Clear The Air News Tobacco Blog Rotating Header Image

May, 2016:

Norway to Detail Progress on Plain Packaging of Tobacco May 31

May 26th, 2016
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-05-26/norway-to-detail-progress-on-plain-packaging-of-tobacco-may-31

The Norwegian government will discuss the introduction of plain packaging for tobacco products next week, as the Nordic nation seeks to become the latest country to stamp out one of the last remaining vestiges of cigarette marketing.

The Norwegian health minister will present new research and provide an update on legislation to require the sale of cigarettes in packages without logos Tuesday in Oslo, the ministry said in a statement Thursday. On May 31 the World Health Organization celebrates World No-Tobacco Day, an annual event created in 1987 that publicizes the dangers of smoking.

Cigarette makers Philip Morris International Inc., Imperial Brands Plc and British American Tobacco Plc lost a fight against European Union curbs on their products in a ruling earlier this month that may pave the way for governments to impose plain packaging. The U.K. and Ireland together with France are the first European countries to back the measure, which tobacco companies claim violates their intellectual property rights.

Tobacco companies also lost a case in a U.K. court to suspend Britain’s plain packaging rules, which require smokes to be sold in drab packages with large health warnings.

Vaping Could Make Medical Pot Healthier

May 26th, 2016
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://www.livescience.com/54888-cannavaping-could-make-medical-marijuana-healthier.html

A new type of smoking called “cannavaping” — using e-cigarettes for vaping cannabis — may help people use marijuana for medical reasons, according to a small, early study.

Smoking conventional marijuana cigarettes may lead a person to inhale high amounts of the toxic contaminants that are released when marijuana is burned, the researchers said. In contrast, cannavaping might provide a way to avoid inhaling high levels of these contaminants, the researchers said. Among these contaminants are carcinogenic compounds called polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, the researchers said.

Vaping involves heating a liquid to its boiling point and then inhaling the vapors; conventional smoking involves burning a substance, such as marijuana, and then inhaling the smoke.

“Vaporization should lead to a lower toxic burden than combustion [burning],” lead study author Vincent Varlet, an analytical chemist at the University Centre of Legal Medicine in Lausanne, Switzerland, told Live Science. “Vaporization constitutes a safer approach of cannabis administration than cannabis smoking.”

There are also devices available that can vaporize marijuana and are designed to sit on a tabletop, but e-cigarettes may be more user-friendly, the researchers said. Both e-cigarettes and tabletop vaporizing devices are likely to be less harmful than marijuana joints, the investigators said.

In the study, researchers looked at the plausibility and efficiency of cannabis vaping as an alternative to smoking the substance for medical reasons. The scientists extracted active compounds in marijuana called cannabinoids and made an oil that they concentrated in an e-liquid, which is a type of liquid used in e-cigarettes.

However, they found that the concentration of the oil they made in the study was not sufficient. About 100 puffs on an e-cigarette would have been needed to induce the same therapeutic effects as those provided by intravenous administration of THC, one of marijuana’s most powerful compounds, the researchers said. More research on the preparation and optimization of such liquid is needed, they said.

However, cannavaping might still one day provide a safer alternative to smoking cannabis, because it does not require heating the cannabis to the high temperatures reached when it is burned, the researchers found. That process leads to the inhalation of high levels of contaminants, the scientists found.

“Cannavaping appears to be a gentle, efficient, user-friendly and safe alternative method for cannabis smoking for medical cannabis delivery,” they wrote in the study, published today (May 25) in the journal Scientific Reports. [4 Myths About E-Cigarettes]

Cannavaping may also offer an alternative to ingesting marijuana by eating products such as brownies or candies. When marijuana is consumed in this way, it is metabolized before it enters a person’s bloodstream and its therapeutic ingredients may therefore become less active, Varlet said. This diluting effect does not occur with cannavaping, which allows the inhaled therapeutic compounds to enter the bloodstream directly, he said.

The researchers noted that they tested only one type of e-cigarette in the new study, and other brands that are available may produce different levels of certain impurities.

