E-cigarettes are battery-operated handheld devices which, upon inhalation, vaporize a solution of propylene glycol or glycerin (with or without added nicotine) to produce smoke-like vapor. E-cigarettes have grown to be extremely popular recreational devices, with many people using them to stop smoking. However, research has not conclusively shown them to be effective for smoking cessation, and their long-term safety profile remains unknown.
Public opinion is strongly divided concerning the risks and benefits of e-cigarette use. However, because they are free of combustion, most scientists agree that e-cigarettes are significantly less harmful than tobacco cigarettes.
因此，电子烟可能构成减少伤害的一种形式，这是烟草吸烟的一种相对更安全的替代品。尽管如此，许多人认为，它们在很大程度上不受监管的风险，包括未知的长期安全问题，对儿童和青少年的可能影响，大多数人群中的尼古丁成瘾增加以及吸烟文化的重新归一化。
主题系列中发布的评论的目的是什么？
The aim of our review was to use an ethical lens to examine the arguments both for and against the use of e-cigarettes for tobacco harm reduction. We used a public health framework that balanced tensions between utilitarianism, which posits that actions are desirable if they benefit the majority, and liberalism, which maintains above all that individuals have the right to self-determination in health.
What were the key findings and conclusions?
Overall, we found that the ethical arguments in support of e-cigarette use for tobacco harm reduction largely outweigh the arguments against them.
Overall, we found that the ethical arguments in support of e-cigarette use for tobacco harm reduction largely outweigh the arguments against them. Relative to the known harms of tobacco cigarettes, e-cigarettes are unlikely to warrant serious long-term public health concerns.
Therefore, it is likely that the public health gains obtained from tobacco harm reduction among current smokers would outweigh any population-level harms that result from non-smoker uptake.
However, while the existence of a gateway effect for youth remains uncertain, e-cigarette use in this population should be discouraged, with policies and regulations aligned to this effect.
我们得出的结论是，鉴于当前的证据，旨在促进电子烟作为吸烟的有吸引力和竞争性替代品的干预措施在道德上是合理的。
需要进一步的研究？
There is an urgent need for data from high-quality randomized controlled trials to conclusively establish the safety and efficacy of e-cigarettes for smoking cessation. This data would allow government agencies to define the regulatory profile of e-cigarettes as either smoking cessation aids or consumer products, which would in turn impact on their availability, and use.
也longitudinal data will be required to examine the long-term safety of frequent and prolonged inhalation of propylene glycol or glycerin, with and without nicotine.
Furthur study my ass we have the Royal College of Physicians report and Britsh Public Health saying they are 95% safer than smoking what is there to study, we don’t know the long-term effects but the fact is people are dying of smoking NOW and we know these products vastly safer quit regulating them out of existence.
感谢您的客观评估。
There is just one point recited that keeps bugging me:
“research has not conclusively shown them to be effective for smoking cessation”
Sure, there are a lot of problems creating RCTs that give sensible results.
But until we have conclusive evidence, doesn’t
“E-cigarettes have grown to be extremely popular recreational devices, with many people using them to stop smoking”
给我们已经有很多定性和定量信息？
如果它不起作用，那么现在是否有理由将这种增长停滞不前或沉没到现在？
I discuss this and other scientific issues related to vaping on my blog.
“They are nicotine delivery devices intended to be used like a cigarette. What happens to someone who stops inhaling the tars of cigarettes and inhales only nicotine? We don’t know. There is at least the potential for harm.”
不错的帖子，电子烟是吸烟者的最佳选择，因为它是无烟和无灰烬的，并且仍然能够提供令人愉悦的蒸发体验。