The rise of electronic nicotine delivery systems and the emergence of electronic-cigarette-driven disease.

In 2019, the United States experienced the emergence of the vaping-associated lung injury (VALI) epidemic. Vaping is now known to result in the development and progression of severe lung disease in the young and healthy. Lack of regulation on electronic cigarettes in the United States has resulted in over 2,000 patients and 68 deaths. We examine the clinical representation of VALI and the delve into the scientific evidence of how deadly exposure to electronic cigarettes can be. E-cigarette vapor is shown to affect numerous cellular processes, cellular metabolism, and cause DNA damage (which has implications for cancer). E-cigarette use is associated with a higher risk of developing crippling lung conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), which would develop several years from now, increasing the already existent smoking-related burden. The role of vaping and virus susceptibility is yet to be determined; however, vaping can increase the virulence and inflammatory potential of several lung pathogens and is also linked to an increased risk of pneumonia. As it has emerged for cigarette smoking, great caution should also be given to vaping in relation to SARS-CoV-2 infection and the COVID-19 pandemic. Sadly, e-cigarettes are continually promoted and perceived as a safer alternative to cigarette smoking. E-cigarettes and their modifiable nature are harmful, as the lungs are not designed for the chronic inhalation of e-cigarette vapor. It is of interest that e-cigarettes have been shown to be of no help with smoking cessation. A true danger lies in vaping, which, if ignored, will lead to disastrous future costs.

Evaluating smoking control policies in the e-cigarette era: a modelling study.

BACKGROUND: In jurisdictions in which electronic cigarettes are currently prohibited, policy makers must weigh the potentially lower risk compared with conventional cigarettes against the risk of initiation of e-cigarettes among non-smokers. METHODS: We simulated a synthetic population over a 50-year time horizon with an open cohort model using data from Singapore, a country where e-cigarettes are currently prohibited, and data from the USA, the UK and Japan. Using the smoking prevalence and the quality-adjusted life year gained calculated, we compared tobacco control policies without e-cigarettes-namely, raising the minimum legal age (MLA), introducing a smoke-free generation (SFG) and tax rises on tobacco consumption-with policies legalising e-cigarettes, either taking a laissez-faire approach or under some form of restriction. We also evaluated combinations of these policies. RESULTS: Regardless of the country informing the transition probabilities to and from e-cigarette use in Singapore, a laissez-faire e-cigarette policy could reduce the smoking prevalence in the short term, but it is not as effective as other policies in the long term. The most effective single policies evaluated were SFG and aggressive tax rises; the most effective combination of policies considered was MLA plus moderate tax rises and e-cigarettes on prescription. CONCLUSION: Policy makers in jurisdictions in which e-cigarettes are not yet established may be advised not to prioritise e-cigarettes in their tobacco end-game strategy, unless their use can be restricted to current smokers seeking to quit.

Potential deaths averted in USA by replacing cigarettes with e-cigarettes.

INTRODUCTION: US tobacco control policies to reduce cigarette use have been effective, but their impact has been relatively slow. This study considers a strategy of switching cigarette smokers to e-cigarette use ('vaping') in the USA to accelerate tobacco control progress. METHODS: A Status Quo Scenario, developed to project smoking rates and health outcomes in the absence of vaping, is compared with Substitution models, whereby cigarette use is largely replaced by vaping over a 10-year period. We test an Optimistic and a Pessimistic Scenario, differing in terms of the relative harms of e-cigarettes compared with cigarettes and the impact on overall initiation, cessation and switching. Projected mortality outcomes by age and sex under the Status Quo and E-Cigarette Substitution Scenarios are compared from 2016 to 2100 to determine public health impacts. FINDINGS: Compared with the Status Quo, replacement of cigarette by e-cigarette use over a 10-year period yields 6.6 million fewer premature deaths with 86.7 million fewer life years lost in the Optimistic Scenario. Under the Pessimistic Scenario, 1.6 million premature deaths are averted with 20.8 million fewer life years lost. The largest gains are among younger cohorts, with a 0.5 gain in average life expectancy projected for the age 15 years cohort in 2016. CONCLUSIONS: The tobacco control community has been divided regarding the role of e-cigarettes in tobacco control. Our projections show that a strategy of replacing cigarette smoking with vaping would yield substantial life year gains, even under pessimistic assumptions regarding cessation, initiation and relative harm.