‘Cannavaping’ could see e-cigarettes used to deliver medicinal cannabis

May 26th, 2016
by Editor.
No comments yet

Vaping medicinal cannabis would be healthier than smoking the drug with tobacco, researchers claim, and allow regular microdoses not possible with pills

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/may/26/cannavaping-could-see-e-cigarettes-used-to-deliver-medicinal-cannabis

Electronic cigarettes can be a safe and effective way to deliver cannabis for medicinal purposes, according to researchers in Switzerland.

Scientists at the University of Lausanne created cannabis-laden oils for e-cigarettes and found that vaping the infusions could deliver useful levels of the active ingredients found in cannabis.

The team claims that “therapeutic cannavaping”, would be healthier than smoking the drug with tobacco, and would allow users to have regular microdoses of the drug’s active ingredients throughout the day, which is not possible with pills containing cannabis extracts.

“This could be a great approach to using these kinds of cannabinoids,” said Vincent Varlet, who took part in the work. “The aim is not to get high, the aim is to get cured.”

Varlet and others used butane gas to extract the active substances, called cannabinoids, from cannabis to create concentrated butane hashish oil. They then tested how well the oil was atomised in e-cigarettes on the market.

Writing in the journal Scientific Reports, the researchers describe how e-cigarettes can deliver therapeutic doses of cannabinoids without getting people stoned. “Cannavaping appears to be a gentle, efficient, user-friendly and safe alternative method for cannabis smoking for medical cannabis delivery,” they say.

In the course of their experiments, the scientists found that butane hashish oil is not very soluble in the liquid refills used in commercial e-cigarettes, leading them to suspect that the risks of people abusing the drug through vaping are low.

“I think it’s a great idea, but this would be illegal in the UK,” said David Nutt, head of neuropsychopharmacology at Imperial College, London. In Britain, cannabinoids in vapable oil form would likely be considered “controlled drugs” under the Misuse of Drugs Act, or psychoactive substances under the Psychoactive Substances Act, which comes into force in the UK today. “I hope parliament makes cannabis a medicine soon,” Nutt added.

But Michael Bloomfield, a clinical lecturer in psychiatry at University College London, has concerns about vaping cannabis oil. “We really need more studies and to look at whether cannabis through e-cigarettes can be use for medicinal purposes,” he said. “From a harm reduction point of view, cannavaping sounds like it may be a good thing, but if this is going to be used as a medicine, it has to go through all the same checks and balances as other medicines.”

“Branding cannabis use through an electronic cigarette as ‘therapeutic cannavaping’ is worrying given that proper randomised controlled trials need to be conducted on any medical intervention to demonstrate their effectiveness, something that is currently lacking in much of the ‘medical marijuana’ market,” he said.

Another concern, he added, was the use of flavoured cannabis e-cigarettes that might become popular with younger people, who appear most at risk from some of the harms linked to heavy, long-term use of cannabis.

E-cigarettes no longer considered medicinal products in Sweden

May 25th, 2016
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=9258ca21-ab20-4384-bcad-2a8d64044143

The Supreme Administrative Court has ruled that e-cigarettes not marketed for smoking cessation purposes should not be classified as medicinal products. This is contrary to the Medical Product Agency’s long-standing position and rulings of the first and second-instance courts. As a result, the EU Tobacco Product Directive (2014/40/EU) rules for e-cigarettes will apply to e-cigarettes in Sweden from May 20 2016, when the directive must be implemented in national legislation.

Facts

The Medical Product Agency had ordered a company to stop selling e-cigarettes with nicotine-containing liquids. The agency argued that the products had a high nicotine content, which is a pharmacologically active substance with an established medical use, primarily for smoking cessation.

The distributor argued that the e-cigarettes in question did not have a sufficiently strong pharmacological effect on the body’s functions to be classified as a medicinal product. Even if the e-cigarettes did have such an effect, they had no health benefits. The distributor claimed that it sold the e-cigarettes purely as a recreational product, with no claims that they were beneficial to health.

Both the first and second-instance courts dismissed the distributor’s arguments and held that e-cigarettes and nicotine-containing liquids should be classified as medicinal products. The appeal court stated that the manufacturers’ and distributors’ perceptions of the products’ use could not be considered decisive. The products were held to have scientifically documented pharmacological characteristics insofar as the active substance nicotine can be used to treat tobacco addiction, which results in nicotine cravings and withdrawal symptoms. This qualified as a beneficial health effect. The fact that the e-cigarettes were not used exclusively as medicinal products did not change this assessment and they were thus classified as medicinal products. The appeal court held that the Tobacco Product Directive does not prevent a member state from classifying e-cigarettes as medicinal products.

