia o artigo completo

Abstract
Tobacco harm reduction remains a controversial topic in tobacco control. Tobacco harm reduction involves providing tobacco users who are unwilling or unable to quit using nicotine products with less harmful nicotine-containing products for continued use. The skepticism towards harm reduction is based in part on the experience with low-yield tar/nicotine cigarettes, which were presumed to be associated with lower health risks than higher yield cigarettes and marketed as such by cigarette manufacturers. Only later did the field learn that these cigarettes were a deceptive way for cigarette manufacturers to allay the health concerns over cigarette smoking. Since this experience, there has been a proliferation of tobacco products that might potentially serve as a means to reduce tobacco harm. Some members of the tobacco control community believe that these products have great potential to reduce mortality and morbidity among smokers who completely switch to them. Others believe that we will be addicting another generation to tobacco products. This paper reviews the past history, the current tobacco landscape and controversies, and an approach that might rapidly reduce the yearly half-million deaths associated with cigarette smoking in the U.S.
Keywords: Electronic cigarettes; Modified risk tobacco products; Reduced nicotine cigarettes; Snus; Tobacco harm reduction.

Leia o artigo completo

Abstract
Introduction: There is mixed evidence as to whether nicotine vaping products (NVPs) can help adults who smoke transition away from cigarettes. This study investigated if self-reported attempts to quit smoking and smoking cessation, over a period of either 18 or 24 months, differed between respondents who initiated nicotine vaping versus those who did not. Outcome comparisons were made between those who: (1) initiated vaping vs. those who did not; (2) initiated daily or non-daily vaping vs. those who did not; and (3) initiated daily or non-daily vaping between surveys and continued to vape at follow-up (daily or non-daily) vs. those who did not initiate vaping.
Methods: This cohort study included 3516 respondents from the ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Surveys (Australia, Canada, England, United Sates), recruited at Wave 1 (2016) or 2 (2018) and followed up at Wave 2 (18 months) and/or 3 (2020, 24 months). Adults who smoked daily at baseline and did not have a history of regular vaping were included. Initiation of vaping was defined as beginning to vape at least monthly between surveys. Respondents indicated whether they made an attempt to quit smoking between surveys. Smoking cessation was defined as those who self-reported no longer smoking cigarettes at follow-up.
Results: Relative to those who did not initiate vaping, initiation of any daily vaping between surveys was associated with a greater likelihood of smokers making a cigarette quit attempt (p < 0.001) and quitting smoking (p < 0.001). Among smokers who attempted to quit smoking, initiation of daily vaping was associated with a greater likelihood of being abstinent from smoking at follow-up (p = 0.001). Respondents who initiated vaping between surveys and were vaping daily at follow up were significantly more likely to have attempted to quit smoking (p < 0.001) and to have quit smoking (p < 0.001) than those who did not initiate vaping. Respondents who initiated non-daily vaping did not differ significantly from those who did not initiate vaping on any of the outcome measures.
Conclusions: Daily NVP use was associated with increased attempts to quit smoking and abstinence from smoking cigarettes. These findings are consistent with the concept that complete cigarette substitution may be more likely to be achieved when smokers vape nicotine daily.
Keywords: E-cigarettes; Nicotine vaping products; Smoking cessation; Tobacco.

Leia o artigo completo

Abstract
Introduction
Little is known about why males are more likely to use electronic cigarettes (ECs) compared with females. This study examined gender differences in reasons for vaping and characteristics of EC used (device type, device capacity, e-liquid nicotine strength, and flavor).
Methods
Data were obtained from 3938 current (≥18 years) at-least-weekly EC users who participated in Wave 2 (2018) ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey in Canada, the United States, England, and Australia.
Results
Of the sample, 54% were male. The most commonly cited reasons for vaping in females were “less harmful to others” (85.8%) and in males were “less harmful than cigarettes” (85.5%), with females being more likely to cite “less harmful to others” (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.64, p = .001) and “help cut down on cigarettes” (aOR = 1.60, p = .001) than males. Significant gender differences were found in EC device type used (χ  2 = 35.05, p = .043). Females were less likely to report using e-liquids containing >20 mg/mL of nicotine, and tank devices with >2 mL capacity (aOR = 0.41, p < .001 and aOR = 0.65, p = .026, respectively) than males. There was no significant gender difference in use of flavored e-liquids, with fruit being the most common flavor for both males (54.5%) and females (50.2%).
Conclusion
There were some gender differences in reasons for vaping and characteristics of the product used. Monitoring of gender differences in patterns of EC use would be useful to inform outreach activities and interventions for EC use.
Implications
Our findings provide some evidence of gender differences in reasons for vaping and characteristics of EC used. The most common reason for vaping reported by females was “less harmful to others,” which may reflect greater concern by female vapers about the adverse effects of secondhand smoke compared with male vapers. Gender differences might be considered when designing gender-sensitive smoking cessation policies. Regarding characteristics of EC products used, we found gender differences in preferences for e-liquid nicotine strength and device capacity. Further studies should examine whether the observed gender differences in EC use reasons and product characteristics are predictive of smoking cessation. Furthermore, studies monitoring gender-based marketing of ECs may be considered.

