Harms of smoking and health benefits of quitting — national cancer institute

Selected References

  1. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. How Tobacco Smoke Causes Disease The Biology and Behavioral Basis for Smoking Attributable Disease A Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health, 2010.
  2. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The Health Consequences of Smoking A Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health, 2004.
  3. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke A Report of the Surgeon General. Rockville, MD U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Coordinating Center for Health Promotion, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health, 2006.
  4. National Toxicology Program. Report on Carcinogens. Eleventh Edition. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Toxicology Program, 2005.
  5. Austoni E, Mirone V, Parazzini F, et al. Smoking as a risk factor for erectile dysfunction Data from the Andrology Prevention Weeks 2001 2002. A study of the Italian Society of Andrology (S.I.A.). European Urology 2005 48(5) 810 818. PubMed Abstract
  6. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Annual smoking attributable mortality, years of potential life lost, and productivity losses United States, 1997 2001. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 2005 54(25) 625 628. PubMed Abstract
  7. National Cancer Institute. Cancer Progress Report 2003. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health, 2004.
  8. International Agency for Research on Cancer. Tobacco Smoke and Involuntary Smoking. Lyon, France 2002. IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans, Vol. 83.
  9. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Respiratory Health Effects of Passive Smoking (Also Known as Exposure to Secondhand Smoke or Environmental Tobacco Smoke ETS). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Office of Health and Environmental Assessment, 1992.
  10. Hatsukami DK, Stead LF, Gupta PC. Tobacco addiction. Lancet 2008 371(9629) 2027 2038.

    PubMed Abstract

  11. Djordjevic MV, Doran KA. Nicotine content and delivery across tobacco products. Handbook of Experimental Pharmacology 2009 192 61 82.

    PubMed Abstract

  12. Henningfield JE, Fant RV, Radzius A, Frost S. Nicotine concentration, smoke pH and whole tobacco aqueous pH of some cigar brands and types popular in the United States. Nicotine Tobacco Research 1999 1(2) 163 168.

    PubMed Abstract

  13. Henley SJ, Thun MJ, Chao A, Calle EE. Association between exclusive pipe smoking and mortality from cancer and other diseases. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2004 96(11) 853 861. PubMed Abstract
  14. Smith Simone S, Maziak W, Ward KD, Eissenberg T. Waterpipe tobacco smoking Knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and behavior in two U.S. samples. Nicotine Tobacco Research 2008 10(2) 393 398. PubMed Abstract
  15. Cobb C, Ward KD, Maziak W, Shihadeh AL, Eissenberg T. Waterpipe tobacco smoking An emerging health crisis in the United States. American Journal of Health Behavior 2010 34(3) 275 285. PubMed Abstract
  16. Prignot JJ, Sasco AJ, Poulet E, Gupta PC, Aditama TY. Alternative forms of tobacco use. International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease 2008 12(7) 718 727. PubMed Abstract
  17. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The Health Benefits of Smoking Cessation. Rockville, MD U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control, Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health, 1990.
  18. Peto R, Darby S, Deo H, et al. Smoking, smoking cessation, and lung cancer in the U.K. since 1950 Combination of national statistics with two case control studies. British Medical Journal 2000 321(7257) 323 329. PubMed Abstract
  19. Doll R, Peto R, Boreham J, Sutherland I. Mortality in relation to smoking 50 years observations on male British doctors. British Medical Journal 2004 328(7455) 1519 1527. PubMed Abstract
  20. McBride CM, Ostroff JS. Teachable moments for promoting smoking cessation The context of cancer care and survivorship. Cancer Control 2003 10(4) 325 333. PubMed Abstract
  21. Travis LB, Rabkin CS, Brown LM, et al. Cancer survivorship genetic susceptibility and second primary cancers Research strategies and recommendations. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2006 98(1) 15 25. PubMed Abstract
  22. Parsons A, Daley A, Begh R, Aveyard P. Influence of smoking cessation after diagnosis of early stage lung cancer on prognosis Systematic review of observational studies with meta analysis. British Medical Journal 2010 340 b5569. PubMed Abstract

Why it would be crazy to ban e-cigarettes — telegraph

I am not a smoker.

Never in my life have I been privy to the heady chemical high that comes from sucking the end of a little white stick and blowing smoke from your nose like a dragon. Nor shall I experience the not so alluring side effects stained fingers and teeth, heightened risk of stroke, heart attack and all manner of cancers or spend up to f400 per month on what by all accounts is an incredibly dangerous hobby.