Decision

The Supreme Administrative Court held that all characteristics of a product must be considered when deciding on that product’s classification, including:
• the way it is used;
• how it is distributed;
• how well known it is among consumers; and
• the risks which may be involved with use.

It is not sufficient that a product has a pharmacological effect on the body’s functions. Referring to EU case law, the court stated that in order to be classified as a medicinal product, the product, if used as intended, must be capable of appreciably restoring, correcting or modifying physiological functions in human beings. The mere fact that the active substance affects the body’s functions is insufficient for it to be defined as a medicinal product.

The court did not consider that the Medical Product Agency’s scientific reports conclusively highlighted the effects that e-cigarettes had on smoking cessation and therefore did not demonstrate any e-cigarette health benefits (one of the prerequisites for medicinal product classification). Further, in its assessment of how e-cigarettes are distributed and used, the court referred to a report from the European Commission which showed that only 2% of Swedish respondents used e-cigarettes to stop smoking and that they did not consider the product to have any long-term effects on their smoking.

The court also noted that the e-cigarette distributor in this case had stated that the e-cigarettes were developed as a healthier, recreational alternative to normal tobacco cigarettes. They were designed to mimic traditional cigarettes and simulated cigarette smoke through their vapour. The addition of various aromas made product use pleasant. The products were not sold with any particular instructions on how the user should cut down on smoking or nicotine addiction.

The court therefore found that e-cigarettes were not medicinal products.

Comment

The Swedish market for e-cigarettes has until now been almost non-existent. However, this is likely to change following this decision. The judgment focused on the actual use of the products on the market and how they are marketed. Considering that no e-cigarettes are currently registered as medicinal products in Sweden, and that sales of non-registered e-cigarettes were virtually non-existent pending this decision, the Swedish respondents’ answers in the commission’s report to which the court referred should be reasonably affected. The court considered that because the way that these products are used and distributed will likely change following this decision, that classification of the product could also change.

The Supreme Administrative Court decision is something of a surprise in light of the lower-court decisions and agency case law. While the legislature in the ongoing implementation of the Tobacco Product Directive had mentioned that it would await the outcome of the judgment, it is likely that this particular outcome was not anticipated. This means that the directive’s rules for e-cigarettes will have to be put quickly into place in Swedish national law.

The judgment may also open up the possibility of introducing other smokeless nicotine products that would have been previously classified as medicinal products. It is uncertain whether the fact that e-cigarettes imitate tobacco cigarettes in terms of shape and vapour was decisive for the decision, and whether such anti-smoking products as lozenges or sprays could be considered general products. These questions remain unanswered.

For further information on this topic please contact Jonas Löfgren or Annie Kabala at Advokatfirman Lindahl KB by telephone (+46 8 527 70 800) or email (jonas.lofgren@lindahl.se or annie.kabala@lindahl.se). The Advokatfirman Lindahl KB website can be accessed at www.lindahl.se.

E-cigarettes CAN cause lung damage, warn Manchester scientists

May 25th, 2016
by Editor.
No comments yet

A study by the University of Manchester carried out at Wythenshawe hospital says the vapour can cause similar conditions to traditional cigarettes

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/e-cigarettes-can-cause-lung-11384841

Tens of thousands of electronic cigarette users are at risk of chronic lung disease, according to a new study by scientists from the University of Manchester .

Experts say that using e-cigs or “vaping” can cause the same debilitating conditions as smoking normal cigarettes.

They claim the study, which is the first of its kind, shows that chemicals found in the e-cig vapour have been known to lead to conditions such as Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

Dr Andrew Higham from The University of Manchester says it contains formaldehyde and acrolein – similar to traditional cigarettes – which could be harmful if taken over the long term.

In research published in the open access journal Respiratory Research, Dr Higham examined the effect of e-cig exposure on human white blood cells taken from 10 non-smokers.