Leia o artigo completo

Abstract
Nicotine vaping products (NVPs) have evolved rapidly, and some vapers have difficulty reporting about their NVP. NVP knowledge may be important for providing accurate survey data, understanding the potential risks of NVP use, and assessing legal and regulated products. This paper examines current vapers who responded "don't know" (DK) regarding their NVP features. Data are from adult daily/weekly vapers in Waves Two (2018, n = 4192) and Three (2020, n = 3894) of the ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey. Analyses assessed DK responses for NVP features (e.g., type/appearance, nicotine) and consumption. A DK index score was computed based on the percent of all features with DK responses, which was tested for associations with demographics, smoking/vaping status, NVP features, purchase location, and knowledge of NVP relative risks. NVP description and appearance were easily identified, but DK was more common for features such as nicotine content (7.3-9.2%) and tank/cartridge volume capacity (26.6-30.0%). DK responses often differed by vaping/smoking status, NVP type/appearance, purchase location, and country. Vapers who are younger, use box-shaped NVPs, purchase online, and exclusive daily vapers were associated with lower DK index scores. Higher DK index scores were associated with poorer knowledge of relative health risks of NVP use. The diversity of the NVP market and wide variation in how products are used makes it challenging to capture information from users about device features, such as nicotine content and capacity, in population surveys.
Keywords: awareness; electronic cigarette; knowledge; nicotine vaping products; perceptions.

Leia o artigo completo

Abstract
Background: Since May 2017, standardized packaging has been mandatory in the UK, with packs required to display an 'information message' explaining that there are more than 70 carcinogens in tobacco smoke.
Methods: Three waves of a longitudinal online survey in the UK with smokers pre-standardized packaging (Wave 1: April-May 2016) and followed up post-standardized packaging (Wave 2: September-November 2017, Wave 3: May-July 2019). Of the 6233 smokers at Wave 1, 4293 responded at Wave 2 and 3175 at Wave 3. We explored knowledge of the number of carcinogens in smoke, and whether knowing that smoke contains more than 70 carcinogens mediated change in the belief that the dangers of smoking are exaggerated (risk perception), stubbing out cigarettes, quit intentions and quitting. As the information message is larger on roll-your-own packs than on cigarette packs, as the packs are larger, we also explored whether there was any difference in knowing that smoke contains more than 70 carcinogens between exclusive cigarette smokers and exclusive roll-your-own smokers.
Results: Knowledge that there are over 70 carcinogens in smoke increased among smokers across waves, with the increase from Waves 1 to 3 greater for exclusive roll-your-own smokers than exclusive cigarette smokers (adjusted odds ratio=1.44; 95% CI 1.03-2.03). Knowledge that there are over 70 carcinogens in smoke mediated higher risk perception but not stubbing cigarettes out, quit intentions or quitting.
Conclusions: The information message improved knowledge of how many carcinogens are in smoke, particularly among exclusive roll-your-own smokers, and this was linked to higher risk perception.

Leia o artigo completo

Abstract
Rationale
Oral nicotine pouches (ONP) emerged in the late 2000s, but have gained popularity since their introduction to the global market in 2016, with claims about their harm reduction potential.
Objectives
Primary objectives

• To evaluate the benefits and harms of ONP when used to help people transition away from combustible tobacco use (smoking).
• To evaluate the impact of ONP on the prevalence of combustible tobacco use.

Secondary objectives

• To evaluate the benefits and harms of ONP when used to help people transition away from other non‐combustible tobacco/commercial nicotine product use.

Authors' conclusions
There is limited evidence on the use of ONP for cessation or reduction of cigarette use. There is no evidence on the use of ONP for cessation or reduction of other tobacco or nicotine products or on the effects of ONP on prevalence of tobacco use/nicotine vaping. Low‐certainty evidence suggests that people randomised to ONP may be slightly less likely to quit smoking than those randomised to e‐cigarettes, but data were from one small study and therefore imprecise. Limited, short‐term data did not identify any serious health harms from ONP when used to help people transition away from tobacco smoking. More research on the effects of ONP for cessation or reduction of use of other tobacco or non‐pharmaceutical nicotine products is urgently needed. Future trials should prioritise comparing ONP to other active interventions (e.g. NRT and e‐cigarettes).

Leia o artigo completo