In May Dr. Lucy Popova and Dr. Pamela Ling coauthored
“Alternative Tobacco Product Use and Smoking Cessation: A National Study.” It appeared in the May issue of the American
Journal of Public Health (abstract here).
The authors are members of the Center for Tobacco Control
Research and Education at the University of California, San Francisco, which is
a staunch opponent of tobacco harm reduction.
So it is unsurprising that their conclusions about safer smoke-free
products were almost entirely negative:
“Alternative tobacco products are attractive to smokers who
want to quit smoking, but these data did not indicate that alternative tobacco
products promote cessation. Unsubstantiated
overt and implied claims that alternative tobacco products aid smoking
cessation should be prohibited.”
But these data DID indicate that alternative products
promote cessation.
The authors used a Knowledge Network survey in 2011 of 1,836
current or former smokers who quit less than two years before. The survey asked participants about use of
chewing tobacco, moist snuff, snus, dissolvable tobacco and e-cigarettes.
Drs. Popova and Ling provide the percentages of the 1,527 smokers
who had been successful and unsuccessful in quitting and who had used these
products, but they either didn’t see or completely ignored these important
results:
Successful Quitting Among Knowledge Network Survey Participants, 2011 | ||
---|---|---|
Product | Ever Users (n) | Percentage Successful Quitters |
Chewing tobacco | 221 | 32 |
Moist snuff | 232 | 29 |
Snus | 205 | 26 |
Dissolvable tobacco | 44 | 20 |
E-cigarettes | 323 | 23 |
All participants | 1,527 | 28 |
Over 300 survey participants had used e-cigarettes, and over
200 had used snus, moist snuff or chewing tobacco. Importantly, a significant percentage of ever
users of all smoke-free products were successful quitters.
Popova and Ling close with this: “Explicit or implied claims
that alternative tobacco products are smoking cessation aids should be
prohibited in the absence of a body of scientific evidence showing such an
effect.”
It is ironic that their paper adds to the body of scientific
evidence that smoke-free products are smoking cessation aids.
Note: Thanks to Dr. Joel Nitzkin for noticing this
discrepancy.
No comments:
Post a Comment