The study was funded by the North West Lung Centre, which is based at the University Hospital of South Manchester NHS Foundation Trust (UHSM).

It was carried out at Wythenshawe hospital , and the University’s Manchester Institute of Biotechnology, where three brands of e-cigarette were investigated.

Scientists noticed a raised activity of the white blood cells following exposure to the vapour, similar to that observed in the presence of traditional cigarettes.

It is also a characteristic of the debilitating lung condition Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, an illness commonly found in smokers.

The University’s research is expected to fuel the debate on the safety of e-cigarettes.

Dr Higham says the results raise concerns over the safety of e-cig use.

He said: “Our research shows quite clearly that there are risks associated with long-term use of these devices in terms of pulmonary inflammation.

“There has been a lot of public discussion on e-cigarettes. But we think that the public needs to be aware of the potential harm these devices may cause which will empower users to make informed decisions.”

There are an estimated three million users of electronic cigarettes in the UK.

They are often used as an alternative to traditional cigarettes to avoid the unwanted health effects.

Why Altria Group, Philip Morris International, and Reynolds American Are Up More Than 10% in 2016

May 25th, 2016
by Editor.
No comments yet

All three tobacco stocks have done well this year. Find out why.

http://www.fool.com/investing/2016/05/25/why-altria-group-philip-morris-international-and-r.aspx

tobacco-stocks

Altria keeps powering ahead

Altria has gained almost 11% so far in 2016, and part of what distinguishes it from its two tobacco peers is the breadth of its business. Under its corporate umbrella, Altria not only has its key Philip Morris USA tobacco business but also its smokeless tobacco unit, its wine business, and a minority interest in beer giant SABMiller. Smokeable products are the bread and butter for Altria’s success, but its other businesses help diversify its exposure to some extent and also offer new avenues for potential growth.

For instance, the pending deal for SABMiller to get acquired by Anheuser-Busch InBev will give Altria a substantial stake in the acquiring company, with its percentage share being smaller but with Anheuser-Busch being a much larger enterprise.

In addition, Altria has worked on maximizing its profitability. Moves like controlling costs with a $300 million productivity initiative and shoring up its balance sheet to get an improved bond rating are measures that can boost the bottom line and make Altria shares rise even more.

Philip Morris International fights international headwinds

Philip Morris International is the winner of the three stocks, rising nearly 14% so far this year. What makes the gains more impressive is that the company has had to deal with plenty of challenges in its internationally focused business. Downward pressure from weak foreign currencies has stunted Philip Morris International’s earnings growth, and a recent adverse decision from a U.K. court upholding plain packaging regulations extended a trend that has caught on across the world.

So far, pricing power and brand loyalty have been enough to sustain Philip Morris through tough times as it outperforms many of its global peers. Longer-term, Philip Morris is especially confident that its efforts to build a franchise based on reduced-risk products like its iQOS heat-not-burn tobacco system will produce growth to replace any loss in the traditional cigarette business.

Reynolds American rides post-merger enthusiasm

Reynolds American has risen 11% in 2016, and the ongoing success of its acquisition of Lorillard continues to power the company forward. The integration of the Newport brand has gone well, and that has made the company an even stronger No. 2 challenger to Altria in the domestic tobacco market. The company has described the Lorillard merger as being “transformational” to its business. Newport in particular is responsible for 14% market share in the domestic tobacco market, coming close to matching the combined brand power of traditional Reynolds American brands Camel and Pall Mall.

Yet one of the biggest victories for Reynolds American has come from the super-premium market, where Natural American Spirit has been a surprisingly strong performer.

By tapping into demand for higher-quality products, Reynolds American has created a franchise that could rival long-established brands at its competitors for years to come.

Tobacco stocks in general have performed quite well in 2016. As long as they can manage to keep growing earnings despite the challenges they face, tobacco giants are likely to deliver solid share-price performance and dividend income to their investors.

Dan Caplinger has no position in any stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We Fools may not all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

HOW TO REPORT A SMOKING OFFENSE IN HONG KONG

May 25th, 2016
by Editor.
No comments yet

Download (PDF, 276KB)

Health Ministry rapped over tobacco plain packaging plans

May 25th, 2016
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2016/05/25/health-ministry-rapped-over-tobacco-plain-packaging-plans/

KUALA LUMPUR: A DAP lawmaker has criticised the Health Ministry for backtracking on its plans to implement plain packaging for tobacco products.