Nor am I one of those non smokers who doesn’t mind other people lighting up in my presence. I have no qualms about shielding my nose beneath my shirt, prefering to inhale my own body odour over their second hand puffings social norms be damned.

And nor am I sympathetic to the plight of this persecuted demographic. The days of bemoaning Big Tobacco advertising for their charming lies, or blaming addiction on ignorant folly, are long behind us. If you’re hooked on smoking, that’s your look out. We all heard the warnings.

But, before a legion of addicts make arrangements to extinguish their fag ends on my forehead, you should know that there is a burning issue on which I stand with you shoulder to shoulder. The proposed EU ban on electronic cigarettes, which may come into effect if three or more of the 28 member states prohibit their use is nothing short of unfair persecution.

Related Articles

  • EU seeks ‘a ban on all currently available electronic cigarettes’

    28 Nov 2013

  • Electronic cigarettes will they make life insurance cheaper?

    29 Oct 2013

  • E cigarettes all you need to know

    13 Oct 2013

I m aware that times have never been tougher for the 21st century smoker. We threw you out of our pubs and restaurants, inflated prices exponentially, broadcast messages of doom on packets and even took them off display in shops, meaning every purchase, every puff, felt like you were participating in a shady drug deal.

But then a groundbreaking new technology hit the market, one that struck the sweet spot between still smoking and cold turkey, allowing smokers to, quite literally, come in from the cold.

Reported to be a f1.7bn industry across Europe, battery powered e cigarettes are now used by 1.3 million of the UK s estimated 10 million smokers, and they mimic old fashioned smoking by vapourising a liquid infused with nicotine, while coming in nice smelling flavours from mint to juicy peach. Granted, they re not perfect some are a visual cross between a fountain pen and Doctor Who s sonic screwdriver, and they have given rise to the abominable buzzword «vape». But, given that experts claim they pose no known harm to others, they could potentially slash the 100,000 tobacco related deaths in the UK each year. Outlawing them would be kicking the wheezing smoker while he’s down.

With fresh government legislation banning the sale of electronic cigarettes to under 18s as of this week, the smoky squabble has taken on yet another dimension. And sure, this new law does make some sense, in that the long term health effects are still somewhat unknown and no one wants to glamourise or advocate any form of smoking to children. However, this is still just one side of the coin. Over 200,000 British children start smoking every year, according to anti smoking charity ASH, with two thirds of adult smokers admitting to first sparking up while under 16. Is it really wise to criminalise a device that regardless of the precise risks could be licensed as a medicine as early as 2016 and is the first step on the route to packing up for many? Or, as with the alleged health risks themselves, is no one actually all that sure?

Just as heroin addicts have methadone, the favoured way for smokers to wean themselves off addiction is via a safer alternative, and with e cigarettes both tobacco free and as effective as nicotine patches, the case against their use is not just cruel but petty.

Already outlawed in Norway and Brazil, one of the prevailing factors behind New York City s forthcoming e cigarette ban, which from April will prevent use of devices in bars, restaurants and public spaces, as with regular cigarettes, was that their use «normalises» the idea of smoking in the minds of impressionable youngsters. That idea is wildly offensive to both e cigarette users and impressionable youngsters.

Another gripe by critics is that the use of electronic cigarettes in restaurants could «confuse» other diners and muddle current smoking laws, as smokeless vapour can look similar to the real thing. It s a concern which, by the same logic, would eventually see sugar outlawed from coffee shops, because it looks a little bit like cocaine from a distance, and you wouldn’t want people stirring that into their capuccinos.

The sole argument holding any currency is that the proliferation of e cigarette advertising is akin to the old days of Big Tobacco marketing with flashy adverts splashed across newspaper spreads, celebrities eager to endorse them and vague messaging masking the actual effects. This may be true, but is this not a staple advertising tactic used by everyone from Ronald McDonald to the singing Satsuma offering high interest loans?

Regardless, if the saturation of e cig ads leads to yet more puffers swapping their B&H for a liquid stick and packet of batteries, then more power to them.

So come on EU, don t punish smokers actively trying to stub out their addiction they ve got enough on their plate dealing with militant non smokers like me, as they battle to spark up in a sub zero pub garden.