Klang MP Charles Santiago said the ministry had previously announced plans to introduce generic packaging for tobacco products to reduce brand recognition and consumption.

“The ministry’s director of disease control division Dr Chong Chee Keong said this on Feb 24.

“He even suggested that standardised colours and fonts be used in the packaging in stages,” Santiago told a press conference in Parliament lobby Wednesday.

He said the statements suggested that the ministry had an implementation plan and strategy for plain packaging.

Santiago noted that Health Minister Datuk Seri Dr S. Subramaniam had said in a parliamentary response on Monday that the ministry had to undertake public consultations before implementing plain packaging.

“This clearly shows that the Government has backed off from its original position and reversed the plain packaging policy,” he said.

Santiago said the Government should not buckle under pressure from the tobacco industry and stressed that the ministry should acknowledge the opinions of health groups.

“The tobacco industry and lobby groups have cautioned the Government that introducing plain packaging would violate international trade laws.

“It is unacceptable that the ministry chooses to ignore the opinions of health groups and instead listen to business corporations,” he said.

He urged the ministry to keep to its plan and implement plain packaging ahead of the World Health Organisation’s Tobacco Day.

The ministry has yet to respond on the issue.

GUEST VIEW: Raising tobacco age to 21 is way to keep children healthy

May 25th, 2016
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://www.mrt.com/health_and_wellness/stories/article_5a492902-21f5-11e6-88d1-47dfec285776.html

Smoking-related illnesses are the equivalent of a modern-day plague. Smoking harms nearly every organ in our bodies; it hurts innocent people who inhale it second-hand; it puts the unborn at risk.

“It’s incredible the suffering we see directly related to tobacco: people losing their voice boxes, their jaws, their tongues, and people being mutilated by surgeries and chemo that we have to perform to cure these cancers,” Dr. Erich Sturgis, a medical oncologist at M.D. Anderson told us. Each year in Texas, smoking-related illnesses lead to more than $2.2 billion in health-care costs and lost productivity, and more than 2,000 deaths.

The difference between smoking-related illnesses and almost every other health scourge visited on mankind is that we have the tools to end it. Although our state and our nation lack the political will to ban tobacco, we can help more people live longer, healthier lives by raising the minimum age for cigarettes to 21.

Virtually all adult smokers started by age 21. Delaying the initiation of smoking reduces the likelihood that someone will become a lifelong smoker.

Right now, more than two-thirds of 10th grade students and nearly half of eighth-grade students say it’s easy to get a cigarette, according to M.D. Anderson’s EndTobacco initiative. Given the stakes for these kids’ health, that level of access is acute. Many head- and neck-related cancers tied to smoking don’t show up until patients are in their mid-60s, a fate that is impossible for teens to comprehend.

By raising the minimum age to 21 for the sale of tobacco products, lawmakers could, over time, reduce the use of tobacco products by one-third in 18-to-20-year-old Texans, according to a report prepared by the Texas Comptroller’s Office. The impact would be direct: Reducing the number of teens who start smoking would slow the rate at which tobacco companies replace those who die of smoking-related diseases with new customers.

Take the law raising the minimum drinking age to 21. Although it didn’t eliminate underage drinking, the change is credited with having spared almost 22,000 lives between 1975 and 2002, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

More than 145 localities including New York City, Chicago, Boston and Cleveland have adopted this commonsense approach, according to the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, a nonprofit advocacy group. Hawaii was the first state to raise the minimum smoking age, and this month California became the second.

Opponents of the law point out that because 18-year-olds can vote, serve in the military and drive, it’s ludicrous for them not to be able to buy cigarettes. Left out of the argument is this salient fact: Nicotine is an addictive substance.

Neuroscience suggests that most people don’t achieve full physiological maturity until the age of 25 and that immature brains are particularly vulnerable to the effects of nicotine use. About 3 out of 4 teen smokers end up hooked even if they intend to quit after a few years. Moreover, exposure to nicotine may have lasting, adverse consequences on brain development.

There’s a still more pernicious reason that can help explain why this common-sense law hasn’t been adopted in Texas. Raising the minimum age would have a negative impact on tax revenues, with an estimated $40 million loss in 2016. But that’s a drop in the bucket compared to the longterm costs of smoking, not to mention to loss of life and suffering it engenders. For the good of young Texans, our Legislature must disregard short-term losses and adopt this farsighted policy.

Tobacco control laws are popular with voters. Nearly three-quarters of adults surveyed supported changing the age to 21, according to a 2015 paper by researchers at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, including 7 out of 10 smokers.

It’s said that youth is wasted on the young. It’s true that often teens don’t have the experience or maturity to appreciate the gift of life. But our older and wiser lawmakers should. With the next session of the Legislature just around the corner, where is the courageous lawmaker who cares enough about Texas youth to stand up to Big Tobacco and to sponsor a bill to raise the legal age for cigarettes to 21?

More than half of EU citizens questioned now think e-cigarettes are harmful

May 25th, 2016
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://www.sciencecodex.com/more_than_half_of_eu_citizens_questioned_now_think_ecigarettes_are_harmful-183102

More than half of Europeans now think that e-cigarettes are harmful–a proportion that has nearly doubled in two years–show the latest results of a European Union (EU)-wide survey, published online in the journal Tobacco Control.

Yet use of these devices across member states has continued to surge within the same timeframe, the findings show.

The researchers analysed responses to two Eurobarometer for Tobacco surveys carried out in early 2012 and late 2014, on the perceptions and use of e-cigarettes, among a representative sample of adults (15+ years) from 27 EU member states, excluding Croatia.

In all, just under 27,000 people in both years answered questions on frequency of use; reasons for use; perception of harms; current tobacco use; and provided information on age, sex, educational attainment, and household financial security.

The proportion of people who said they had ever tried an e-cigarette rose from 7.2% in 2012 to 11.6% in 2014 across member states, although this figure varied widely by country, ranging from 5.7% of respondents in Portugal to 21.3% in France, for example.

And in Malta, survey respondents were more than five times as likely to say they had tried an e-cigarette in 2014 as they were in 2012.

Furthermore, in 2014, around one in seven people who said they had ever tried an e-cigarette defined themselves as a current user of these devices, indicating that they had shifted from experimentation to use, say the researchers. But once again, this varied by country, ranging from 1.7% in Slovenia to 28.9% in Portugal.

Current smokers were 23 times more likely to say that they had ever tried an e-cigarette while ex-smokers were more than 6.5 times as likely to have done so.

Being in the age range 18-24, living in a town/city, and being more highly educated were also linked to increased odds of ever having tried an e-cigarette.

Those who defined themselves as current vapers were more likely to be older. And they were nearly three times as likely to say they had started vaping because they thought e-cigarettes could help them quit smoking, and more than twice as likely to say they had done so to get round smoking bans.

The attractiveness of e-cigarettes had no bearing on the decision to become a regular vaper, the responses showed.

But despite the rising overall popularity of e-cigarettes, the proportion of those who felt these devices posed a health risk nearly doubled between 2012 and 2014.

In 2012, around one in four people (just over 27%) believed them to pose a health risk. By 2014 this figure had risen to more than 51.5%.

Yet again, this figure varied widely, from just over 31% of respondents in Hungary to just over 78% in The Netherlands. The UK had one of the lowest proportions of citizens who thought e-cigarettes were harmful.

Nevertheless, almost a third of all respondents (29%) said they didn’t know whether e-cigarettes were harmful, which indicates prevailing levels of uncertainty about their safety, suggest the researchers.

They point out that as their study was cross-sectional, meaning that data were collected from each participant at a single point in time, caution should be applied to any assumptions about causal relationships.

Variations in responses may be partly explained by the differing rates of smoking across EU member states as current and former smokers were much more likely to have tried e-cigarettes, they say.

Other factors, such as the way in which e-cigarettes are advertised and/or promoted as a smoking cessation aid, and their affordability, are also likely to have a role, they add.

“A better understanding of the population-level use and impact of e-cigarettes within the EU is needed, especially of the potential impact on smoke-free laws, smoking initiation and cessation,” they conclude.

← Earlier Posts Newer Posts →